Cold war Tech Tree

Active Nations:

USSR: 45 IPCs
Would include all starting USSR territories, plus the following:
Germany, Poland, Slovakia Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Albania

Western Europe (WE) : 23 IPCs

Portugal, Portuguese Guinea, Angola, Mozambique Holland Belgium, Suriname, Belgian Congo Greenland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway Northern Italy, Southern Italy, Sicily, Sardinia Turkey, Greece, Crete

So in E&W, a bit ahistorically (as the game is set in 1948) Greece and Turkey are part of WE, despite not joining NATO until 1952. For now I’m lumping them in here, but my other preference would be to have them as strict neutrals – more on that later.

Also in E&W, Greenland and Iceland are treated as US territories; since both are worth 0 IPCs on the Europe 1940 map, the only real important distinction is whether they are hostile or friendly, so I wanted to include them under WE instead.

UK: 31 IPCs
gains the following territories:
Italian Somaliland, Tobruk, Libya, Western Germany

UK loses Trans-Jordan, Egypt, Alexandria to the Arab League UK loses Iceland to WE

US: 38 IPCs
gains the following territories:
Greater Southern Germany

US loses Southeast Mexico to the OAS US loses Greenland to WE

Neutral Powers:

France (pro-NATO) : 16 IPCs

France loses Syria to the Arab League

What I’m proposing for France would be sort of a hybrid rule between the activation rules for pro-neutrals, and a house rule I proposed for China, in E&W.

Essentially how this works is that France would contribute income to WE, based on the IPC value of French territories containing NATO troops (WE, UK, or US) at the end of Western Europe’s turn. If France is attacked by the USSR, all French units and territories would convert to WE ownership.

The reason for doing this is primarily to keep France as part of NATO, without making WE so huge economically that they don’t need any help. Also, by weakening NATO a little bit in this way, I’m hoping to avoid needing to use the E&W rule whereby USSR gets infantry for 2 IPCs instead of 3 IPCs.

Organization of American States (OAS) : 9 IPCs
(Essentially, all of the neutral South American countries except Suriname, plus Southeast Mexico)
If the OAS is attacked by the USSR, all OAS units and territories would convert to US ownership.

Arab League: 8 IPCs
(Alexandria, Egypt, Trans-Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia)
If the Arab League is attacked by the USSR, all Arab units and territories would convert to UK ownership.

…
So, in addition to possibly including a diplomacy mechanism similar to classic E&W, I was wanting to incorporate one of the house rules I had suggested for E&W and apply it to this scenario:

All remaining neutrals are considered “strict neutrals”
However:

The USSR may attack any neutral at any time. If the USSR attacks a strict neutral, rather than having ALL strict neutrals side with NATO (as in classic Europe 1940) instead NATO gets to shift either the OAS or Arab League one step on the diplomacy scale.

Now, if Greece and Turkey are kept as strict neutrals, rather than being part of WE, this rule could potentially have large consequences if/when the USSR chooses to attack them.

I was thinking instead of the classic E&W diplomacy scale, it’d make more sense to have it like -8/-6/-4/-2/0/+2/+4/+6/+8

Strict Neutrals:
Probably a good “hard and fast” rule would be that if attacked by the USSR, strict neutrals in Europe would join WE, while strict neutrals in Africa or the middle east would join UK; Rio De Oro would be considered part of Spain, for these purposes. If Turkey is neutral…? I’d probably consider them part of the middle east.

Europe: Eire, Spain / Rio De Oro, Switzerland, Sweden, Finland Africa: Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ethiopia Middle East: Northwest Persia, Persia, Eastern Persia, Afghanistan

What this all means:

Starting Income:
USSR: 45
NATO: 92

Maximum potential income, including neutrals:
USSR (plus Arab League, OAS*, and all strict neutrals) : 71
WE (plus France, and all strict neutrals in Europe) : 46
UK (plus Arab League, and all strict neutrals in Africa + Middle East) : 42
US (plus OAS*) : 46

*Assumes OAS income is capped at 8 rather than 9

@armedace
Those are some pretty cool ideas, I’ve thought about incorporating marines and how to do so-your ideas seem good. I also like the idea of interceptors at 2, more realistic and makes you think about SBR more. Although I’m not so sure about reducing air bases costs and increasing their ability to scramble to nearby land-seems OP.

@toblerone77:

I’m just going to say something here. Excluding your math Baron. The whole point of this rule was to open up a way for SBR against ICs with a loose historical basis. The loose historical depiction of night bombing was to give the attacker a less risky SBR but the penalty was less risk=less reward.

Given the basic concept, I think it is viable. I liked the idea of night fighters but thought it best to drop them. That’s my POV. An SBR that drops interceptors/escort could simulate this simply.

I encourage everyone to post as they like. Personally I like the idea of simply eliminating escorts and interceptors for night raids and reducing AA fire 1@D12. Damage totals are halved. That’s just what I like.

Everyone else, carry on.

Hi Toblerone77,
I don’t know if you play 1942 second edition, but within the optional rule for SBR escort and interception it becomes viable to have such thing as StB playing a role as Night-fighter, because the odds are clearly different from G40 during the regular SBR with escort: all Fgs and StB A1 first strike, while Fg D2.

All you have to do to implement a 1942.2 Night bombing & Night Fighter HR is this when playing with escort and interception optional rule:

Day SBR damage on IC becomes 1D6+2/StB, instead of just D6.

During 1942.2 Night SBR, the damage becomes D6-1/StB (or D6+2 halved rounding down, if you prefer).

In addition, all attacking StBs and defending StB Night-fighters roll a regular A/D@1, same as G40 SBR escort and interception rule.

The AAA fire @1 in both cases, Day or Night SBRs.

These 2 things will make all the basics 1:1, StB vs Fg/StB Night Fg, balance.

Day SBR:
StB vs AAA, damage + 4.583 - casualty 2.0 = +2.583 IPC damage/StB
StB vs Fg+AAA,  damage + 4.977 - casualty 4.777 = + 0.2 IPC damage/StB

Night SBR:
StB vs AAA, damage +2.083 - casualty 2.0 = +.083 IPC damage/StB
StB vs StB NF+AAA, damage +3.736 - casualty 3.667 = + 0.069 IPCs damage/StB run

So, Night SBR is better when there is more than 1 Fg defending an IC, and it is still an even match for both sides (near 0 IPC) to throw 1 StB against a StB NightF.

But, if there is only 1 Fg on the IC, the Day SBR is still positively better (.2 vs .069).

In addition, there is less StB and money in 1942.2 compared to G40, so there is lesser chance that StBs presence will forbids any Night SBR.

To summarize the viable SBR tactics with this 1942.2 HR:

No Fgs on IC, go for Day-SBR 2 or more Fgs on IC, go for Night-SBR unless there is more than 1 Night-Fg for 1 StB raider. Keeping a 1 Fg + (1 StB :1 Fg) advantage for Day bombing is better. Or staying within the 1 StB and 1 Fg vs 2 Fgs is the lower limit, it is still viable around 0.00 IPC/StB run.
So, going 1:1 vs Day or Night is almost the same risks involved, but with less damage & casualty in Night SBR.

What do you think of this?

Now, Night Bombing can be viable in both games.

Here is the calculation basis for this 1942.2 Night bombing with Night Fgs House Rule:

OOB 1942.2: 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 3.5 IPCs = 2.9 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: 2.9 - 2 = +.9 IPC damage/StB

OOB 1942.2 SBR with D6 damage:
1 StB A1 first strike against 1 intercepting Fg D2

StB roll (D6)/Fg roll / AAA roll

161= 6/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg killed: 2.78%
165= 30/216 no casualty vs 1 Fg killed: 13.89%

526= 60/216 StB killed by Fg: 27.78%
541= 20/216 StB killed by AAA: 9.25%
545= 100/216 both survived: 46.3%

Results with :
60.19% * ((1+6) IPCs)/2= +3.5 IPCs) = 2.107 IPCs
16.67% killing Fg *+10 IPC = + 1.667 IPC
39.81% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 4.777 IPCs

Sum: 3.774 - 4.777 = - 1.0 IPC damage/StB

1942.2 HR damage D6+2 : 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 5.5 IPCs = 4.583 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: 4.583 - 2.0 = +2.583 IPC damage/StB

1942.2 SBR HR with D6+2 damage:
1 StB A1 first strike against 1 intercepting Fg D2

StB roll (D6)/Fg roll / AAA roll

161= 6/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg killed: 2.78%
165= 30/216 no casualty vs 1 Fg killed: 13.89%

526= 60/216 StB killed by Fg: 27.78%
541= 20/216 StB killed by AAA: 9.25%
545= 100/216 both survived: 46.3%

Results with :
60.19% * ((1+2) + (6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = 3.31 IPCs
16.67% killing Fg *+10 IPC = + 1.667 IPC
39.81% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 4.777 IPCs
Sum: 4.977 - 4.777 = + 0.2 IPC damage/StB

HR for 1942 with StB as Nightfighter interceptor all A1/D1 as in G40 interception rule, damage at D6-1:

1 StB A1 vs 1 StB D1 doing interception

StB roll /Fg roll / AAA roll

116= 6/216 1 StB killed by StB NF vs 1 StB NF killed: 2.78%
151= 5/216 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 StB NF killed: 2.31%
155= 25/216 no casualty vs 1 StB NF killed: 11.57%

516= 30/216 StB killed by StB NF: 13.89%
551= 25/216 StB killed by AAA: 11.57%
555= 125/216 both survived: 57.87%

Results:
69.44% * ((0+5) IPCs)/2= + 2.5 IPCs) = 1.736 IPCs
16.67% killing StBNFg *+12 IPCs = + 2.00 IPC
30.55% StB killed *-12 IPCs = - 3.667 IPCs

Sum: 3.736 - 3.667 = + 0.069 IPCs damage/StB run

1942.2 HR damage D6-1: 1 StB doing SBR without interceptor
5/6 StB survived * 2.5 IPCs = 2.083 IPCs
1/6 StB killed *12 IPCs = -2 IPCs
Sum: +2.083 - 2 = +.083 IPC damage/StB

1942.2, damage D6+2: 1 StB & 1 Fg A1 first strike doing Day-SBR against 2 intercepting Fgs D2

StB+Fg rolls/interceptors Fgs roll/ AAA roll = odds   casualties

1/3636/361/6   = 36/7776      1 StB killed by AAA vs 2 Fgs : .5%
1/3636/365/6 = 180/7776      no casualty vs 2 Fgs : 2.3%

10/3612/361/6 = 120/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg : 1.5%
10/3612/365/6 = 600/7776    1 Fg  vs 1 Fg : 7.7%
10/3624/361/6=  240/7776    1 StB killed by AAA vs 1 Fg : 3.1%
10/3624/365/6 = 1200/7776   no casualty vs 1 Fg : 15.4%

25/364/366/6   = 600/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by Fg vs no casualty : 7.7%
25/3616/361/6 = 400/7776    1 Fg and 1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty : 5.2%
25/3616/365/6 = 2000/7776  1 Fg vs no casualty : 25.7%
25/3616/361/6 = 400/7776    1 StB killed by AAA vs no casualty : 5.2%
25/3616/365/6 = 2000/7776   no casualty at all : 25.7%

Results:
Bombard on IC: 76.8% * ((1+2)+(6+2) IPCs)/2= +5.5 IPCs) = 4.224 IPCs
Killing 2 Fgs: 2.8%+20 IPCs =   + 0.56 IPC
Killing 1 Fg: 27.7% +10 IPCs =  + 2.77 IPCs
Fg killed: 33.4%-10 IPCs =        - 3.34 IPCs
StB killed: 8.8%-12 IPCs =       - 1.056 IPCs
StB & Fg killed: 14.4%*-22 IPCs = - 3.168 IPCs

Sum: 7.554 - 7.564 = - 0.01 IPCs damage/StB

Probably quite a bit, since heavy stacks of infantry can be nuked out of existance instead of slowely killed through attrition.

I’m wanting to condense rules for AA50 Strategic down as much as possible
I do still like the idea of adding ONE unique Tech to each nation
Atlantic Wall and Panzerblitz are not really necessary and add more complexity than needed
With only 1 starting BB, Yamatos has limited use and can also be eliminated (I’ve kept Air bases as a Global Tech (at reduced cost) for Naval defense vs. HB)

**GERMANY

1. WOLFPACKS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-improved communications grant subs the following benefits:
a) Destroyers now detect Subs on a 1:1 ratio.  Any Sub that is undetected, does not have any of it’s special abilities cancelled (eg. Sub movement, Submersible and Surprise Strike)
b) ALL Subs, regardless of whether a Destroyer is present or not, can ALWAYS submerge after 1 round of combat
c) ATTACKING Subs that are not detected, have the option of choosing transports as their primary target.  Subs roll their Surprise Strike and can have their 1st hit dedicated to sinking a transport.  Any subsequent hits are targeted at other naval vessels.

JAPAN

1. TOKYO EXPRESS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/Researcher)
-Your DDs gain limited transport capability. Maximum carrying capacity is 2INF per DD. Each DD can be used during either Combat or NCM, but not both
i) COMBAT - Your DDs can load and/or unload only 1 INF during Combat. A unit loaded in Combat must be unloaded in Combat on the same TURN (unless DD is sunk or forced to retreat). If the SZ is hostile, your DD must first participate in Naval Combat. If your DD survives, it may then unload 1INF into the Amphibious Assault.
ii) NON-COMBAT - Your DDs not participating in Combat can load and/or unload up to 2 INF during NCM. INF loaded during NCM do not need to be unloaded the same TURN, and may remain aboard the DD. A loaded DD does not suffer any combat penalties.

ITALY

1. MERCHANT MARINE (Minor Tech, 5IPC/Researcher)
-Up to 2INF/TURN can be transported from Italy to Algeria without a transport as long as Axis controls Italy, Algeria, and there are no Allied surface ships in SZ 14.**

yeah, the 3 fighter carrier is awesome, the defence capabilities are astounding and the saving of not having to buy a third carrier is great,

fast cruisers are another strategic element that can rescue a developing onslaught and stall the advance, they can be kept with the fleet and the players that have not developed fast cruisers have to plan around the fact that the cruiser range has increased, 2 fleets of fast cruisers at the pacific is devestating

Back in 1993 we had a rule for Nuclear Weapons.

First you had to discover it, but could not do so until after round 10 (classic, remember.)
Second, it had to be loaded on a heavy bomber
Third, it removed 50% of the units on a territory if the bomber lived through any AA Guns.

Purpose:  Back then there was a problem of 400 infantry on Japan and it was just a pain to take it.  This way we could eliminate all 400 of them with 2 nuclear weapons and assault the next round iwth infantry.

I personally would never use this leveling up rule. When I roll for a tech … what I’m hoping for is HEAVY BOMBERS. If I already have some other tech and I am rolling for another tech – I would never choose to level up my existing tech … instead I would prefer to reroll (hoping to roll HEAVY BOMBERS). I think the idea is creative and could be useful. I like having options! I guess I might would use it IF I already had HEAVY BOMBERS, but IF I already had HEAVY BOMBERS – more than likely I wouldn’t even bother rolling again (I’d be buying all the bombers I could).

Just my opinion…

Mista Biggs 8)