New Special Unit Ideas?

@trig said in Special Fortification Zones:

@noneshallpass
@JbuckBuddy
This isn’t exactly made clear, but I would go with the old A&A rule of, “if it has a land border, it isn’t and island.” Otherwise, what is an island. Is the UK? Is Australia? It goes on and on.

Australia is a continent, not an island. The UK and Japan are listed as island nations, and I would play them as exceptions to the special fortification zones, but I don’t see that in the rules. The New Guineas, Borneo, Sarawak, Ireland, etc., would qualify as islands, and special fortification zones, in my opinion.

@generalhandgrenade Thanks for the answer !

@delaja Thanks! Yeah, I thought it had a decent base to it. Just as you said, I was trying to think specifically in terms of an HBG expansion. I wanted it to stay localized to the area at hand.

My thought for requiring the planes on the islands was to force the player to have to do something to get the bonus convoy raid other than just possessing the territory. True, the overall goal is to bring those islands into the conflict in some way, and by eliminating the need to have a fighter present on either Malta or Sicily you’d still want to defend the islands with troops. But I figured this way either side would have to “give” something to “get” something. You want the convoy raid? Place a fighter in these spots, even if not optimal for potential offensive operations!

I’m certainly happy to chat more about it if you’d like as well! Will and Doug both implied they liked it. But like I said, they said it looked great, and asked if I play tested, and I didn’t hear anything after that. Not saying they had to or anything, but I don’t know how much stock they may have really put in it in the end!

@hbg-gw-enthusiast I would just add italicised texta clause saying something on the lines of “aircraft may not be placed on carriers during the place units phase” in that section, and a clause saying “newly built carriers may not be used to guarantee landing spots for fighters and tactical bombers.”
It is rather obvious is you look for it, but I think a FAQ or a additional clause is needed.

@insanehoshi Yea i memorized 85 useless different unit types, but i was talking about new players, and also seeing the values helps calculate combat more quickly. With counters i can easily add in the 15 bonus unit types that are also useless.

@noneshallpass Thanks for the quick response!

It doesn’t hurt to have one of each because they can also receive lend lease from the Americans. It just gives you that option.

I use British units for ANZAC and paint them.

I’ve found that a couple sheets’ worth of paper “Light” and “Heavy” roundels works to disambiguate which tanks/cruisers/battleships/carriers/bombers are which. Not the prettiest option, but sure is the cheapest.

For instance:

Heavy roundels designate - Heavy Artillery (my homebrew artillery tech “Heavy Artillery Doctrine”, same stats except Costs +1, supports two infantry units), Heavy Tanks, Heavy Strategic Bombers, Heavy Cruisers, Heavy Carriers, Heavy Battleships

Light roundels designate - Light Tanks, Light Cruisers, Light Carriers, and I use “Light” roundels to indicate “Fast Battleships” as well, since they move faster than ‘standard’ battleships