Research & Development Discussion - Delta+1

[Young Grasshopper]

@Cmdr:

Wait, I disagree with YGs threshholds for free dice.  Vance and I agreed on 50 IPC per rung so we’d actually have:

0-9 IPC no dice
10-49 IPC 1 die
50-99 IPC 2 dice
100-149 IPC 3 dice
150-199 IPC 4 dice
200-249 IPC 5 dice
250+ 6 dice

I’m ready to agree with this scale for two reason….
1. I’m frustrated with your lack of compromise.
2. It is very rare that any power will see over $150 with just income +NOs

---

I agree to qualifications - they are so written in the second draft on Page 10 (or 11).

OK… so be it for the qualifications

---

Research and Development should be rolled prior to collecting income - but dice should be determined before you start your turn based on whatever qualifying cash you have.

To complicated, not one of the options presented, no more time for thoughts in the wind, and…… R&D dice should be based on the NOs and income gained in the same round you’re rolling, in order to promote and reward aggressive game play.

Qualifying cash should include:  Money you collected on the previous turn for both NOs and Territories.  I say at least 5 IPC or all IPC you saved from your purchase last round as well.

So based on the options that everyone has voted for (2 for #4, and 2 for #5) I guess you will be voting for option #5, which allows a $5 carry over to be included in the total after income+ NOs

The option that offed the choice of using cash on hand from previous turns didn’t receive any votes.

---

Development Chart:

A)  Was this not voted on already?  I know we voted on dropping it to 6 different technologies and that the pairings are as shown.  We did not vote on what - specifically, each of the technologies now do - but which one is now combined with the other we did.

B)  I don’t mind discussing each technology later, what Rockets mean, what LRA means, what War Bonds mean.

C)  We can also determine, at that time, which half or if the whole technology can be attained by free dice and which requires purchased dice.

A. if somewhere in this thread I agreed to some chart, I wish to open the discussion again (you get what you want with my scale, I’m getting my hands in your chart)

B. OK…. we will discuss individual technologies later, agreed.

C. This is the first time I have heard of this, and I Absolutely disagree with it. I must have been playing A&A when this got cooked up. Free dice rolling @6, is just as valuable as a purchased dice rolling @6 and may roll for tech on the same chart.

[Guest]

@Vance:

I was thinking you could get to choose which of the two you want.  If I was UK I might want the radar; if I was Germany I might want the rockets.

[Young Grasshopper]

@Vance:

@Vance:

I was thinking you could get to choose which of the two you want.  If I was UK I might want the radar; if I was Germany I might want the rockets.

I will be making a proposal to amend the chart. It will consist of 10 individual technologies, and at the point of developing one tech from the chart of 10 (only 1 allowed per round), the power developing will choose 6, and than roll a 6 sided die to develop one. However, we are not discussing the chart until we resolve the issues at hand, but I will say this…. I’m not agreeing to any situation that allows a power to choose their tech without a roll of the dice.

[Jennifer]

I’m not happy with 10 technologies.  It’s far easier to keep it as 6 technologies as we all have six sided dice.  You’re lucky enough getting a breakthrough, I don’t think you should completely eliminate the chance it’s useless for you at the current time.

[Young Grasshopper]

@Cmdr:

I’m not happy with 10 technologies.  It’s far easier to keep it as 6 technologies as we all have six sided dice.  You’re lucky enough getting a breakthrough, I don’t think you should completely eliminate the chance it’s useless for you at the current time.

I didn’t say we would be rolling 10 sided dice, I said there is a chart of 10, you pick 6 of them than you roll a 6 sided dice. you would of course be picking the 6 that are most useful to you, so there is an element of getting what you want, but not choosing exactly what you want, Mantlefan called it “brilliant” before he was booted.

[Guest]

@Cmdr:

Half tech
If a player wins a tech, they can choose ONE of the options (e.g. radar or rockets if they get a 6).  If they win that same tech again, they automatically get the remaining option (e.g. if they chose rockets the first time, they get radar the second time).  If they already have both of them, they get nothing.

Sorry but this got taken way out of context and misinterpreted.  What I meant was you would roll however many research dice you have and if you get a 6 you roll again.  you would look at the chart to see which pair of techs go with that number.  Then you pick one.  You do not get two.

[JimmyHat]

Wait a minute, what if each country had its own tech chart?  That way Russia wouldn’t get super subs but something they could use.

We could have 6 techs for 6 powers, that 36 different options!  Lots for people to get creative in.  Just an idea that might also allow us to balance weaker countries to stronger ones.  ANZAC could get a really cool tech while US has 6 mediocre ones.

[Young Grasshopper]

@JimmyHat:

Wait a minute, what if each country had its own tech chart?  That way Russia wouldn’t get super subs but something they could use.

We could have 6 techs for 6 powers, that 36 different options!  Lots for people to get creative in.  Just an idea that might also allow us to balance weaker countries to stronger ones.  ANZAC could get a really cool tech while US has 6 mediocre ones.

Considering the popularity of National Advantages in the recent poll, I predict that there will be plenty of “national special abilities” for each power in the future…. no need to burn down the current progress in order to start building the Titanic.

[Jennifer]

Jimmy,

That would be AWESOME!  Except, it’s not KISS, right?  :-P

Grasshopper,

I dont like choose at all.  I think it should really be 1 chart of 6, which is the reason we got rid of two charts, or maybe we follow Jimmy’s suggestion and come up with 9 or 10 different technologies and then decide which nations qualify so that all have 6 to choose from.  The other part of this that might be good is that we could say they get 2 each as “advantages” and choose them at the start of the game, as an optional rule - and you could CHOOSE to do that instead of having technology at all - or you could choose to do neither advantages or technologies (or objectives.  If things are going optional, objectives should be optional too.)

[Jennifer]

@Young:

@JimmyHat:

Wait a minute, what if each country had its own tech chart?  That way Russia wouldn’t get super subs but something they could use.

We could have 6 techs for 6 powers, that 36 different options!  Lots for people to get creative in.  Just an idea that might also allow us to balance weaker countries to stronger ones.  ANZAC could get a really cool tech while US has 6 mediocre ones.

Considering the popularity of National Advantages in the recent poll, I predict that there will be plenty of “national special abilities” for each power in the future…. no need to burn down the current progress in order to start building the Titanic.

Yes, but think of all the problems that would be solved if we created a list of 6 “advantages” for each nation to choose from and just dropped Research all together?  Jimmy wouldnt complain that Technology breaks the game, we wouldn’t have to bicker about 10 vs 6, there would no longer be a concern over saving money to qualify for free dice, even smaller nations (which maybe only get 3 choices to choose from?) would get at least one “technology” or “advantage.”

Example:

• Russia, Japan, Germany and America choose 2 technologies or advantages
• Italy, Australia and England choose 1 technology - or advantage

(That, by design, gives the allies 1 more advantage than the axis and is even in all other respects.)

We could then tailor a list of advantages so they:
A)  make historical sense.
B)  are different between countries.

By removing R&D and just going NAs we can elect to use some “technologies” as NAs.

[special forces]

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

[Jennifer]

@special:

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

Fails to follow KISS.  Right?

Here’s my KISS test:  I ask my 9 year old son if he understands.  If he cannot understand it, a lot of people on the internet won’t either (there are some really stupid people.  As Carlin said: “Think of house stupid the average person is, then realize half of them are stupider than that!”)

[special forces]

@Cmdr:

@special:

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

Fails to follow KISS.  Right?

Here’s my KISS test:  I ask my 9 year old son if he understands.  If he cannot understand it, a lot of people on the internet won’t either (there are some really stupid people.  As Carlin said: “Think of house stupid the average person is, then realize half of them are stupider than that!”)

Are the 10 desired techs seperable in 2 categories of 5? (like originally 6 air-naval, and 6 land) ?

If so, its’ simple: 1 =  throw again.

[Jennifer]

No.  If we got rid of the 4 lamo technologies for each nation we’d still have 12+ technologies.  I think the only one no one would want is the current incarnation of War Bonds and if we change it to best of 2d6 +2 that would change too.

[Guest]

@special:

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D  That is me laughing because now we have officially come full circle.  Zallomallo suggested this way back on page 1 of this thread, and it was and still is an excellent idea.  Some techs may be made more likely to be won than others.

And it does follows KISS: you roll 2 dice and you get whatever tech goes with the total.  I would even throw on one more twist: you get snake eyes, you get nothing sorry sucker.

EDIT:
Oh oh oh, and if you get double 6s you get the right to purchase two ATOMIC BOMBS. Each A-bomb costs 500IPCs and may not be built until round 22 (around summer 1945ish). Each A-bomb must be delivered by one strategic bomber and it automatically destroys ALL UNITS in the attacked territory.  If the territory is a capitol, that power must unconditionally surrender.

[Guest]

@Zallomallo:

Like:
2 - Awesome
3 - Fantastic
4 - Excellent
5 - Great
6 - Good
7 - Meh
8 - Good
9 - Great
10 - Excellent
11 - Fantastic
12- Awesome

If you don’t know, 2 dice has increased probability of inner numbers (7 is the highest).  This could make technology a little more predictable, or something.

yep. good idea!

[Young Grasshopper]

@Cmdr:

Jimmy,

That would be AWESOME!  Except, it’s not KISS, right?  :-P

Grasshopper,

I dont like choose at all.  
Why not?
I think it should really be 1 chart of 6,
Why?
which is the reason we got rid of two charts,
We did?

or maybe we follow Jimmy’s suggestion and come up with 9 or 10 different technologies and then decide which nations qualify so that all have 6 to choose from.  The other part of this that might be good is that we could say they get 2 each as “advantages” and choose them at the start of the game, as an optional rule - and you could CHOOSE to do that instead of having technology at all - or you could choose to do neither advantages or technologies (or objectives.  If things are going optional, objectives should be optional too.)

So, start all over because you had a thought or two this evening after dinner? What’s to say that after 20 pages of working out these new ideas, that you won’t spontaneously think of a whole new direction to go in, and than ask us to start over again?

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

@special:

Haven’t really foillowed this topic, but if you use 2 x D6, and exclude double 1’s, then you have 10 different numbers you can throw (3 to 12)

(with some numbers that will happen more often then others)

Fails to follow KISS.  Right?

Here’s my KISS test:  I ask my 9 year old son if he understands.  If he cannot understand it, a lot of people on the internet won’t either (there are some really stupid people.  As Carlin said: “Think of house stupid the average person is, then realize half of them are stupider than that!”)

Haha.  Well your kid gets a healthy dose of you most of the time!  I’m not sure we can trust his opinion either!:)

Seriously though, I didn’t say replace tech with NA’s or make both mandatory.  But I do see the similarity with them.  Perhaps youre right and bringing in the nation specific techs is too much like NA’s and we should have both, not just 1.

[JimmyHat]

For rolling to see what tech you get, I also liked zalomalos idea, although if you get to re-roll when you roll the same number, then everyone is going to end up with ‘7’.  What if 7 is ‘reroll’ and then the others can be techs.  If you roll the same tech again then you’re screwed.

As for the ipc level needed to receive dice, I tend to feel Jenn’s list where 15 is 1, 65 is 2, 115 is 3 and so on.  That way if you’re in the bucket for ipcs you can’t tech.

I don’t like limits, whether its limiting someones ability to save ipcs or limit minor powers to less or less powerful techs.

[Jennifer]

@Young:

@Cmdr:

Jimmy,

That would be AWESOME!  Except, it’s not KISS, right?  :-P

Grasshopper,

I dont like choose at all.  
Why not?
Because Tech is a Crap Shoot.
I think it should really be 1 chart of 6,
Why?
Because one die has six sides.
which is the reason we got rid of two charts,
We did?
Yes, the whole idea was to make tech stronger and by combining the two charts - as we voted on already, and thus we are here - that is accomplished.  Go WAY back to the beginning.

or maybe we follow Jimmy’s suggestion and come up with 9 or 10 different technologies and then decide which nations qualify so that all have 6 to choose from.  The other part of this that might be good is that we could say they get 2 each as “advantages” and choose them at the start of the game, as an optional rule - and you could CHOOSE to do that instead of having technology at all - or you could choose to do neither advantages or technologies (or objectives.  If things are going optional, objectives should be optional too.)

So, start all over because you had a thought or two this evening after dinner? What’s to say that after 20 pages of working out these new ideas, that you won’t spontaneously think of a whole new direction to go in, and than ask us to start over again?

I did, combine your idea of targetted technologies with the national advantage idea, come up with a list of “technologies” a nation qualifies for and let them choose what they want.  Now minors get tech, majors get tech and people can just choose what they want.  No more worrying about what price dice rolls are, no more worrying about how the cash was accumulated to get free dice - just no more dice.  It’s as KISS (on the player’s side) as you can possibly get!

We could even tweak the technologies so that Germany’s Advanced Artillery is not the same as America’s Advanced Artillery.    Just make a list of 6 “techs” for each country and let them choose.  All we need to do then is figure out the technologies (which we now have to do again) and figure out how many each nation should get.  Keeping it as close to even between Axis countries and Allied countries would be best - and of course, your technology advantages would fail to work without your capitol or being at war - but those seem like minor issues compared to scrapping a technology system entirely, and then trying to figure out a way to make a technology fun for all nations without some loophole for a specific nation. (Just write the loophole out for that specific nation, or don’t give that nation the option of that specific technology - replace it with something else.)