Axis gets full advantage in the early turns, this forces them to get more aggression there for no reason for them to use peace as a shield and if I am playing as the allies, I’d rather have them be aggressive at turn 1 than turn 4.
Technology
-
But LL is DICE, it’s just an algorithm which makes dice rolls closer to average than reg.dice.
So A&A with LL is still A&A, b/c there is still dice rolls.
And no, random dice rolls can’t be controlled by player decisions unless you are using dice cheats.
You love tech and randomness, now please move on to your next lottery “competition”… :roll:
-
You are not accomplishing anything good by being rude.
Here’s a - karma to add to your collection. -
Well, I have smited you once in this thread, but never in the karma support group. I have actually never smited anyone in the karma support group, and I have giving you several + karma, in the support group.
But you might be right about moving on…
I have stated my opinions, and even if I never intended to change people minds about LL, reg.dice and tech/no-tech, any further efforts here will be futile, so I’m moving on… until the next thread about LL/reg.dice/tech… :evil:
-
@Subotai:
so I’m moving on… until the next thread about LL/reg.dice/tech… :evil:
Right on! :wink:
-
I want to echo what Zhukov has to wonderfully put about tech, and add some other thoughts:
I think if the techs were better balanced, I would like playing with them more.In AARe (Enhanced), the rules were so designed (and tech tweaked) that even Super Subs were desirable for Germany with certain strategic game plans. THAT level of ‘even’ tech is not in AA50, and to me, that makes Tech no fun to play with.
With the removal of directed tech (choose what you are trying to research), and techs being immediately in play as opposed to the end of a turn, Tech has increased it’s varible affect on a games outcome.
Some like the wide variable range, others do not. I think it’s a personal prefence, and the fact that tech is optional is a great way to make the game appeal to all: Play with it or without it.
……Or incorporate house to make it more to your liking.
Good Gaming!
-
@Subotai:
I don’t fear dice destroying my scripted strats, and I have no scripted strats in any A&A game, I only got some first rnd standard opening moves. But after the very first rnd, every game is very different from each other. And it is not possible to predict dice outcomes in reg.dice or LL, b/c you don’t know what the opponent do, before after he has made his moves.
No scripted strats, Mr. 100% times KGF fanboy? Come on, you are not going to sell me the motorcicle this time! :-D
And for not predict results in LL … a great :lol:! 100 % results are the very basis of LL: you can send 3 inf, 3 tanks vs 3 inf to strafe and retreat in LL with a 100% of success: 2 kills, one casuality, and no other possible result. I’d never do that strafe with normal dices but I’d do much times in LL, and there are much more examples trading territories and, per example, calculating the exact minimal amount of units need to take Australia
Focus on correcting the unbalanced AA50 setup and stop making us losing time with this LL no tech fanmania :-D
-
And for not predict results in LL … a great :lol:! 100 % results are the very basis of LL: you can send 3 inf, 3 tanks vs 3 inf to strafe and retreat in LL with a 100% of success: 2 kills, one casuality, and no other possible result. I’d never do that strafe with normal dices but I’d do much times in LL, and there are much more examples trading territories and, per example, calculating the exact minimal amount of units need to take Australia
If this is true about LL (never played it) than LL is freaking retarded.
This is a wargame, not some story or play with a script. The “regular”, as you call it, dice do a fantastic job of simulating the great risks and unpredictability of war. There are countless, countless examples of battles all throughout history where the side with the great superiority of forces lost, and sometimes lost very badly.
If you can’t handle dice in a wargame, just go back to chess. -
There are countless, countless examples of battles all throughout history where the side with the great superiority of forces lost, and sometimes lost very badly.
That reminds me Bailen, 1808: crappy equipped Spanish army toasts overconfident french invaders. Or Midway in WW2! :lol:
-
That reminds me Bailen, 1808: crappy equipped Spanish army toasts overconfident french invaders. Or Midway in WW2! :lol:
Absolutely. Midway, Thermopylae (battle of the 300 Spartans), Alexander against the Persians, and I’m leaving out who knows how many others.
The point is, if you play LL (and no tech, for that matter), you’re destroying one of the greatest things about wargames. The simulation of unpredictability, and very surprising results. In real life, the side that is “supposed” to win, does NOT always win!!! Boo hoo! :cry: If WW2 was played with LL dice and no tech, the Japs and Germans would have won easily!
-
I was seriously planning to leave this thread, but the statements about scripted strat is not just wrong, it is a lie! It is the same as saying the world is flat.
The reason why you cannot use scripted strats is that every single game is different regardless of LL or reg.dice, or tech. There is no player who do exact the same in each game. If you’re facing an IC in India or a German naval build, you have to act accordingly, and LL or reg.dice doesn’t alter this fact. My overall strats are the same regardless of game settings, be it LL or reg.dice or tech.
I believe KGF is more efficient than KJF, that a German naval build is bad for axis etc. These strats are irrelevant for the game settings. I use the same overall strats regardless of game settings.To use a bomber and 2 infs against 1 inf in LL is not a strat, is a single battle which have no influence on the outcome of the game. The only difference from LL vs reg.dice is that you have to use more overkill when attacking. But this is tactics, and is not related to overall strats at all.
A while ago I asked the (imo) best Revised (LL) player in the TripleA lobby about strats and tactics, and almost every answer was: “it depends…”.
Except from a few standard opening moves, WR/Ukr R1, Egy G1, Ukr, J1 sz59, China etc etc, he always played according to the moves and buys of the opponent. LL or reg.dice doesn’t have any effect on this fact.I feel like a scientist (which I am not!) arguing with young earth creationists.
-
The point is, if you play LL (and no tech, for that matter), you’re destroying one of the greatest things about wargames. The simulation of unpredictability, and very surprising results.
All of my LL no-tech games have been unpredictable, and guess why? B/c I can’t predict the future, I never know what the opponent does before he makes his moves. Chess is also unpredictable b/c you never know what moves the opponent will make.
-
That reminds me Bailen, 1808: crappy equipped Spanish army toasts overconfident french invaders. Or Midway in WW2! :lol:
Absolutely. Midway, Thermopylae (battle of the 300 Spartans), Alexander against the Persians, and I’m leaving out who knows how many others.
The point is, if you play LL (and no tech, for that matter), you’re destroying one of the greatest things about wargames. The simulation of unpredictability, and very surprising results. In real life, the side that is “supposed” to win, does NOT always win!!! Boo hoo! :cry: If WW2 was played with LL dice and no tech, the Japs and Germans would have won easily!
The reason for most of those victories has more to do with technology, tactics, intel, and other force multipliers. These things are not modeled in axis and allies. If the battle of Thermopylae would have taken place in an open plain, they would have been slaughtered.
-
The point is, if you play LL (and no tech, for that matter), you’re destroying one of the greatest things about wargames. The simulation of unpredictability, and very surprising results.
Another problem I have with the variability of this incarnation of tech in AA50 is non-directed tech.
What scientist/researchers/whatever you want to call them would be working on trying to develop a heavy bomber and WHOOPS! We created super submarines instead!
Silliness.
Yea yea, simulation and what not… researchers are abstract concepts of people researching weapons, I know. But it really doesn’t make much sense to get a tech you didn’t really want.
IF the techs were more balanced, I could live with this indiscrimiate way to choose which tech you get once you get a break thru…but they are not, which makes them less than desirable to using in this game.
-
The reason for most of those victories has more to do with technology, tactics, intel, and other force multipliers.
Everyone knows that.
These things are not modeled in axis and allies.
Yes, they are. That’s what the dice do.
If the battle of Thermopylae would have taken place in an open plain, they would have been slaughtered.
Of course, but it didn’t take place in an open plain, because the defenders knew the best place to defend their homeland. That’s why attacking infantry attack at 1 and defend at 2.
My whole point was that the “regular” dice simulate the unpredictability of battles (and technology, training, fatigue, commanders, luck, weather, you name it)
-
IF the techs were more balanced, I could live with this indiscrimiate way to choose which tech you get once you get a break thru…but they are not, which makes them less than desirable to using in this game.
It’s quite easy to “balance” the techs, if you’re one of those guys that “balance” is the primary goal of everything. See my suggestions below. No one is stopping you from making your own house rules.
I just started a poll to see who plays with tech, who modifies, and who goes no tech, because I was curious.
I really don’t give a damn why you don’t like tech, or why you don’t like regular dice, or any of that.
-
Tech, totally unchanged - 17
Tech modified in some way - 4
No tech - 8That is very interesting. I thought there would be a lot more voting for modified tech.
-
Keep in mind as well, with the topic being ‘technology’ most players who dislike tech in some fashion would avoid the topic, I know I would have had I not been quite so bored.
-
Keep in mind as well, with the topic being ‘technology’ most players who dislike tech in some fashion would avoid the topic, I know I would have had I not been quite so bored.
Ahhhh hahahahaha!
Do you have scientific evidence that “most players who dislike tech in some fashion would avoid the topic”? I think it might attract them, more than anything, because it seems people who don’t like tech try to badmouth it, as evidenced by this thread! :lol:It attracted you, it attracted Subotai, it attracted axis_roll, and about 5 others. :lol:
-
No one is stopping you from making your own house rules.
Right, and it is a fact that many many A&A players started using house rules from Classic, continued in Revised, and also AA42 and AA50.
Almost all TripleA players plays/played w/o tech in Revised, and almost all TripleA players use bids to balance the game. Technically, bids are house rules b/c it is not an official optional rule.
Without one or several “house rules”, A&A would be completely boring and almost no one would wanted to play, especially b/c no A&A game is perfectly balanced like chess.Even if most players who voted on this tech poll, voted for tech, I strongly doubt that tech is favored by most experienced A&A players.
-
I really don’t give a damn why you don’t like tech, or why you don’t like regular dice, or any of that.
funny coming from you, who:
-
Encouraged people to post their own modified tech (some reasoning / basis would most likely be included in one’s house rule post)
-
Defended Tech as superior to LL and/or No tech
-
Sent me a PM saying Thanks for Posting our Tech House rules!
and NOW, NOW you say you don’t want to hear peoples thoughts about Tech?
Germanman01, your posts remind me of split personality poster. Open to discussions and thought exchange on day, then very closed minded and defensive to others with differing views another.
-
Suggested Topics
