I originally designed this unit independent of any other source in the 1980’s when there was only A&A Classic available.
Motorized Artillery: move 2 (same as Armor) Attack value = 4 and Defence value = 1. Cost is 7 PF.
Artillery become stronger
-
if thats the case,GERMANY should have special pieces to represent 88s and they should be able to use them in all 3 ways. ouch!
Why not! :evil:
-
if thats the case,GERMANY should have special pieces to represent 88s and they should be able to use them in all 3 ways. ouch!
Why not! :evil:
Your a neo nazi.
-
on the scale this game is played, the artillery differences between each nation are small as compared to the units you have to choose from. If you give germany a slightly different unit for there artillery then what about the US p51 mustangs, which were better aircraft than the Zero, or the superfortresses….why should germany only get a special unit? you can make the argument that every nation had varying differences in comparable units. If you start incorporating those unit differences then the game becomes immensely more complex for a 6 sided di game.
dont get me wrong… i think adding slightly different unit could be cool, but balance should be maintained.
as it is now the spring 1942 version is very balanced, If you tip the scale in favor of germany then your just giving them a better chance of winning. -
on the scale this game is played, the artillery differences between each nation are small as compared to the units you have to choose from. If you give germany a slightly different unit for there artillery then what about the US p51 mustangs, which were better aircraft than the Zero, or the superfortresses….why should germany only get a special unit? you can make the argument that every nation had varying differences in comparable units. If you start incorporating those unit differences then the game becomes immensely more complex for a 6 sided di game.
dont get me wrong… i think adding slightly different unit could be cool, but balance should be maintained.
as it is now the spring 1942 version is very balanced, If you tip the scale in favor of germany then your just giving them a better chance of winning.i just like the idea of an anti-tank gun used just like a anti-aircraft gun, except used on tanks. this would mainly effect the GERMAN/RUSSIAN conflict
-
Dylan, first, it’s you’re not your. Secondly, you’re still doing name calling in a forum, it’s really something you ought not to do.
-
Dylan, first, it’s you’re not your. Secondly, you’re still doing name calling in a forum, it’s really something you ought not to do.
Okay, but it was really tempting.
-
I’m not sure what reason you think that comment deserved what you said. In any event, attack the ideas, not the person.
-
Artillery do give a huge push to the attacker already. Remember they also boost infantry +1 on the attack as well. In this way, statistically, they give more punch than a single tank.
-
No offense…
Neo nazi…sure not… but a good german player yes I’am…
_i]on the scale this game is played, the artillery differences between each nation are small as compared to the units you have to choose from. If you give germany a slightly different unit for there artillery then what about the US p51 mustangs, which were better aircraft than the Zero, or the superfortresses….why should germany only get a special unit? you can make the argument that every nation had varying differences in comparable units. If you start incorporating those unit differences then the game becomes immensely more complex for a 6 sided di game.
dont get me wrong… i think adding slightly different unit could be cool, but balance should be maintained. _
P51 was introduced in 1943. 88 canon appears early in the war.
I prefer accuracy before balanced game.
Anyway, in all A&A game, the advantage in on the Allies side. -
If you cherish accuracy then the Allies win on the 18th turn.
-
Well put. I have a game called Squad Leader, I think it was voted war game of the year around 1982. A large 80 page rule book of small print, hex map, lots of rules, all kinds of different strength units, lots of rules. I don’t think I ever played it. I am sure its very accurate for squad level combat in the soviet/german battles in the ruins of russian cities. Oh yeah, smoke screens, limited fields of fire and view…you get the point.
-
If you cherish accuracy then the Allies win on the 18th turn.
So what!
I played 1939 World at war game. (60 pages rules).
We start to play at 11 am and finish our games late during the night, sometimes early in the morning.
If you love to play a 3 hours game, fine….for myself I cherish 12 hours games…. -
P51 was introduced in 1943. 88 canon appears early in the war.
I prefer accuracy before balanced game.
Anyway, in all A&A game, the advantage in on the Allies side.true it was introduced later… that being the case the japanese should have Zero’s, and the british should have spitfires. there are many examples of how some units are better across all nations
If you prefer accuracy over balanced game play then you prefer the allies winning over the axis. yet you want to improve the axis and not the allies. though i see the merit in “Accuracy”…this game represents a specific point in the war “Spring 1942” and basically the games purpose is to simulate the war after that point. not to necessarily keep accuracy throughout the game.
I tend to think that this map is very balanced, of course it depends on the strategy utilized on both sides -
If you want accuracy, you would need to introduce the concept of units ‘breaking’ and running before they are destroyed. Squad Leader (Avalong Hill 1977) had this, some squads keep fighting when they are down 50% strength, others ‘break’ and run when damage hits 10%. Of course each of the existing units when they need variable strengths compared to other nations units. This would require a switch to dice with a greater range of values, I’d say minimum 10 sides, but lets use 2 10 sided like AD&D. No way a soviet or german tank unit fights the same way as an allied unit. The way the allies fought german tanks was using a squad of 4 allied versus a german tank. It starts like this, the first allied tanks lights up like a torch and the remaining three start to manouver around the german as its turret rotated a bit slow. So, allied tank #2 then #3 light up in flames and the 4th allied tank gets in behind the german and lets loose at point blank range in the poorly armoured rear of the German and manages to disable it.
New units would not fight as well as vetern units of course so you would have to keep track of the age of each unit then modify its combat values based on just aging and also exposure to combat. Yeah cool, way more accurate, of course each countries turn would take a few hours and we would have to go back to cardboard units with the 3-4 % values representing the units abilities. We would need zillions of these units for each combination of values.
In ‘set-piece’ battles the Japanese were getting slaughtered against the US. Perhaps it because by 1943 the US was producing as many machineguns per month as the Japanese produced during the entire war. I think the Japs having never faced trench warfare and the futility of charging into massed machineguns had no concpet with this type of warefare. Moreover, the Japs never seemed to retreat so they had little ablity to learn lessons as nobody came back to HQ with information on what they faced. I would think for accuracy this would have to be represent also with different strencth units.
Personally, I think AA has found a pretty good balance of accuracy and playability.
Suggested Topics
