Condensed 'Bring-me-up-to-speed' information?

Makes sense Charles DG.  General HG uses armored cars as artillery scouts.  Could do something similar.

I’ve settled on my house rules (for now) and so I’m going to release my files for a free download for anyone that’s interested in using them or even just checking them out to get some ideas for your own set. The link to download them is at;
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mucfl9jol75ujl9/GHG_House_Rules.zip

I also made a video with my house rule set that I use and the copy that I have sent to Young Grasshopper to put on the prize table at the Grasshopper Invitational coming up. It gives a summary of all of my house rules with a quick explanation of each as well as a close look at the units and markers. You can see the video here;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCWswdQL-rw

CWO Marc I am not talking the Tech, but rather the availability of Sonar for ASW on ships designed for ASW and not the U boat threat but rather U boats attacking in unison.
Another factor with historically accurate concepts has to be playability without getting overly complicated.

IE German assault guns over tanks was lack of resources….and the availability of chassis from outdated tanks like the PZ ll and PZ 38t to create a need in Self propelled Artillery and Anti-Tank vehicles. I assure you that the Tanks were preferred over assault guns. This concept has morphed in house rules to what these assault guns were actually intended to do. A Panzer Division commander would rather be supplied Panthers over JagdPanthers

And instead of giving the US an extra $10 for having the Philipines and Hawaii, they should start off with $10 extra and lose $10 due to a massive loss of morale when they lose them. A penalty as suppose to a reward. The loss of morale can truly result in a loss of production. That would make it more realistic.

I am probably going to post this topic in another section. I would like to build more support for this for any future revisions to the rules.

@oztea

Hi! Sorry to disturb you, but just to clarify (sorry for the stupid question), Japan is supposed to be at war with the UK, ANZAC, and the Dutch in this setup, right? I’m asking because the TripleA map doesn’t have the UK and Japan at war and I’m not sure whether that’s an error or not. Thank you!

@Cmdr:

Yea, but I just dont see tanks having the ability to hit bombers and fighter/tbombers.  Maybe tanks can select any ground unit they want to hit, but then to rebalance, prohibit them from hitting aircraft.

Yes, my intent was to limit the targeting to ground units. The other units not directed by the general could hit aircraft in the first round if the defender does not have enough fodder. The planes could be hit in the second round of combat by anything as normal.

Seems to me that some of the Japanese NAs are very powerful, like Yamato Class Battleships, Paper Planes and Banzai attacks. With this, Japan would be unstoppable, on the mainland and at sea. Even the extra 40 IPCs for the US wouldn’t be enough, and I would know since that’s how I play, and that’s how I’ve played from the beginning. Tone them down or replace them and/or give the Allies a bid (20-30 IPCs) and it’ll be more fair.

Nonetheless, I still love the ideas, even if I have seen them around the forums. I also love the ability to pick which ones you want to use.

I got to say that the introduction of the National Objectives concept, was a stroke of genius imho.
Now, the game, through the NO Bonus Incentives, push the players towards their historical aims.

Anyhow, as with any setup, I think that even with the NO setup, AA50 might go stale over time.
Also, not ALL historical strategies are being encouraged by the OOB NOs. What about the German Sub strat, for example? It is not shown in any NOs at least.

Therefore, I thought of the Variable NO concept. It runs like this :

We create a list of, say, 5-10 NO’s per Nation (not possible to create even THAT many for a nation like China, for example). Before the game starts, every nation rolls randomly to see what NO’s they get.

1 NO: China
2 NO’s each: Italy and Soviet Union
3 NO’s each: Germany, Japan, UK and US

I like the thought of China having their own NO/NOs, but of course, they could be incorporated into the US one.

What’s your thought? Or maybe you got some NO’s of your own?