0523f68b-a1e7-488c-9e3a-7fc34a3514bb-triplea_41718_1hisa.tsvg
crockett36 l vs The Good Captain x
-
@crockett36 I like the sub rules. So how many attempts did it take for you to get heavy bombers? How many tech do you have?
-
@crockett36 found it. So how much money? Just gauging the luck differential.
-
@crockett36 the land battles have been atrocious for the axis and …land is where the IPC are so, I still think this is an Allied win but am glad that this is as interesting as it has been for sure. Really enjoy it. To answer your question, everything can be found in the history tab. I’m not exactly sure EXACTLY what you mean by “how much money”, but I think Japan threw seven or eight dice over two turns and made two breakthroughs.
I don’t like tech dice in any version but this one (but in almost every other version its optional, here it is not). I haven’t had a martini either, I just heard the expression ;)
-
@the_good_captain LOL! Wow. seven or 8. good to hear. I always assume I’m getting screwed by the dice EXCEPT for once in a blue moon.
Don’t you think the Anniversary edition tech token system (theoretically a laboratory) is better. The fact that it is optional is an absurdity. And the fact people insist on not playing with it tells me they are engineers or accountants. They don’t want anything to mess up their calculations. That’s why I do full frontal infantry assaults. Yes, I know the odds, but 20 percent of the time you are going to lose badly or win big.
-
I am learning and relearning sooooo much. I really am trying to plum the depth of any kJF strategy. The thing I hate about tripleA is the fact that you miss the drama of the enemy turn. If you are ever doing a turn and want to call me, feel free. I am available as a UPS driver with a good headset. And even at night. It adds quite a bit of fun to game especially for the big battles or the atomic bomb runs.
-
Don’t you think the Anniversary edition tech token system (theoretically a laboratory) is better. The fact that it is optional is an absurdity. And the fact people insist on not playing with it tells me they are engineers or accountants. They don’t want anything to mess up their calculations. That’s why I do full frontal infantry assaults. Yes, I know the odds, but 20 percent of the time you are going to lose badly or win big.
My long form video response to that is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg_xYjP1Xm8
In short, due to the massive increase in on board pieces in Anniversary/Global, the doubling of tech breakthroughs, and the fact that tech is now “no risk” in terms of IPC loss (i.e. you buy one tech token, you’re guaranteed one breakthrough), it injects an element of catastrophic randomness. Examples are in the video but one of them is long range aircraft relative to unescorted (or even escorted) transports.
When I did my deep dive into anniversary, the games I played with tech (some of which were played against members of that anniversary tournament we were in) another issue arouse. The fact is that all but one unit influencing tech is offensive in nature. There were no outright defensive techs except for AA guns.
There are a few other issues I cover in the video. I think the best decision from the designers was to leave that an optional rule. I feel strongly under its current iteration, it removes a significant element of skill/experience from the game. I might play with it if we were all around a table drinking and not taking things seriously.
-
Can I do a reaction video of your tech video? I’ll play nice!
-
@crockett36 of course - and there is no obligation to play nice. Any criticism of ideas is welcome (if it gets personal, I generally ignore that anyway - in the end the board is the best place to work out differences). I am curious where you think where the weakness is though. For context, if/when I speak, its from a position of playing experience. I have played many games against many different opponents before opening my mouth, especially in regards to tech. Can I ask if/what I may have missed? I’m always open to having my mind changed.
-
Your critique of the randomness seems misplaced for a game like ana or even a historical record like ww2. I see examples!
So if the Japanese discovered jet fighters in a game, would not it be quite a hoot to play from behind and be victorious or make it close because you as the US have to now go hog wild with technology.
As to tech in anniversary favoring the aggressor, that is actually a question for historians. Victor Davis Hanson says that technology swings defensive or offensive in cycles. Also I would love to have you then offer up solutions or variations that would correct the situation AND SAVE technology.
A game of anniversary without tech is a game of 1941 or 2, not a world war 2 game. So then my question would be: if you had your dream tech rolls, what would turn 8 look like? And would that be enjoyable?
-
@crockett36 said in crockett36 l vs The Good Captain x:
I think I see where at least some of the confusion or differences of opinion are:
So if the Japanese discovered jet fighters in a game, would not it be quite a hoot to play from behind and be victorious or make it close because you as the US have to now go hog wild with technology.
It would be, but in my playing experience and as I stated in the videos, simply purchasing a tech token as each power on the first turn almost guarantees that breakthroughs will occur before anyone is “behind” (statistically, by the end of turn two there are two breakthroughs).
As to tech in anniversary favoring the aggressor, that is actually a question for historians. Victor Davis Hanson says that technology swings defensive or offensive in cycles. Also I would love to have you then offer up solutions or variations that would correct the situation AND SAVE technology.
Historically speaking sure, but tech in Anniversary is a game mechanic. Historical context was never in my mind while shooting the video. In fact, I’ll just concede the historical argument. Which goes nicely into my “fix”.
My opinion is that tech was never broken. Classic had it “right”. There are six techs. They are extremely high risk to invest in and best employed as a legitimate ‘hail mary’ when there is someone who is behind in the game (as you point out).
A game of anniversary without tech is a game of 1941 or 2, not a world war 2 game. So then my question would be: if you had your dream tech rolls, what would turn 8 look like? And would that be enjoyable?
I don’t quite understand what to make of this. I’ve heard you say it before and I still don’t understand it. I’m also not sure what you mean by how I think turn 8 would look with tech.
I know from playing experience on this website and through TripleA that by turn eight, things tend to be very, very messy with tech as its written in anniversary. To be precise, I think I played against 3-4 different players in as many games. Each of those examples in the video was something I inflicted on someone or that someone else or had inflicted on me. The games generally ended more quickly and based on feedback in that player population (and including myself) all agreed to drop it.
-
agree to disagree. And I am familiar with the community’s disdain for tech. But principles should drive play and playability.
-
@the_good_captain Not a big fan of tech as a hail mary. It ought to be integrated and central. Front and center. Absolutely ubiquitous!
-
-
@crockett36 the sub in the North Pacific sea zone survived. Where do you want him to retreat? Japan/Midway/Russia or Alaska? (purchases are in the bottom right)
-
@the_good_captain midway
-
@crockett36 missed the sub off Wake as well. He can go Okinawa, Japan, North Pacific , or Solomons
-
Okinawa!!!
-
@crockett36 and finally, a sub survived off Hawaii. Retreat options for him are Mexico SZ, West Coast, Solomons, Midway or the South Pacific SZ.
-
@the_good_captain midway yeah yeah!
-
Game History
Round: 11 Purchase Units - Japanese Japanese buy 1 bomber and 3 infantry; Remaining resources: 14 PUs; Combat Move - Japanese 2 infantry moved from China to Kwangtung 2 infantry moved from Manchuria to Kwangtung 1 armour moved from Manchuria to Kwangtung 1 fighter moved from Manchuria to North Pacific Sea Zone 1 fighter moved from China to Wake Island Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from Japan to Hawaii Sea Zone 2 bombers moved from Manchuria to India 1 battleship, 1 carrier and 4 submarines moved from East Indies Sea Zone to Caroline Islands Sea Zone 1 bomber moved from East Europe to Anglo Sudan Egypt 1 infantry moved from Yakut S.S.R. to Evenki National Okrug Japanese take Evenki National Okrug from Russians Combat - Japanese Strategic bombing raid in Anglo Sudan Egypt Bombing raid in Anglo Sudan Egypt rolls: 2,5,1 and costs: 8 PUs. Bombing raid costs 8 PUs Strategic bombing raid in India Bombing raid in India rolls: 6,3,6,1,6,1 and costs: 23 PUs. Bombing raid costs 23 PUs Battle in Kwangtung Japanese attack with 1 armour and 4 infantry British defend with 1 armour Japanese roll dice for 1 armour and 4 infantry in Kwangtung, round 2 : 1/5 hits, 1.17 expected hits British roll dice for 1 armour in Kwangtung, round 2 : 1/1 hits, 0.33 expected hits 1 infantry owned by the Japanese and 1 armour owned by the British lost in Kwangtung Japanese win, taking Kwangtung from British with 1 armour and 3 infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 2 Casualties for Japanese: 1 infantry Casualties for British: 1 armour Battle in North Pacific Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 fighter Americans defend with 1 submarine Japanese roll dice for 1 fighter in North Pacific Sea Zone, round 2 : 0/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits 1 submarine owned by the Americans retreated to Midway Sea Zone Battle in Wake Island Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 fighter Americans defend with 1 submarine Japanese roll dice for 1 fighter in Wake Island Sea Zone, round 2 : 0/1 hits, 0.50 expected hits 1 submarine owned by the Americans retreated to Okinawa Sea Zone Battle in Caroline Islands Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 battleship, 1 carrier and 4 submarines Americans defend with 1 submarine Japanese roll dice for 4 submarines in Caroline Islands Sea Zone, round 2 : 3/4 hits, 1.33 expected hits 1 submarine owned by the Americans lost in Caroline Islands Sea Zone Japanese winJapanese winJapanese win with 1 fighter remaining with 1 fighter remaining with 1 battleship, 1 carrier and 4 submarines remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Americans: 1 submarine Battle in Hawaii Sea Zone Japanese attack with 1 bomber Americans defend with 2 submarines Japanese roll dice for 1 bomber in Hawaii Sea Zone, round 2 : 1/3 hits, 2.00 expected hits 1 submarine owned by the Americans lost in Hawaii Sea Zone 1 submarine owned by the Americans retreated to Midway Sea Zone Japanese win with 1 bomber remaining. Battle score for attacker is 8 Casualties for Americans: 1 submarine Non Combat Move - Japanese Russians lost 1 PUs to rocket attack by Japanese Rockets roll: 1 1 bomber moved from Hawaii Sea Zone to Manchuria 1 fighter moved from Wake Island Sea Zone to Caroline Islands Sea Zone 1 fighter moved from North Pacific Sea Zone to Caroline Islands Sea Zone 2 bombers moved from India to Manchuria 1 bomber moved from Anglo Sudan Egypt to East Europe Place Units - Japanese 3 infantry placed in Manchuria 1 bomber placed in Japan Turn Complete - Japanese Japanese collect 31 PUs; end with 45 PUsCombat Hit Differential Summary :
Japanese regular : -0.50 British regular : 0.67
Suggested Topics
