@armedace
Those are some pretty cool ideas, I’ve thought about incorporating marines and how to do so-your ideas seem good. I also like the idea of interceptors at 2, more realistic and makes you think about SBR more. Although I’m not so sure about reducing air bases costs and increasing their ability to scramble to nearby land-seems OP.
Tech via a Point System
-
@Imperious:
no. the battle of Crete. They lost most of these on that operation
opps, different med island
-
Initial tech points assignments:
Tech Value
War bonds: 10
Advanced Artillery: 10
Paratrooper: 20
IC: 20
Mech Inf: 25
Rockets: 20Shipyards: 15
Long Range: 25
Heavy Bombers: 30
Radar: 20
Jet Fighters: 15
Supersubs: 15Okay, I’ve playtested this (somewhat) with axis_roll, and while we didn’t get too far, before I had to call it quits due to time issues, I think that a serious reduction in cost is in order. Here are my suggested prices.
War bonds: 8
Advanced Artillery: 8
Paratrooper: 12
IC: 12
Mech Inf: 15
Rockets: 15Shipyards: 10
Long Range: 17
Heavy Bombers: 20
Radar: 12
Jet Fighters: 10
Supersubs: 10These numbers are too low, ESPECIALLY for the ‘game hreaking’ tech like Long range or paratroopers.
My intent was to eliminate the random roll but not ‘guarentee’ a great roll by allowing one to target that rollHow do I know… game play testing.
USA decides that paratroopers will allow them to take Berlin. They take all $40 in their bank and buy 8 dice, giving them Paratroopers.
USA has in essence bought a weapon. UGH! This is the main reason the initial prices were at their level… no ‘buying’ a tech -
even with 20, you have 96% to get it with 8 dices…
But I agree that this numbers should not be too low. Tech games may involve a lot of money invested in tech, and reaching 20 is not such a big deal for instance (in average, this is 10ipc in 3 turns).
When a nation is earning around 50 a turn, it can be a good strat to invest 10ipc a turn in tech…
-
I dislike the instant aspect of targetted tech. In Revised (LHTR), tech came active at the end of your turn. No Buying long range with a wad of cash because you needed it that turn to take out Germany.
with AA50, techs are instant again. But OOB rules makes hem random, so there’s no guarentee. The Tech By Point system allows targetting, and we’re back to the same purchase-a-win problem.
A quick thought for a fix would be a tech obtained on it’s first roll attempt is only active at the end of a turn (or after non-combat has been completed if you wanted war bonds to be active).
-
Yes, the idea is quite good.
I think the main point is about techs which allow to increase your attack directly. So mainly LRA, paratroopers, heavy bomber (maybe less now that they have been reduced a lot by the new faq), mech infantry, and at a less level adv artillery, super subs and jet fighters.
For the others, it depends of the investment you need (for instance, one of the other tech at 13+ points, I do not think that a lot of people would invest 15ipc to get it in one round, so it should not change a lot of things). If it can be achieved in two rolls, this means that the tech is not so much powerfull, so delay the tech reduces again the interest people could have for it.
-
Yes, the idea is quite good.
I think the main point is about techs which allow to increase your attack directly. So mainly LRA, paratroopers, heavy bomber (maybe less now that they have been reduced a lot by the new faq), mech infantry, and at a less level adv artillery, super subs and jet fighters.
Thought about that as well… listing specific techs (like you list) that would not be instant on their first roll.
Either way is fine.what is needed is more game play testing… :)
-
Hey axis_roll,
I’ve been looking at this Tech via a Point System thing again and just wanted to offer a little more feedback.
Advantages of the System
1. I defnitely agree that Tech needs to be Directed (only makes sense, in a game of strategy)
2. I’d also agree, thet the better Techs should cost more
3. Also, I agree that you should be able to research more than one tech at a timeDisadvantages of the System
1. One disadavantage I see, is that players can still “buy” a Tech in one turn. If a player is planning an attack and needs a certain Tech to help it succeed, he can spend enough IPC to pretty much guarantee that Tech, which of course is cheived instantly. This can be gamebreaking especially when capitals are involved.
2. As you know, I’m not a big fan of tracking points. Players have always been used to that dynamic of “If you roll a 6, you get the Tech”. I’d be in favor of preserving this dynamic as much as possible.So what’s the alternative you ask? :-D
Well, I do have something in mind, but I’ll bring in it up in a new thread :-) -
Disadvantages of the System
1. One disadavantage I see, is that players can still “buy” a Tech in one turn. If a player is planning an attack and needs a certain Tech to help it succeed, he can spend enough IPC to pretty much guarantee that Tech, which of course is cheived instantly. This can be gamebreaking especially when capitals are involved.This one can be easily managed by using the idea given a little before : it is sufficient to delay the activation of “big” techs at the end of the turn if all the rolls have been bought this turn.
-
Disadvantages of the System
1. One disadavantage I see, is that players can still “buy” a Tech in one turn. If a player is planning an attack and needs a certain Tech to help it succeed, he can spend enough IPC to pretty much guarantee that Tech, which of course is cheived instantly. This can be gamebreaking especially when capitals are involved.This one can be easily managed by using the idea given a little before : it is sufficient to delay the activation of “big” techs at the end of the turn if all the rolls have been bought this turn.
yep, no buying instant ‘killer’ techs and using them in the same round.
-
OK, it’s been 8 months since this idea was first discussed and presented in my FTF player group.
We have at least 15+ games using these tech rules and there have been several modifications along the way through this game play to make them more balanced and strategic.
I am attaching the latest version of the ideas and points (and a nice way of keeping track of the tech rolls as well)
Feedback is appreciated
The attached Word document is much nicer format, but wanted to show the point values and rules without requiring people to d/l the document.
TECH via a POINT SYSTEM v2.2 revised Dec 2010
Each tech has a point value. Purchased researchers have the same cost, but are targeted for only one tech. Roll as normal for research, but add up the total rolls and apply them toward the selected tech. Once point value is reached, tech is gained (said researchers are lost/not needed). Techs achieved on the first try come into play at the end of non-combat moves (yes, war bonds are ‘instant’). This may result in achieving multiple tech per turn. This is legal under these tech rules.
Number of Researchers restriction: Only 2 tech researchers are allowed per tech. Both can be bought in one round.
Tech points assignments:
Tech Value
Chart 1:
Advanced Artillery: 12
Rockets: 20
Paratrooper: 30
IFP: 20
War bonds: 10
Mech Inf: 25Chart 2:
Supersubs: 15
Jet Fighters: 18
Shipyards: 15
Radar: 15
Long Range: 38
Heavy Bombers: 25 -
Number of Researchers restriction: Only 2 tech researchers are allowed per tech.
This is the main change here. That changes a lot of things (for instance, there is just no way to get LRA before turn 4, and in average you’ll get them on turn 6 if you invest 10ipc on turn 1 ; not sure LRA looks so interesting after that).
Do you play with Heavy or Medium bombers ? (i.e. with the one from the FAQ or not)
-
Number of Researchers restriction: Only 2 tech researchers are allowed per tech.
This is the main change here. That changes a lot of things (for instance, there is just no way to get LRA before turn 4, and in average you’ll get them on turn 6 if you invest 10ipc on turn 1 ; not sure LRA looks so interesting after that).
Do you play with Heavy or Medium bombers ? (i.e. with the one from the FAQ or not)
We utilize the FAQ tech rule for HBs. Same as LHTR. 2 dice, choose best result.
BTW,the tech rules are listed next to each tech for reference in the document
Regarding the ‘delay’ in techs due to the limitations of number of researcher dice per tech:
We play these tech rules with our Chicago Rules (http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=21653.0) , which are more even and longer games. In fact, I have a 14th round game that is STILL not decided that has the USA navy ruling the Pacific and Moscow under heavy pressure, but a monster glob of 20+ allied ftrs are holding their ground. So in this example, a tech in round 6 is really not that early, and even later in the game, I WISH my UK ftrs had long range to threaten Berlin as well as help hold Moscow.
If you wish to accelerate how soon you can get a weapon, increase the limit of tech researchers per tech from two to three or four or whatever. This system is very flexible.
The key is finding the proper points relative to the other techs.
-
TECH via a POINT SYSTEM v2.4 revised March 2011
We made another set of tech values for the OOB rules (not the Chicago Rules)
This is a shorter game, but still allows tech to be part of the game since they are targetted
The points below are for the short game onlyTech points assignments:
Tech Value
Chart 1:
Advanced Artillery: 8
Rockets: 14
Paratrooper: 20
IFP: 14
War bonds: 7
Mech Inf: 17Chart 2:
Supersubs: 10
Jet Fighters: 15
Shipyards: 10
Radar: 10
Long Range: 25
Heavy Bombers: 25- OOB capabilities -
ttt, discussion about tech over at AAMC.
Suggested Topics
