Had the same for a Vichy trench in Golden Coast.
Also there is a bug that troopers land anyhow even if the tranny is sank or escapes (Redrum witnessed that firsthand)
Special Warfare I perceive as needed from Italy. But definitely not on T1 in general unless the Allied player is a novice.
Special Warfare also threatens Cairo IF the UK Med-Fleet is not built up, and may force Wavell (or Alexander!) to abandon W.Egypt.
Main point of S.Warfare is that you can 'add' to an attack to W.Egypt an amount of troopers instead of having to land them first in Lybia @ Tobruk usually.
Even Germany could make use of S.Warfare admittedly (They can produce marines, sure but S.Warfare is a powerful tech all around) - to retake Copenhagen, to land INF in Leningrad, for ENG units to have some extra omph in Urban territories.
Not needed - sure - but handy? Certainly.
@redrum For that save I think it's easier if I pass you through the lobby! But the situation of the non working converted barracks repeated in a few games. And I think it's easily duplicable as well in any game.
@Hepps Adding, I feel Armour can use at least also a +1 attack through some technology - and eventually also added defence to have a final base of 7 / 6 / 2 (Dare say diluted in 3 different techs - including improved armour giving +1 defence). Currently they're easy to hard counter with AT (that can gain through techs). I believe Armour should upgrade as well through tech to keep in tune a line of armour piercing vs armour technology race (if that ever happens). To be a 6 costing unit they have lots of penalties in many terrain ontop of having a direct hard counter if they're spammed.
Question - maybe related to a bug.
Vichy France builds Barracks in Algeria.
Then Allies land in Marocco. Algeria turns German.
Germany cannot place anymore INFs or other new units in Algeria, not acknowledging the presence of the Barracks.
Is that intended or a bug?
I was feeling already the Allies too strong before the changes of 3.0 frankly. Now I played a few games and German T1 is quite awful - but in general Allies are winning in -every- game I get to watch in the lobby (unless a player is quite bad compared to the other, only cases where I saw Axis in winning positions).
What I think about 3.0 changes that need fine tuning (and that in my opinion leaves the game still widely in favor of the Allies):
SUBs should stay 4-1-2 OR Germany also gets Improved Submarines as starting Tech (It's the only really impactful one, all other nations have few subs for the difference to be felt).
Keep Improved Submarines to 5-1-2 tech.
UK naval plane from Central Britain to London (It cannot scramble from there)
Improved Destroyers also add 1 to Destroyed defence (making them 3-4-2). The defines more the role of Sub as offensive unit and DD to defensive one.
US naval plane in E.Coast to inland, Eastern Central US.
Undo the last UK changes (Put back naval plane in SZ148, remove the 2 extra AA)
German transport from SZ69 to SZ64 (Gives the option to ferry that resource to Morocco if they want when it's still possible)
Italian starting technology is Special Warfare instead of Improved Hulls (They had alpini and san marco and decima mas) - a tech that at least a nation like Italy can use, more than one that works pratically for 3 of their units (and probably fated to remain 3 for quite a while). Also gives them to operate in the Mediterranean better making the theater more interesting, and threatening Malta of invasion on T1. (Operation Hercules)
UK gets already 30 free BPs in turn 1-5 in the form of the Dakar Vichy Fleet - unless miracles happen Axis cannot impede that, it's like having frozen assets there for a short while in a game that technically should span well over 10-15 turns but ends usually well before. Vichy mainland fleet is there but will disappear once Morocco falls (and the Allies can arrange that by turn 3 or 4 usually. It's a good shielding force but that's pretty much it. Germany may have a minor gain averagely by lucking out 1 or 2 of these ships, averagely. Not something one can rely on though since it's random, and even the less plan around).
I think the 30 BPs (BB + DD) that are getting given to UK in 'frozen terms' need to find a tradeoff on Axis end. 1 resource does not cut it (and that transport ferrying it in 99% is just fated to sink without chance of other support in Allied dominated seas.)
Not saying to remove the Dakar fleet (it's a good idea imo and fits historically!) - but Axis needs gains elsewhere to make up for that!
General Pre 3.0 feelings:
As of now it seems far too easy and cheap to overwhelm Italy prematurely, and stall Japan naval expansion in the Pacific that hardly reaches the expansion historically had. From Australia fantasy fleet to an undewhelming Japanese starting fleet (they are awfully short of small vessels as DDs), Japan only faces a fierce resistance in islands that are all manned (I'd empty of INFs an amount of the Dutch Indies as they were litterally scarcely garrisoned and should just be a takeover as most of the holdings of Commonwealth there) ontop of the fact that Japan life also can change a lot if they nail Special Warfare on Turn1 or not.
I think Japan needs 1-2 more DDs -and- to have all the infantry in the islands (except Formosa and Hainan) converted to marines. While that gives actually them more marines they lack shipping for most of them assuming USA plays a split between Europe and Pacific (and thus it's only a +1 in defence). BUT if Japan has a major problem (which can happen) to not gain Special Warfare in T1, and eventually in T2 too...
How things pan out in Europe is more like Germany gets hammered by Soviets in T1. In T2 both sides reorganize. In T3 Germany can try some shy offensive but in the while the Allies packed up their shit and are ready to hammer the Germany down somewhere.
Allies are far too quick to do their things as it is now - and Axis just implode in the long run. And Axis needs time too to pack their shit for Russia or wherever they want to hit. Russia can hit way too hard in Turn1 (I think Germany needs 1 more INF in each of: Pskov, Orel, Kharkov, E. Ukraine).
But math is not an opinion - Allies have higher starting TUV by a far shot, and they've a full nation (Russia like) of additional production. So it is usually just a matter of time til Axis is toppled (That assuming even skills of players).
Viable options are to:
Weaken Dutch Indies and / or (I'd do both) convert Japan INF into MARs.
Japan needs some more naval assets / Australia needs less.
Add German starting units, in Russia, and some trenches in the West / Norway (Copenhagen especially)
Tweak production some - Axis needs a bit more production over time to remain competitive. Germany in particular. Some provinces may require extra PUs per turn.
Italy seems very passive and often impotent - and if the UK and USA wants to go for the Med they can, by itself is not wrong, but it's the speed at which they can concentrate to achieve that.
In general I try to play but end up pretty much frustrated as Allies can be in parity or gain upper hand on Axis anywhere. And by turn 3 or 4 it's more a matter of gathering together your assets and producing things with the PUs you got. There is no massive swing from starting position (save as mentioned already, poor players that sleep on their feet and get some mighty army swept clean because they moved inaccurately).
Given Turn1 can be quite a variable only for Germany - not much that can be done.
Japan can roughly calculate their attacks. Soviets can calculate them with even more precision. And so is for everyone around except Germany - because Germany besides Tobruk plays lottery. Your sub sent against a transport can fail, and then gets hit with 1. That repeats all over - and thus there is a major luck / unluck swing on Germany turn1.
All other nations can pratically predict the outcome of their battles (assuming one plays with LL - I personally prefer dice but... no one or almost like dice. Then one can go play chess in general if they prefer no luck!). That can give quite a swing to Allies, doing already big invasions on Turn3, or Turn5 instead if the submarines were effective. Because if German submarines kill things AND survive they remain a threat, so Allies need to escort their stuff adequately. If in German T1 the Allies are lucky, kill submarines and their things even live in large amount ... Allies dance.
That has a -major- impact on how the game pans out in the subsequent turn (exactly as much as UK nailing Special Warfare turn1 or not, for who does not tech Logistics on T1.)
Adding: Allies also have starting superb technologies for their relative needs. Italy has a shoddy one. Germany's quite relative and in many cases only works on T1 Soviet assaults and with AT that survives that, since Germany must try to grab grounds and won't produce defensive units early on. Soviets have the amazing logistics, USA has production which is ever handy and UK has the better AA which always help! (I know National Tech Advantage is an optional - but gives an amount of chrome. I'd alter that to mirror better Axis earlier 'tech / training' advantage in various fields, giving more than 1 tech to who may deserve it - and / or adding further starting tech if Shared Tech is enabled to some nations)
@redrum On point 2 I went to read again the changes, and I've misread the 'Vichy turns into a ... gives income to Germany' into 'Vichy turns German' (Hence thought Vichy was to lose their capital).
On the submarine business we'll see how it pans out - atm the few games I've watched saw the Allies quite well positioned - and I did twice the first turns in new games to be continued.
Submarine change looks quite nifty and good.
But I feel while the change itself is positive, the adjustments on the map for Turn1 outcome for what concerns submarines are not sufficient - the Allies have many more surviving naval units, which speed up sensibly their invasion force.
Then I've a concern that I've read in the notes - but not experienced yet: if Vichy turns German due to Allies taking North Afrika, what happens to the remainder of the Vichy possessions (such as Madagascar / etc) assuming they're still Vichy France? Their PU go into a waste-bin, or they convert too into German regions?
In the mirror of the scale of the fights no side had 'total' air superiority unless the enemy did not had pratically absence of fighters / bombers (ie - late '44).
If you take in the average time of the war when both sides had an active airforce there was no side having absolutely 0 bombers or so flying through enemy fighters.
Thus it should be that each round there is 1 round of air combat - do it with separate air battle OR with AA style fire - and then the surviving planes support ground forces for 1 round of ground combat.
It is called realism where bombers can go through fighters - albeit with losses.
I did not meant 'separate air battle' which I think it's a wrong concept by how TripleA works.
What I mean is to give 'AA fire' (like AA, Anti Tank, etc) to fighters / naval fighters against other planes.
It is not a separate battle - but each round fighter shoot at other planes (like each round an AA shoots specifically to planes, and AT to tanks).
I don't think it will be massive work that in terms of coding.
That too can work tbh - but it means some reworking.
Fighters having some AA against other planes when both defending and attacking and less regular attack / defence. (and Naval Fighters too or they'll end up being used as fighters on land too)
That should mirror some 'air battles' too that go each round on.
Armour & Tactical Bombers
I feel that armour is less used an amount, now that the AT got beefed up with its cyclical fire.
I suggest that armour gets +1 attack as well with the Improved Armour tech.
Tactical Bombers are rarely seen beyond the starting allotment. In general a fighter (either type) is more versatile in attack and defence. Even more so as Fighters get the improved range rather easily (same branch) while TACs need strategic technology as prerequisite, so ultimately a Fighter has matching attack of a Tac or differs of 1 (and it's not something you can easily mass to cut a large difference), and Tac helps tanks which are not overly used as of now.
So I feel Tactical Bombers too should get some beef in a way or another.
Given the large map and the span of turns it should take for a meaningful representation of the war I throw here a bundle of suggestions.
More unit tiers of some type. Like 3 fighters plus jet fighters. TWW in comparison has the base, the improved tech and then the advanced unit. I'd simply make the 'improved' a new type of unit instead of boosting all the existing fighters. I see it as like (hurrican > spitfire > typhoon, or Bf109 > FW190 > TA152 type of thing). That can be done for planes, tanks, and in general costy units.
Garrison troops. 0 moving infantry that can be moved only like the AAs, by trucks and trains. Helps a lot to balance quiet sectors and not have the Allies have an early landing start in the first turns - that in TWW is completely ahistorical - or the overly active Chinese army.
Not having Finland 'winterized' on turn1. Most of Axis troops there if not all of them (Germans included) had winter warfare equipment or were trained for - especially Finns. They should be able to move and the like OR if frozen the Soviets should not be able to make progress in the Finnish sector.
Japan Surprise Bonus - add some 'Kamikaze' units that can boost Japanese attack / soak losses in turn1, with some rule (via document) that can only be used vs UK and USA. That should help to mirror the fact the W.Allies suffered the brunt of the sudden attack.
Coastal defence boats. I am not sure how you plan to handle them - but they could have like 0 movement by default and gain a +2 from ports or so? Or remain at 0 movement to defend the coasts where they're placed in (Think of torpedo boats, coastal gunships, monitors, and the like). It would also be nice to evaluate some 'airfield' alike movement bonus for ships in general.
Doctrines technologies. Some troops can start with determined stats and simply being boosted up via techs to mirror warfare preparations. Ideally as manpower is added, in the grand scope there can also be the significant difference of quantity vs quality. Like - basic infantry can be 1-1-1 (attack - defence - movement) and through various techs (Infantry Tech I, Infantry Tech II, etc - be it a mix of improved equipment, training, doctrine) they ramp up to 1 - 2 - 1, then 2 - 2 - 1, then 2 - 3 - 1 and so forth.
Allies will get more PUs (Slightly) from West Afrika - as it is beefed up.
Allies gain 1 BB and 1 DD for free once West Afrika is freed plus X infantries around that zone, which by far will outweight any losses they suffer against 3 INFs (Can't see Germany easily affording planes there)
Vichy fleets defends there, certainly - but Allies can simply do, as you pointed out - their regular Norway / North France tantrum there and simply disregard that change.
I pointed that out already - saying that either Germany gets offensive units there too to require attention or the sector can be mopped up anytime by Allies.
Germany really lacks the means to invest in the sector unless they really want to pay a hefty cost elsewhere.
So as it is now it's pratically a 1 turn affair for USA to go to Azores, and by turn2 or turn3 they land in West Afrika, get the Vichy Dakar fleet as Allied (hefty bonus) and if the minor allies of UK want can skip the scrapping as they neglect the mediterranean alltogether and UK keeps pinning Cairo.
What Red said it's even worse though, Vichy loses flexibility due to the loss of N.Afrika that mandates 1 resource instead of a choice, and ultimately it's a neat Allied gain. Not minor - after I thought on his words.
That in a map that from my perspective is already heavily swinging to Allied favor.
The 'problem' of the man is that the Axis can easily keep a ship there though because Vichy is de facto producing German troops under all terms.
Unless the requirement is to have X PUs kept in Vichy or that Sea-Zone to represent German forces ready to intervene (Even if Vichy produced they're not used elsewhere to be ready to grab ships)
The Germans struggle to bring reinforcements there whereas the Allies can simply wait to Turn2 or Turn3 to gain a richer region, capable of hosting UK facility too in Nigeria - their tradeoff is less pressure in Europe in these turns, which is fair but I do not think it balances out properly once turn 5 is hit or so.
Without sacrificing much of the Cairo defence.
Anyhow - good to see that there are changes and will see how they pan out in practical terms.
What I meant with the German tranny is that it can go in the SZ with the Vichy fleet, and if the Allies attack the tranny they also attack the Vichy fleet. Not that the tranny converts to Vichy.
But by what I saw the Brits can land in West Afrika without having to go around any Vichy Fleet since West Afrika borders with 2 zones.