WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread

[trulpen]

I also want to add that I really like the change that strategic bombers cost 12 but has a hit probability of 1-3. They of course still got great range, but now I feel they’re more focused on SBR than an overall threat wall.

[Avner]

I admire the effort you have made to create this board :)

I’m still practicing BM3 but I can’t wait to try this version too.

[gamerman01]

@trulpen said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

I also want to add that I really like the change that strategic bombers cost 12 but has a hit probability of 1-3. They of course still got great range, but now I feel they’re more focused on SBR than an overall threat wall.

Totally agree

The first version in the 80’s had nuclear weapons… you could get multiple techs in the same turn if you rolled more than one 6, and the 6th tech was… heavy bombers. 3 dice per bomber and you could score 3 hits per bomber. And when you did SBR, it directly destroyed their cash on hand. (They did cost 15, though, which would be half of the UK’s starting economy!) I just had to share that since you told me you’ve been playing A&A for just a year or two :) :)

[gamerman01]

BUT - when a transport could only take 2 infantry OR a tank, and cost 8 IPC’s, you kind of needed the heavies to take down a huge stack on Japan at the end.

[aagamerz13]

@gamerman01 I’m seeing an illegal state exception. Image Not Found:flags/Neutral_fade.png when i load the game now. Anyone else see this? Using latest triplea

[simon33]

@aagamerz13 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

@gamerman01 I’m seeing an illegal state exception. Image Not Found:flags/Neutral_fade.png when i load the game now. Anyone else see this? Using latest triplea

Perhaps the map package has been corrupted somehow. Lack of disk space???

Back to topic, has a level of bid been established yet?

[aagamerz13]

@simon33 I have more than enough space. I even deleted and reloaded map. Error is still there.

[regularkid]

@aagamerz13 what version of TripleA are you using?

[aagamerz13]

@regularkid 2.1 20365

[trulpen]

@aagamerz13 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

@regularkid 2.1 20365

Had that problem with that one as well. Upgrade to a later version. You find it as pre-release.

[simon33]

One change I’m not sure about is increasing the price of Mechs from 4 to 5. I didn’t really think Mechs were over powered at 4IPC cost. Is there really much point in buying them when for 1IPC more you can have a tank?

[trulpen]

@simon33 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

One change I’m not sure about is increasing the price of Mechs from 4 to 5. I didn’t really think Mechs were over powered at 4IPC cost. Is there really much point in buying them when for 1IPC more you can have a tank?

Definitely. They defend as good as tanks and attack with one less when combined. Think the cost-difference reflects that. They’re still cheaper and hence protect the more expensive unit, while having pretty good fire-power in itself. I’m sure they crunched the numbers thoroughly. I like the change.

[simon33]

Hmm, maybe I should reserve judgement.

[Adam514]

@simon33 Mech tank combo defeats pure tanks on attack and on defense for a given PU value.

[wizmark]

Here’s something different…check out the 2 French fighters in London! :smile:

[regularkid]

@wizmark haha very nice. wonder how that happened.

Also, click “View” and “Change Map Font and Color.” I put my font at size 18. Your eyes will thank you!

[wizmark]

@regularkid Pejon 88 made an underpowered attack into normandy, which i scrambled to, the land units killed each other and the plane had to land in normandy. 1 quick escape to Blighty on the french turn, and we now have double the amount of garlic munchers over here…a mixed blessing I suppose…:grinning: :grinning:

[gamerman01]

I thought the same as you about the mech, Simon, but I didn’t realize they defended on a 3 when they are with a tank. It’s definitely a change, along with Strat bombers attacking on a 3 and carrier planes being able to defend land and neighboring sea zones. I’m still playing my first PtV game so am also trying to reserve judgment. When you’re so used to the old way, these significant changes take some getting used to.

The mech change does succeed in reducing the amount of mech (but not eliminating) and increasing the number of tanks in the game again, and I think that’s a good thing. They wanted to reduce the cheesy numerous fast cannon fodder mech were at 4, I believe. Sometimes I wonder if it would be a good idea to double all the IPC values of everything so that we could fine tune the values a little more on certain territories and units. Then mech could be 9 (not 8 or 10), effectively a 4 and a 1/2. If PtV isn’t finalized yet, maybe this is something to consider? Obviously a departure from all past A&A (goodbye 3 IPC infantry), but so is a lot of other things you guys have done here, so why not? :)

[gamerman01]

Oh, and I don’t mean doubling all the values just because of the mech. I think it would allow you to fine-tune the values of various territories, NO’s, as well as certain unit costs. Could be a very beautiful thing.

[trulpen]

There’s another way, maybe. You can have a cost of i e 4,5 always rounded up. When buying two you get them for 9. Buying one would cost 5.