The only thing really wrong with that is that Japan is going to have its way on the mainland pretty easily I think. The 3 infantry and fighter that start in India isn’t exactly that much unless you build a factory in India. Japanese transports in my games tend to be the game enders because they can reinforce the mainland really well from Manchuria. Also, taking out Germany first will be difficult without the help of the United States. What is England doing in the Atlantic?
Fixing Strategic Bombing
-
I personally think that it is the most unrealistic part of the game. You have ten fighters sitting on Germany, yet a single B-17 can go bombing merrily away without fear after the anti-aircraft gun misses. If they made it so that fighter could intercept bombers hitting on a four, while the bombers shot back at a one, one would actually have an incentive to bring along escort fighters which would hit with a three, since they are attacking territorial defense fighters. The bombers are defending from an attack. Strategic Bombing raids would be more of a risk for the attacker, and the game would be much more realistic.
Edit: I think that only one round of combat would be sufficient.
-
It may be more realistic, but strategic bombing is not very powerful as it is…
-
SBR are representative of the bombing of industrial resources via the IC’s. The IPC’s surrendered immediately to the bank are representative of a player spending money to rebuild their industrial resources. What I could never figure out: When you do SBR and successfully bomb enough IPC’s so the defending player cannot pay the full amount, why do they still get to have a fully functional IC? :? Do magic gnomes come and rebuild for free when you have no more money? :lol: From my point of view, you just bombed the tar out of their IC and they ran out of money to rebuild it…therefore, that IC should be removed from the game. Also, why not just allow them to refuse payment and remove the IC to keep their IPC’s? (granted, it would only happen in extreme circumstances)
-
I believe you were very close with theÂ
Magic Gnomes
 comment.
seriously…. Â :mrgreen:
-
I think you should be allowed to NOT fix your IC if you don’t want too. Say Germany captures Caucasus. England SBRs for 4 Damage. Germany elects to put the Industrial Complex back in the box, or maybe just put a hit counter on it and when you do 15 dmg it goes back in the box…
Anyone who recaptures the complex still has to repair it before you can use it.
-
I meant for Revised, which needs the new rules.
-
Here’s a question: If you could choose to remove an IC instead of paying the IPC’s, at what cost is it worth it to remove the IC?
Naturally, 15 IPC’s come to mind, but then it’s not just replacement cost…it’s that one turn delay of not being able to build units there. How much is not having that one turn delay worth to you? If it’s a captured IC, you probably don’t care at all and would just ditch at the first hit as Jennifer previously stated. Certainly you would never think to sacrifice UK or Japan’s only IC. But if it’s Germany’s Southern Europe IC or the US West Coast IC… I’m not so sure There may be a price at which you’d just rather ditch it and rebuild later if you need to. I’ll have to think about that.
-
Let’s say you built an IC in India but now the Allies look like they’ll capture it next round. America SBRs for 3 dmg and Russia’s going to invade to capture it for teh British. Japan chooses to instead destroy the IC and play scorched earth on the allies instead of paying the 3 IPCs.
-
If that’s the case, Shadow, then you should be allowed to SBR any territory up to the value of the territory regardless of if there is an IC there or not.
I think it’s more akin to destroying actual factories and who says the government WANTS to fix them?
-
i love the dogfight rules me and my boys have added to our revised games, i would like to add it to our online games. anyone else agree?
Suggested Topics
