House Rules

1-1.png

My map isn’t heavily distorted to fit too many kind of units. I am favour to add new units if only absolutely needed. But Italy and China have units with similar Mech stats to diversify their options.

In my opinion, the ultimate expression of anti-aircraft cruiser was built too late for the war: the US Navy’s Worcester class cruisers. Six twin-gun 6" turrets, with semi-automatic loading. They were capable of launching 144 rounds a minute at maximum rate of fire (12 rounds / minute per barrel, 12 barrels). Or, put another way, each of those 144 shells weighed 105 to 130 lbs, for a mass of about 7 1/2 tons of steel and explosives launched in the air. Every minute. I mean, when you’re done messing with Kamikazes…

Just, not commissioned until 1948…

-Midnight_Reaper

@der-kuenstler For some reason I’m just finding this thread now. I mostly agree with what others have said. The only thing I want to add is that if you want to play with more than the simplest of house rules, you should feel good about creating play aids to support those rules. Seriously, go out and print your new rules, in full color. Put some thought into how to design and lay out a chart or a cheat sheet that will help players remember and use your rules. Cut them out so they’re the right size, and then laminate them or print them on heavyweight cardstock. If your rules involve any special pieces, buy sculpts for those pieces or use some paint or something to convincingly alter the closest available piece; don’t just slap a chip underneath artillery and say “OK, now it’s a self-propelled artillery.”

If you’re not willing to put in that work to make things easier on your players, then why should they put in the work to test out your house rules? It can take 8+ hours for a single playtest; if you invite 3 friends over, that’s 24 hours of other people’s time. You should be willing to put in at least 10% of that (2 hours) on creating play aids to improve that experience. If you’re not, maybe that’s a sign that you’re having so much fun imagining new rules that tickle your fancy that you’re not really thinking hard about whether those rules will be fun to play with for others.

GODLEADER, what version are you talking about because we are talking about 1942.2

Good post Black_Elk, also what do you use against allied fighters that destroy your transports because destroyers sometimes don’t always defend them.

@Baron:

Hope UK Pacific new turn order will help smooth the game flow.
Do you intend to merge it with ANZAC when you have less players around the table?

I don’t think so, the group loves the speed of the game with the separate UK nations… but they want something a little closer to oob rules. Also, it’s believed that the new victory objectives help balance the game the way a combined UK Pacific and ANZAC combo once did. It still needs a few tweeks to the NOs.

What about giving it the ability to fire first in battle, defender removes casualties, then normal combat begins. Or what about being able to fire from adjacent territory. Also can it be used as AA and land combat at the same time or do you have to designate in defense.

But doing that does not model the capabilities of these units. The game OOB permits the preemptive firing because it is against just air units that are flying over to attack. It is marginally acceptable to allow this, but realistically these are just basic artillery.

Since they were made as a new unit it stands to bring it fully into the fold as a normal combat unit.

To allow preemptive fire every round is too strong for a 5 IPC unit IMO.

Plus this unit needs to be 3-2-5 as the other units took the other values, so the value of a 5 IPC unit must balance out and preemptive is worth more.

Right - but using the latest rules for straights - you can make a rule “subs cannot conduct convoy raids while inside protected straits” - so the subs would have to come out to make the raid and remain in that zone for the rest of the turn.

…interesting…