AARHE: Phase 3: Revised NA's

@Guerrilla:

Nationalist Support: Once per game, at the beginning of Italy’s turn it may declare Nationalist Support. All its land units cost -1

When making “National Advantages” we ended up with some “National Units” as already in the draft. They are reduced costs for production of certain units due the nation’s policy and economies of scale.

However we quickly saw an unrealistic side effect. Players saving up.
Hence we introduced limits as they are in the draft now.

Not sure if it matters here though.

Pact of Steel: During your place Units phase you may convert 1 German unit on any of Italy’s IC’s to Italian.

Is this at Germany player’s discretion?

yes… You wouldn’t give your equipment up for nothing…

GG

yeah the free loan method would see diplomacy at work

even more exciting if we cater for the different cases where powers switch sides now that we have national victory (national goals) but thats too complicated

What if we give Italy some sort of a Lend-Lease NA instead of Pact of Steel

I think he is referring to cash exchange instead of units… I would be willing to do that… Unit wise does make it very wishy-washy if no one is certain that an Italian BB is going to appear out of nowhere… 10 IPC’s exchange? Enough for a fighter?

GG

@Imperious:

can you elaborate? what is the idea?

GG said it all

yeah sounds about right

@Guerrilla:

Unit wise does make it very wishy-washy if no one is certain that an Italian BB is going to appear out of nowhere…

yeah I know wishy-washy
although its not too bad because all the Axis move at the same time

Perhaps Italy shouldn’t have IPC’s at all - Germany can supply it with 5 IPCs, 10, 20… whatever amount the players agree upon each turn. It leads to some increased co-ordination. Mussolini did very little without Hitler’s aid.

Interesting concept, but considering that they had war “power” they should have lend lease… and income…

GG

There power was very limited. Greece was an ‘Italian’ invasion, but German troops did quite a bit of the fighting. Germany did most of the fighting when it came to defending Italy as well. Italy may have had war ‘power’, but most of their fighting forces seem to have been German, or backed up by German units.

Ok thats good… hows that list coming? ( e.g. the NA list?)

Well… I have 10 for each power. Is that enough? And also, I’m thinking we should give some powers one special unit each (just like German Tigers). What do you think? I’ll work on it if you like the idea

@Imperious:

BTW Italy is not just italy… it includes the balkans… which by inference = hungary, Rumania, and Bulgaria all of which had armies to fight for Germany… thats part of the viability of having an Italian player… to represent all these nations in one big ball… Italy must have its own identity and income… Germany could of course loan limited money in times of emergencies hence that “pact of steel” provision.

We might have to revise Italy’s NA’s to model this, all our current NA’s our concentrated on Italy.

How are we coming along with this? Germany Italy and USSR…

Have you read our phase 2 draft? It’ll help to fit the NAs into existing rule changes.

UK

Radar
Radar is now a tech. UK has head-start pre-war research.

Joint Strike
Joint Strike is standard among Allies.

Commonwealth Troops
Probably not needed. UK can now raise troops in South Africa, Australia, India, and Persia.

Battlecruisers
Either Battleship move at 3 but takes 1 hit.
Or if optional unit Cruiser is used than even better. Cruiser (Battlecruiser) fight like Battleship but moves 3 and takes 1 hit.

Mideast Oil
Our new non-combat air move already has a “refuel” model. Maybe let UK “refuel” again in the middle east.

Flying Boats
Maybe too powerful.
These bombers would still need supply.
Probably let carriers “carry” 1 bomber additionally.

Japan

Kamikaze
Air units fire in opening fire now. Air units are also tied up with dogfighting until air superiority.
So shall Kamikaze units bypass enemy air units? There are also complicated exceptions with Jet planes.

Banzai Attacks
That default rule is bit too powerful.
During our discussion in phase 1 we thought of many ideas related to realism.
Both attack and defense?
Higher casualties?
No retreat?

Kaiten Torpedoes
Submarines fire in opening fire now. Casualities of “submarine hits” can’t hit back (but can perform ASW warfare).

Each submarine can carry 3-6 Kaitens. Submarines can remain submerged while launching. Kaiten torpedoes had to be launched with the submarine within closer distance from enemy ship. There was poor survival rates for submarines using them.

So maybe this NA could let a submarine roll 2 individually targetable dices in one combat cycle. But if detected attack rolls against the particular submarine hit on +2.

Naval Advantage -> Shinyo Suicide Boats
Probably just have the suicide boat part.

Guerrilla Tactics
How about combine with Dug-in defenses.
In Pacific Islands. Both tanks and infantry immune to “coastal bombardment” and “bombardment support” and first in opening-fire in first cycle.

US

Lend-Lease Program
Lend-Lease is now standard.

Chinese Divisions
How about US can purchase 1 INF per turn for 1 IPC each in those territories. In WWII Chinese forces were low in supplies and hence weak. US has to supply them before they can do much.

Liberty Ship Program
This is covered by another optional rule, “National Units” providing cheaper units (with production limit). USSR Armor, Germany Submarine, UK Fighter…

Superfortresses
Probably a “Heavier” Bomber again. So Heavy Bomber +1 dice, Superfortress +1 dice.

Great Wall of China
Probably too powerful. And Sinkiang has little to do with Great Wall.

Naval Industry
This is covered by Advanced Production tech.

Paratroopers
We’ve yet to add paratroopers as a unit due to limited large scale use in the war. Anyway it would be a new unit.