New Naval rules

@djensen Yes, the old forum software allowed to somehow cluster the mass of top categories, so they appeared more sorted and compact. Now the new theme had them all showing up in a somewhat endless list, that’s why categorizing appeared to be a valid solution to us.

Obviously categorizing (top and sub) is not the best way to give categories/forums a logical structure by clustering forums that thematically belong together. As de-emphasizing or hiding has never been our intention.

So instead of breaking the idea of having reasonable groups of forums - are there maybe other supported tools that allow us to group our categories reasonably, preventing from “top and sub, de-emphaszise and hide”?

@SS:

Ya I agree
Didn’t mean there was a cap neither just throwing up some numbers

So how much you need to repair before you can use it ? 4 - 6 ? Down to 3 ?

If increasing to 8 or 10, I rather keep 3 to make unoperational.
Thinking about the OOB rules, probably make it 3 and more to be unoperational was due to get Bases fix with only 4 IPCs or less, Minor IC cost 4 or less to be able to produce 1 unit at least.
Both have similar requirements.

Not convinced.

Rather Tankograd in URALS should be represented  ( large IC). Possibly as second choice a small IC in Archangel (wherever Murmansk is on the map)

Hey Folks,

has anyone of you ever tried HBG “Battle Shapes (3D)” rules (fortifications, rockets, etc.) in your 1940-Global games? (www. historicalboardgaming.com/Battle-Shapes-3D-printed_c_425.html)
If ‘yes’, what are you’re experiences with them? Are they a great imrpovement? Or to expensive, unbalanced or simply unrealistic?

Yes, I was talking about those, I was also thinking about their role in sea battles (against Subs):

Unlike fighters, they don´t need to end their move in a territory with friendly Inf, but they can move max 3 spaces away from a territory with friendly Inf

If there is an Airship involved in sea battle then:
Enemy submarines can not submerge and they can not surprise attack
Airships roll one dice against enemy Sub, hitting it at die roll of 2.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12316.0

Another way to make it more fair.  Give Japan all of the Western hemisphere US territories.

The way you have it set up is:

Ger + UK + 50 % of US.

vs the original setup of GER + Jpn.

In my estimation, Ger + (any other country) makes it an interesting and usually fair game.  Adding any more to that will unbalance the economics and/or require a military offset.  You may want to also shift the order of nations in the round to prevent the taking of capitals at the game outset.

Has anybody ever tried crossing rules between Axis & Allies with its Pacific and European counterpart. Such as Marines, Destroyers, surfacing subs, etc.? If so I am curious to know if the game turned out well. I agree it would make the game more complicated but I have no experience as to whether it makes it more interesting, fun, balanced, or simply a pain.