Here’s the Armies vs Navies idea I came up with!
G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
-
Ok, I can’t see if this has been discussed before. One the things I find somewhat irksome is that the French ships block the control of the Med objective I1 when all the other ships have been cleared from the Med and Vichy is inevitable. Was there a reason Vichy couldn’t be activated afterItaliansPlace rather than at the start of the French turn?
-
It’s part of the balance of Vichy at this point, and makes more sense for it to happen on the French turn.
-
2 points I want to make here.
-
Bids are reaching the magical 10IPCs (ftr Scotland), I submit there may need to be a change. Or we could just stop playing with the Ok/IJ objective, which I would also point out re-strengthens the J1 DOW.
-
If a German sub stops Lend Lease through SZ125 even though Germany isn’t at war, in the event that Japan is at war with USA & UK, shouldn’t a Japanese ship in SZ80 also stop Lend Lease through that lane (Persia)? The logic here being it is the other powers whose ships are being used in both cases. Not sure which is the important power though.
-
-
@simon33 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
2 points I want to make here.
-
Bids are reaching the magical 10IPCs (ftr Scotland), I submit there may need to be a change. Or we could just stop playing with the Ok/IJ objective, which I would also point out re-strengthens the J1 DOW.
-
If a German sub stops Lend Lease through SZ125 even though Germany isn’t at war, in the event that Japan is at war with USA & UK, shouldn’t a Japanese ship in SZ80 also stop Lend Lease through that lane (Persia)? The logic here being it is the other powers whose ships are being used in both cases. Not sure which is the important power though.
-
I don’t see an issue with bids of 20 and under. Bids are good way to keep the game fresh and balance it through the ages, as such a complex asymmetric game cannot stay balanced as strategies evolve. J1DOW was nerfed compared to its vanilla effectiveness even with the Iwo Jima objective, given that Italy has an important role to play in BM.
-
German subs don’t stop Lend Lease if Russia isn’t at war, Russia doesn’t get any NOs until they are at war with Germany or Italy. Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying.
-
-
@Adam514 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
German subs don’t stop Lend Lease if Russia isn’t at war, Russia doesn’t get any NOs until they are at war with Germany or Italy. Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying.
If Italy is at war but Germany isn’t, the USSR objective is supposed to be stopped by a German sub.
-
Krieghund said that’s because it’s the UK/USA’s ships being targeted, and those powers are at war with Germany. Well, presumably in the USA’s case.
-
@simon33 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
@Adam514 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
German subs don’t stop Lend Lease if Russia isn’t at war, Russia doesn’t get any NOs until they are at war with Germany or Italy. Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying.
If Italy is at war but Germany isn’t, the USSR objective is supposed to be stopped by a German sub.
I don’t think it should be stopped by a ship it isn’t at war with. It’s not something that happens anyway.
-
Ok, but those are the official rules.
I’m going to take that to mean that there’s no interest in expanding USSR lend lease to be blocked by a Japanese blockade of the Middle East when Japan is at war with US+UK but not USSR.
-
@simon33 Then why wouldn’t it extend to sz5 and Amur also? Japan didn’t want to block ships destined to the USSR in order to avoid provoking the USSR into a war with them after all.
-
That is probably a fair point. Although I think it is plausible that they would have attacked in Indian Ocean and argued that the ships might be helping the British hold Persia or for anti-Iraq etc. Might not too. I think an inspection regime is pretty implausible so far from home.
-
Rules question regarding Marines; TripleA is allowing you to bombard with a ship in the combat phase and then unload a marine from the same ship in the non-combat phase. This is illegal by the rules if the marine was loaded the same combat phase but what if the marine was pre-loaded?
-
@Misterblue said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
Rules question regarding Marines; TripleA is allowing you to bombard with a ship in the combat phase and then unload a marine from the same ship in the non-combat phase. This is illegal by the rules if the marine was loaded the same combat phase but what if the marine was pre-loaded?
“Transports can move to friendly coastal territories and load or
offload cargo, unless they loaded, moved, offloaded, or were
involved in combat during the Combat Move or Conduct
Combat phase.”Looks to me like you can’t. The cruiser/BB participated in combat therefore can’t unload.
-
@Misterblue Transport or ship can’t do anything else that turn if it did anything during the combat move phase (moving, bombard, battle).
-
I thought about something regarding the Vichy rules. Might be crazy, but what if the garrison in S France expanded with 1 inf each round beginning the turn after it turned Vichy?
That could give Axis an incentive to keep S France intact longer, instead of just finishing the Vichy with entering S France once most of the other Vichy territories had been converted.
Not saying it’s a great idea - no other neutral territories function in that way - but it’s a thought of flavour.
-
Is it legal to bid artillery to China?
-
@Amon-Sul Yes.
-
You should never allow axis to take malta, crete and cyprus. One or two of the three might be OK, but NEVER all three. I am convinced of this
-
@oysteilo said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
You should never allow axis to take malta, crete and cyprus. One or two of the three might be OK, but NEVER all three. I am convinced of this
I’m a fan of taking Cyprus I1 now. This way you can block 2 UK objectives and they are hard to reclaim.
I think you’re overstating the value of the 3IPC bonus for all 3 islands though. If Italy can do that, they’re largely controlling the Med.
-
@simon33 no i am not. You need huge compensation to allow this. An even position is not even close.
-
NEW PROPOSED CHANGE TO BALANCE MOD
Hey all. The Mod Squad is contemplating a new change to Balance Mod, and would like to solicit your feedback. The proposed change: increase the cost of strategic bombers from 12 to 14 PUs.
The rationale for this proposed change is as follows: It appears, from the increasing number of BM league games wherein players have agreed to an Allied bid (albeit smaller bids than we typically see in vanilla games) and from the slightly skewed win/loss ratio in favor of Axis, that our goal of balancing the game hasn’t been totally realized.
One of the reasons for this is the Axis’s continuing positional advantage on the map; they are able more readily to project threat across the board, to multiple key points at once. This advantage is particularly pronounced when it comes to bombers, with their long range, high attack value, and added utility as strategic bombers. We tried to nerf some of this, in the current mod, by giving fighters a 2 defense on air raids. But bomber spam remains a viable strategy, and continues to be OP, especially for Germany.
Increasing the cost of strategic bombers to 14, we think, would more accurately reflect the unit’s strategic value and go a long way to rectifying the foregoing issues. We would be interested to hear the community’s thoughts on this.
Thanks!
Suggested Topics
