@tincanofthesea thanks! I’m going test it next time I play. Whats your feedback? @GeneralHandGrenade
Larry's new tank rules for Global 1940 Alpha Beta
-
In Original did anyone even build tanks? at 3-2-2 5 you were better off with massive stacks of infantry
I did with Russia. ON R1 its a good idea to buy 3 tanks and 3 men, rather than 8 men if you think the German player will stack less than 16 total units in EE.
With Japan tanks were a must to win to take Moscow and Germany needed to buy them to win. Not many ways to win with 1-2 infantry unless you want long games. You need 3 to beat a 2 and fighters at 10 IPC based on the economics of Milton Bradley made it hard. Germany seldom built fighters in that and Russia could never really buy fighters making her starting 2 the most important pieces in the game.
-
I will check on this now.
-
Wow, in ADDITION to the new unfair tank changes rule, I also get to see the slimy, unwashed, despicable underworld of forum politics! Don’t hide the truth, IL, put that poll back up! Many people are going to be unhappy at this change, especially 6 months into the game’s relase!
-
Good catch. I merged both of those topics.
If you still want the poll, post it and i will merge your duplicate thread with this one.
-
Many people are going to be unhappy at this change, especially 6 months into the game’s relase!
ok working on it.
-
Mantlefans poll inserted.
I just don’t want two posts of what larry said making threads. The only different component was that poll, but the posts would be more people saying " i hate it or i like it" and we dont need two threads like that.
-
Extra choices might be interesting.
What other choices you want?
-
Yup, IL, I have to say mantlefan has a point here. You’re trying to make him look ridiculous, with the 4/3 tank. On a topic in which YOU BOTH AGREE ON SOMETHING, it looks suspicious.
Whatever, here is what I was trying to say earlier before the thread got closed…
-
There is 3-2-2-5 with a def boost to 3 as well.
OK i will add it and others.
Other choices are not ridiculous. Some people might even like them.
Also, you can change votes.
-
Tanks are for aggressive players and people who just want to have fun and roll some dice.
1 inf 2 artillery attack at 6 like 2 tanks, offer cannon fodder better than 2 tanks and is 1 ipc cheaper.
Something is wrong with that picture and larry harris wants to make it worse :|. At least in Classic I bought tanks before a major attack (not buy artillery and infantry move it up then attack). tank buys are entirely circumstantial now… They are only bought before an attack on the next round or round after. Which is exactly like classic.
~I voted for 3/2/2/5. I think people don’t buy tanks for the purpose of defending anyway and I want to roll some dice and not have a stare down.
-
I didn’t delete the above post.
You violate no rules with it.
-
Fellow Axis and Allies aficionados:
A call goes out to all WWII history buffs, armchair generals, and in-general board game freaks: Larry has decided that current Armor units are Somewhat Overpowered with a 3 Defense Value, even when the cost was revised upwards to 6 IPCs for the AA1940 game. He has decreed that Armor Units will Now Roll with a 2 on Defense Without an Accompanying Infantry Unit. THIS MUST NOT STAND. This insults everyone here, and our intelligence, our dignity, nay, our very LIVELIHOODS, as WWII board game enthusiasts, is at stake.
Who here does NOT enjoy playing the new Alpha +.2 with the newly reinvigorated Axis powers? Who does NOT enjoy the thrill of attempting and winning Sealion attacks against all odds, or rolling armies of new Panzer divisions into Russia a year ahead of schedule? Well, the pride and joy of the German Wehrmacht, emerging from the legendary genius of General Heinz Guderian, the revolutionary new military equipment that changed the face of modern warfare forever, yes, OUR BELOVED PANZER DIVISIONS, are at stake. We are talking about introducing changes that will forevermore change the face of the WWII boardgame, for YEARS to come, wherein armor will NOT be built by Germany, since it will be “considered a sub-optimal buy”, in the wake of waves of infantry supported by artillery, with massive stacks of planes behind the front lines. SAY IT WILL NOT BE SO! WE SHALL NOT GIVE UP OUR 3/3/2 6 IPC ARMOR UNITS WITHOUT A FIGHT!
SAY NO TO THESE PROPOSED CHANGES BY LARRY HARRIS. He is essentially turning his back on the glory of the armored unit in its heyday, wherein the world saw more combat involving these behemoths than in any war thereafter, wherein anti-tank guns and planes were specially developed for defeating them in combat! WE SHALL FIGHT THESE CHANGES, AND WE SHALL WIN. WHO IS WITH ME?
-
Dammit, IL, you are diluting the significance of this armor change with that ridiculous poll. This thread is just going to get derailed, and probably already has with all the bickering.
-
What is wrong with it?
It contains all the various incarnations plus a few choices.
Also, complaining is also a derailment of a thread, so don’t
-
IL, can I start another thread with another, more clearly delinated poll, with better options? People will read this and wonder WHAT the hell is going on.
-
If you read the vote can be changed. that corrects your mistake.
-
IL,
You may as well lock this thread. Larry has already backed down from this proposed rule. See this quote from his web site:
Wow… and I thought I had problems.:roll: But, like I said, there is no need for polls. Logic and good argument is far more effective when it comes to me. Democracy/numbers, from which polls draw their substance is a farce, that’s why the greatest country in human history is a republic.
If anyone has noticed, there has been no changes to the page 1 Alpha+2 rules as relates to this issue. This idea went up the flag pole and no one saluted it. Let’s bring it down. Sorry for all the stress I caused. You guys are the best!
LH-i
That “LH-i” at the end is Larry Harris. This one is done.
-
Yes that is best. I am glad Larry rescinded that idea.
Whew.
-
I didn’t think it was too bad. I’m not going to criticized what I haven’t tried yet. However, if they are still tweaking the rules, they need to seriously consider bringing back National Advantages. They add much more depth to the game. At least make some official optional ones we can use, because my group only plays with official rules, so it would be nice if Larry gave us something we could use :-D
-
Well the rule was not adopted, however i would agree that NA’s were great. I prefer them to even tech since the tech ideas are mostly contrived ideas out of thin air.
Suggested Topics
