| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
 |
|
| jfkziegler wrote: | | The only thing that I didn't like was that the game got a little boring towards the end when both sides has their surface fleets mostly gone, but neither side could quite make that magical number of winning points. I'll have to think about whether that needs fixing or not. |
We playtested the Malta scenario under slightly different rules tonight, using v1.2 as a baseline. The changes:
Troop transports are no longer Slow. We are playing on a 15x20 hex map, and Slow is too cumbersome for that distance. It also streamlines the game a little, as it's one less roll we have to remind new players about.
Troop transports are loaded at the beginning of their Sea Movement Step and unloaded at the end of their Sea Movement Step. It's a semantic change, but it cleans up the rules sheet.
Troop counters lose Hard to Kill and gain a variation of Uniquely Tough...
Infantry: This unit cannot be destroyed by or lose its last hull point to attacks from ship or air units.
Troop Counter vs. Troop Counter Combat: The Infantry Combat Phase occurs after the Surface Gunnery Phase. Each player rolls a die for every infantry unit in a sector with opposing infantry units. Each 5 or 6 counts as a success. Each success counts as a hit, which may be applied to any opposing infantry unit in that sector. (Thus, if multiple successes are rolled, it is possible to destroy an infantry unit in one turn. However, smart generals will assign those hits to units already damaged).
Scenario-specific alterations: The three objectives are located on the south end of the map (I'll draw out a map in a day or two; we're more interested in getting the scenario balanced at the moment); The Italian fleet contains 8 Troop transports which are trying to get across the map (I don't foresee the scenario lasting long enough for the transports to re-load and conduct a second landing.).
The Italian fleet, not counting the cost of the transports, is 359. The British fleet, not counting shore batteries, is 248. Victory conditions will be adjusted through the course of playtest to determine a balanced victory. (After all, the results of scenario 1 and this scenario will determine the fleet selection available for scenario 3, when the Italians invade Gibraltar with German support.)
At present, there are 3 objectives, two of which contain a shore battery and three defending infantry. The third objective, furthest from the Italian deployment zone in the northeast corner of the map, is defended by three infantry but flanked in either adjacent hex by artillery.
Both fleet lists have been painstakingly researched by the group's resident Naval History professor, who is also responsible for the research which led to the Aquila we'll see in a couple of weeks.
The Italian fleet was 2x Giulio Cesare, 4x Zara (some will become Gorizias), 2x Bolzano, 2x di Savoia, 2x d'Aosta, 4x Targio, 4x Vivaldi, 3x Ambra, and 6x SM.79. This fleet is almost 100% accurate for what the Italians would have fielded in the Sicilian-Maltan theater on 2 July 1940.
The British fleet is a bit of a compromise. As the British are about to attack Oran, and Force H had yet to approach Malta, They would have had Royal Sovereign, Ramillies, and Eagle, along with 2 Town-class CLs, 2 Ajax-group Leander CLs, a Sydney-group Leander CL, 8 destroyers, and a squadron or two of Gladiators at Malta. Our fleet is 2x Repulse, 2x Belfast, 2x Ajax, 1x Sydney, 8x Javelin, and 1x Illustrious with 2x Swordfish. We're going to hand-waive both sets of relatively ineffective fighters, the Fiat CR.42's and Gladiators, and say they're having a slap-fight somewhere in the skies over the Med. We may also add a Kent and another Belfast to the British fleet, which could easily have been recalled from Oran or South Africa given the imminent danger of an Italian build-up on Sicily.
The second playing of this scenario was far more successful than the first. The British fleet took serious losses early, but managed to eliminate all Italian BB's and CA's in the process of having their surface force wiped out. The Italians landed two transports at each objective, eventually (after several turns of just troops fighting) capturing all three objectives. Allowing infantry to die in one infantry phase sped up gameplay without taking too much from the original rules. The shore batteries tied up a couple of CL's, and even managed to pop a crippled Cesare that stuck around off shore to sink the last Repulse. Taking a re-arming counter instead of damage 50% of the time is almost as good as receiving a damage counter - the Italians could run CLs right up against the coast and blast away at the battery and ensure it never got to fire back. The bombardment rules now make more sense - you can easily disrupt infantry, but you have to put boots on the ground to kill infantry.
We still aren't sure about a redistribution of victory points, owing to the scenario being wildly different from the original troop rules set up for a meeting engagement invasion, and we're kicking around a couple of ideas. One is to gradually award victory points to the Italians for occupying objectives at the end of each turn. Scoring 25/75/150 for controlling 1, 2, or 3 objectives, respectively, for each turn compensates for the smaller British fleet.
We're going to run this scenario again on Saturday, and I'll take pics of the map to give you a better visual of our board. I'm also going to ask Hossmosis to discuss his experience playing British this week after alpha testing this scenario as Italian deputy commander last week. |
|
 Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:08 am |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quick follow-up: You had the same idea I had by rewording Hard To kill. We arrived at the same revision. I'll talk to the group about Rescue and regenerating damage and respawning transports before we play again. |
|
| Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:12 am |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Thanks for the report, UNC. I definitely feel like we're getting close with these rules. I'll have some more specific feedback sometime when I'm less tired. 
_________________
 |
|
| Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:40 am |
|
|
Posts: 9
|
|
|
Post subject: You win some, you lose some.
|
|
|
Thanks UNC_Samurai. I'll keep my comments few in number and short in length.
(1) Removal of slow from transports makes game play a little quicker and works quite well for the 12 hex distance that the transports must cover. However, I feel that the advantage of not having to roll 8 d6 each move and possibly staggering transport groups would be a scene for game imbalance using a smaller/normal map.
(2) Troop counters lose Hard to Kill and gain a variation of Uniquely Tough... Infantry: This unit cannot be destroyed by or lose its last hull point to attacks from ship or air units. This is spot-on. A small modification but I found that it worked.
(3) Sizing/points: The 110-point advantage fielded by the Italian fleet was noticeable but was not unreasonable. An assessment of play in turn 1,2, and 3 would reveal a relatively balance duo of engaged fleets. Having commanded the Italian fleet (incarnation #1) last week and seen the play of the Italian fleet (incarnation #2) last night, I support a point advantage for the Italians but would suggest somewhere along the lines of 50 points. A possible remedy? The addition of a two-cruiser or an cruiser-destroyer squad on the British side.
(4) The new map (land mass of Malta) is more appropriate and - in conjunction with the absence of troop movement - produces a more realistic chance for landing success (Ital) or land defense (Brit). My only suggestion: the position of the Malta land mass could stand to be moved a single hex closer to the British deployment zone but this needs additional play-testing and discussion. As the Italians moved forward on turn one and two it became obvious to this Admiral that one objective was lost, impossible to defend with ships. The success of the Italian fleet was not ensured but I would still consider a movement of the land mass.
(5) Sidenote: Unloading troops at Malta, sending transports back to the Italian base, and then returning these transports to land is close to impossible barring incompetence on the sea from both Admirals.
(6) We will be playing again in a few days. UNC_Samurai and I will keep you posted. |
|
| Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:12 pm |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| UNC_Samurai wrote: | | We playtested the Malta scenario under slightly different rules tonight, using v1.2 as a baseline. The changes: |
Thanks again for the playtest. My thoughts are below.
| Quote: | | Troop transports are no longer Slow. We are playing on a 15x20 hex map, and Slow is too cumbersome for that distance. It also streamlines the game a little, as it's one less roll we have to remind new players about. |
Perhaps this should be added as an optional rule. I don't like making it a standard rule, though, because it seems to me that on a small board lack of Slow 2 makes things too easy. You don't have to worry about protecting the transports because they're at the islands so quick.
| Quote: | | Troop transports are loaded at the beginning of their Sea Movement Step and unloaded at the end of their Sea Movement Step. It's a semantic change, but it cleans up the rules sheet. |
This is probably a good change. It wouldn't affect gameplay and would make more sense.
| Quote: | Troop counters lose Hard to Kill and gain a variation of Uniquely Tough...
Infantry: This unit cannot be destroyed by or lose its last hull point to attacks from ship or air units. |
I actually don't like this ability, because I do think that ships and aircraft should be able to destroy troop counters. I just think it should be hard to do. In my playtest last night, I was actually pretty happy with how Hard to Kill played. The troop counters were tough to take out, but not impossible.
| Quote: | | Troop Counter vs. Troop Counter Combat: The Infantry Combat Phase occurs after the Surface Gunnery Phase. Each player rolls a die for every infantry unit in a sector with opposing infantry units. Each 5 or 6 counts as a success. Each success counts as a hit, which may be applied to any opposing infantry unit in that sector. (Thus, if multiple successes are rolled, it is possible to destroy an infantry unit in one turn. However, smart generals will assign those hits to units already damaged). |
I'll have to think about this. On the one hand, I worry that it would make troop counters too strong. On the other hand, I like the combined arms feel it gives. One thing to think about is that creating a separate Infantry Combat Phase means that destroyed troops would be removed before engaging in Troop Combat.
| Quote: | | Scenario-specific alterations: The three objectives are located on the south end of the map (I'll draw out a map in a day or two; we're more interested in getting the scenario balanced at the moment); The Italian fleet contains 8 Troop transports which are trying to get across the map (I don't foresee the scenario lasting long enough for the transports to re-load and conduct a second landing.). |
I'm anxious to see the map for this scenario, and I am very excited to try this when I come down to play in October.
| Hossmosis wrote: | | Thanks UNC_Samurai. I'll keep my comments few in number and short in length. |
I appreciate your thoughts, Hossmosis.
| Quote: | | (1) Removal of slow from transports makes game play a little quicker and works quite well for the 12 hex distance that the transports must cover. However, I feel that the advantage of not having to roll 8 d6 each move and possibly staggering transport groups would be a scene for game imbalance using a smaller/normal map. |
I think you hit my thoughts right on the head here. I think an optional rule is the best way to cover this.
| Quote: | | (2) Troop counters lose Hard to Kill and gain a variation of Uniquely Tough... Infantry: This unit cannot be destroyed by or lose its last hull point to attacks from ship or air units. This is spot-on. A small modification but I found that it worked. |
I'm still not crazy about this because I do think that ships and aircraft should be able to destroy troop counters - I just think it should be hard to do.
Again, thanks for both of your input!
_________________
|
|
| Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:50 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| jfkziegler wrote: | | Quote: | | Troop transports are no longer Slow. We are playing on a 15x20 hex map, and Slow is too cumbersome for that distance. It also streamlines the game a little, as it's one less roll we have to remind new players about. |
Perhaps this should be added as an optional rule. |
This is going in the mini-campaign-specific rules. I'm working on a document with all the notes and fluff for the first two scenarios today.
The packet will also include a map, and as soon as I can get a hold of Odysseus and his 1337 shooping skillz, I'll make a blank map template. We'll have specific deployment information for each scenario in handy visual format.
| jfkziegler wrote: | | Quote: | Troop counters lose Hard to Kill and gain a variation of Uniquely Tough...
Infantry: This unit cannot be destroyed by or lose its last hull point to attacks from ship or air units. |
I actually don't like this ability, because I do think that ships and aircraft should be able to destroy troop counters. I just think it should be hard to do. In my playtest last night, I was actually pretty happy with how Hard to Kill played. The troop counters were tough to take out, but not impossible. |
I don't have a lot of background in the effectiveness of shore bombardment on infantry in the European or Mediterranean theaters other than the Massachusetts' attack on the Jean Bart and port facilities at Casablanca. I have studied a lot of reports from island bombardments in the Pacific, and every single report despite years of evolving and improving naval gunfire, naval bombardment never successfully dislodged infantry. It certainly softened them up for the landing infantry, but in every case I've seen the defending infantry units remain functionally intact. This resulted in what I thought was a fairly accurate playtest when the Italian infantry landed last night. The light cruisers were able to disrupt infantry and destroy fixed artillery positions, and when troop combat began, the defenders were using their successes to first disrupt and then destroy attackers, while each success by the attackers delivered the fatal blow, thanks to sea-land cooperation. We'll discuss the use of Infantry versus Hard to Kill 3.0, and of Regroup.
| jfkziegler wrote: | | Quote: | | Troop Counter vs. Troop Counter Combat: The Infantry Combat Phase occurs after the Surface Gunnery Phase. Each player rolls a die for every infantry unit in a sector with opposing infantry units. Each 5 or 6 counts as a success. Each success counts as a hit, which may be applied to any opposing infantry unit in that sector. (Thus, if multiple successes are rolled, it is possible to destroy an infantry unit in one turn. However, smart generals will assign those hits to units already damaged). |
I'll have to think about this. On the one hand, I worry that it would make troop counters too strong. On the other hand, I like the combined arms feel it gives. One thing to think about is that creating a separate Infantry Combat Phase means that destroyed troops would be removed before engaging in Troop Combat. |
I think the solution is another step within the Surface Gunnery Phase:
First Player's Surface Gunnery Step
Second Player's Surface Gunnery Step
First Player's Infantry Step
Second Player's Infantry Step
During the Infantry Step, a player rolls for his infantry, and the damage stacks or applies along with bombardment, but it rewards admirals who start by unleashing naval fire.
| jfkziegler wrote: | | Quote: | | Scenario-specific alterations: The three objectives are located on the south end of the map (I'll draw out a map in a day or two; we're more interested in getting the scenario balanced at the moment); The Italian fleet contains 8 Troop transports which are trying to get across the map (I don't foresee the scenario lasting long enough for the transports to re-load and conduct a second landing.). |
I'm anxious to see the map for this scenario, and I am very excited to try this when I come down to play in October. |
We'll work on that template. We're also trying to finalize the exact position of the islands, and then I'll build land masses out of Styrofoam. |
|
| Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:16 pm |
|
|
Love this Picture
Posts: 125
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Quote:
If you aren't going to allow Strafing attacks, why not just call it Bomber vs Troops? I have to object to freshly landed Troops having an AA score of any kind, by the way. They should have to rely on Fighter protection and Heavy Antiair from supporting Ships.
I suppose it could be called Bomber vs. Troops. The reason I did not allow strafing attacks is because I want to keep troops relatively difficult to kill. If they were statted low enough so that fighters could kill them, then destroyers could also kill them with ease, and no troop counters would ever survive.
As for the AA score, I suppose it could be dropped. Again, it was added to make them a little more survivable, but I guess it could be removed.
End Quote
Why not allow planes to use there AA dice then troops could have a higher armour vs ships and still only have one armor value
2 cents
_________________
 |
|
| Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:14 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
| We're going to run Malta this afternoon. We'll post results and other thoughts later this evening. |
|
| Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:09 pm |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Cool. I look forward to hearing the results.
_________________
|
|
| Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:52 pm |
|
|
Muahahaha!
AHF Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 1493
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
As do I. I'd like to have a well - worked out scenario for landings. jfkziegler - have you considered submitting your ruleset to RB as an example of something we'd like to see in the upcomming starter? I for one would like to see SOMETHING surrounding our auxilaries and island assault in the new starter.
_________________
-Greyh
Trade List: Greyh's WAS Trade List
+13 On AH Trade Boards
+10 On aaminis Trade Boards |
|
| Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:16 pm |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I have not. However, if someone who corresponds with RB frequently would like to submit the ruleset, I would have no objections.
_________________
|
|
| Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:30 pm |
|
|
Posts: 727
|
|
|
| Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:50 pm |
|
|
AHF Bronze-Rated Trader
Posts: 388
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
So we playtested our invasion of Malta yesterday...and I have nothing to report.
The Italian admiral pulled a fast one on the British. He moved towards Malta for two turns, then promptly began slowly withdrawing to the southeast. The transports never landed, and the British were forced to chase the Italians across the Messina Strait. The Regia Aeronautica conveniently rid the British of any Extended Range, and the two Giulio Cesares picked off the British cruisers one by one. The only damage suffered by the Regia Marina were two Ambras, a Luca Targio, and a single point of damage on a Gorizia.
For the next iteration of the scenario, we will be moving Malta a couple of hexes further to the west. With this alteration, we believe the scenario is just about ready to lock & load, in spite of the one-sided affair yesterday. On to designing the invasion of Gibraltar... |
|
| Mon Aug 31, 2009 6:23 pm |
|
|
Posts: 727
|
|
|
| Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:41 am |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Very cool Otto! Thanks!
_________________
|
|
| Sat Sep 05, 2009 11:47 am |
|
|
Muahahaha!
AHF Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 1493
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Ok. I finally think I'm gonna have a chance to fully test these rules. (Especially now that I have LSDs...muahahahahaha!)
It may be a few days, but as always, I'll report my findings and suggestions. 
_________________
-Greyh
Trade List: Greyh's WAS Trade List
+13 On AH Trade Boards
+10 On aaminis Trade Boards |
|
| Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:22 am |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Awesome. I'm holding off on any more revisions for the time being until some more feedback comes in. I don't think we need any more than minor tweaks from here.
_________________
|
|
| Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:38 am |
|
|
Muahahaha!
AHF Silver-Rated Trader
Posts: 1493
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
Well, we did a few games (two 200 pts and one at 300pts).
I have to say that the system works well. It was a lot of fun and it forced you to really use your auxiliaries. I learned that the GH and the T1 were really good. Protecting your "convoys" of troops became very important and often if you had lots of Islands there would be very stratigic moving of fleets.
Not really sure there is anything I would change. I would love to have a really-really nice card made up for the auxilaries to look just like the WotC ones that I could print out.
We didn't try the Casabiancas - but we'd like to try it.
All in all, this is a solid ruleset. I approve!
_________________
-Greyh
Trade List: Greyh's WAS Trade List
+13 On AH Trade Boards
+10 On aaminis Trade Boards
Last edited by Greyh Seer on Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:32 pm |
|
|
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6928
|
|
|
Post subject:
|
|
|
I'm glad to hear it. I think I'll probably finalize it with version 1.4 soon. Or maybe I should call it version 2.0, since it should theoretically be the base version.
_________________
|
|
| Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:24 pm |
|
|
Posts: 1644
|
|
|
| Sun Oct 04, 2009 12:07 am |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Donations are used for Forumini Olympics awards (donations admin: Aquarius)
| Forumini Gallery |
 |
|
