Potential Rule Change

[Lebatron]

I feel my new production mutiple models real life fairly well. Look at it this way, even though the US will have a lower production per say they will not actually create less units with it. They will continue to try and produce the same amount. The lost production will be seen in the research first. That is were I believe players will be spending less. Then you will not get unrealistic 9/9 infantry and such. So does it create an unhistoric US production? Not really. And it fixes the uber-unit problems.

[Forwarn45]

The lost production will be seen in the research first. That is were I believe players will be spending less.

I think the best way to really fix this is to force the WA to make tough choices early in the game, when the US wasn't committed to the war. Reducing production while perhaps increasing some starting units to make research more expensive for the WA could do a lot to model this. The US army in 1942 and maybe even a good part of 1943 wasn't a match for the Germans in terms of quality. Nor did the WA have any significant tech edges in most other areas, except perhaps heavy bombers. The Japanese navy and air were on par and perhaps better in some respects in early '42. I don't think reducing the modifier post-war will necessarily address this problem (and I've already mentioned my reservations about it as a matter of history).

[WanderingHead]

x1 1940
x2 1942 OR Japan attacks Russia or the US
x3 1943
x4 1944

It seems to me that the effect that is being looked for is basically for the benefit to Japan for DOW to generally outweigh the benefit to the WA. This is accomplished if USA production does not go up as a result of DOW, but it could still follow the presumed more historically timeline.

x1 1940
x1 1941
x3 1942 OR Japan attacks the US
x4 1943 and after

What would the US have done in 1942 if not attacked? Probably there would have been an increase in war production regardless.

US would still get it's mountain of metal, regardless of whether Japan attacks. Sort of might as well move early, to increase Japanese production.

Just a thought.

[aletoledo]

x1 1940
x1 1941
x3 1942 OR Japan attacks the US
x4 1943 and after

What would the US have done in 1942 if not attacked? Probably there would have been an increase in war production regardless.

US would still get it's mountain of metal, regardless of whether Japan attacks. Sort of might as well move early, to increase Japanese production.

I suppose anything that disassociates a penalty for japan attacking early would work.

[mcaryf]

It seems to me that the weakness of your proposed rule change is that it does not really change what happens merely the interpretation of it and that is already quite possible via a house rule approach.

I would like to see some real changes to game events representing something actually happening. I mentioned in a previous thread that if the Allied invasion of Europe had actually been delayed then Britain would have suffered a much worse bombardment of German V weapons. This could be represented in the game with some potential random damage taking place each turn to units and production located on land within two regions range of Netherlands or France after Summer 44 if these were still in German hands. This would give a very strong incentive to the Allies to speed the invasion.

With respect to the Japanese, I would like to see them given automatically generated free Kamikaze capability each turn from, say, Fall 1944 onwards. An off the top of the head suggestion for implementing this would be to use the Japanese Tac Air unit which is fairly redundant otherwise as it is too close to the Heavy Bomber in capability. This unit might be adjusted to have a low evasion and low air attack, a high sea attack but low torpedo capability and a range of 2. This would make it effective against all ships except Heavy Fleets (which Kamikaze's were). The Japanese player might be awarded two of these units in Honshu for every turn that they survive after Summer 44. Thus by Summer 45 they would have had 8 free units. My rough guess from the starting forces is that a GGWAW air unit is equivalent to 300 planes. Well the Japanese deployed 2,500 Kamikaze's in the period Autumn 1944 to August 1945 so my 8 units is about right. As the game progresses the threat available to the Japanese player via Kamikaze could be built up by hording them. A mass attack would have the most impact. This might even require the WALLIES player to use the island hopping route so as to have additional land air protection. It is not unreasonable that these units are counted as free since the Japanese used a lot of their relatively obsolete planes and pilots with minimal training.

Mike

[SGT Rice]

Uncle_Joe said:

If the islands are made into fortresses, the Allies will have even less reason to want to mess around with attacking them. At this scale, the casualties the Allies suffered taking those islands are miniscule....probably a damaged unit. I dont think requiring the US to invest army groups to take those islands is improving the realism or the game balance.

Agreed ... they shouldn't have to invest army groups to take a few islands. Nor should the Germans have to assemble army groups to take Gibraltar, in response to the British having massed 10 militia, 3 artillery and 3 flak units (or whatever) in an area of 6.5 square kilometers.

Any objection to some territories (Gibraltar, the smaller islands/groups) having stacking limits?

[Forwarn45]

Stacking might be nice for a sequel to the game assuming the amount you can attack with is similarly limited. I don't mind Gibraltar so much as I think of it as including "Southern Spain," which really should exist as its own territory.