Destroyer on G1

[OutsideLime]

:roll:

[frimmel]

@ezto:

noone plays with NA

You might amend that to no one you play with uses NA’s.

I’ve never played with them though.

In Jen’s scenario though you have money in the water and thus Navy takes on a new role.

[Jennifer]

Exactly, lots of players use NAs, more and more every day because it takes a static game and makes it dynamic.

Chinese Divisions, Fast Carriers, Colonial Garrison, Radar, Lend-Lease, Trans-Siberian Rail all makes KJF a much more viable strategy.

Dive-Bombers, U-Boat Interdiction, Banzai all makes the fall of Russia much faster.

[frood]

I’m about ready to mix it up a bit - maybe some NAs or techs. I was thinking about giving each side some random techs - say you would roll randomly until each side had 2 or 3 techs, then you work with what you get. But of course, only to take effect after round 1.

Or how about if each round you allowed one free tech roll, and it took effect immediately? First roll a die to see if you get a tech, then roll a die to see what it is.

[Jennifer]

Axis: Roll 1d6 for a random NA.  Roll 2d6 for two techs each.
Allies: Roll 1d6 for a random NA and another for a random tech each.

That’s 6 per side, pretty even.  And with LHTR, the allied NAs are mega nerfed and the Axis are buffed so it pretty much kills a need for a bid over, oh, 5 or 6 IPCs.

[Guest]

Take teh automatic tech away from teh US and I think you MIGHT have a viable game, though depending on the NA’s received, it could still end up over before it starts…

[Jennifer]

What if the USA get’s rockets…that’s pretty pointless for America, no?

[OutsideLime]

A US player could definitely put together a good plan with Rockets if it happened to get the tech.  Algeria hits Southern Europe.  Norway hits Berlin.  Both territories are commonly taken and easily held by the US player, so it wouldn’t be too tough to get an AA into either and start raining down the shells.  Actually it would be devastating for Germany if the US got AA into both.  That’s a lot of German IPCs down the drain with nowhere near the loss that setting up and running an effective SBR campaign would take.

~Josh

PS - Not that I’d ever pick that as USA’s first tech to research, or second, or third.  But if I was assigned it randomly……

[dezrtfish]

I like playing with NA’s. I prefer to roll for them 2 for each of the allies and 3 for each of the axis.  ^ per team.  I do think some of the techs need work and am in the process of implementing some of the alternates I have read about.  I think the Superfortess as it is is a game breaker.

[frood]

@OutsideLime:

A US player could definitely put together a good plan with Rockets if it happened to get the tech.  Algeria hits Southern Europe.  Norway hits Berlin.  Both territories are commonly taken and easily held by the US player, so it wouldn’t be too tough to get an AA into either and start raining down the shells.  Actually it would be devastating for Germany if the US got AA into both.  That’s a lot of German IPCs down the drain with nowhere near the loss that setting up and running an effective SBR campaign would take.

~Josh

PS - Not that I’d ever pick that as USA’s first tech to research, or second, or third.  But if I was assigned it randomly……

That’s my point - getting a few random techs would force the player to try different strategies. I’m on my 3rd axis game in a row, and starting to see some of the same things over and over and over… With your example of the US getting rockets, that would change the dynamic with the Allies playing to have the US take Nor instead of the UK. And Germany’s response would be different if they get supersubs (maybe worth going naval) or jet fighters.

That would test a player’s ability to really come up with their own strats, rather than playing the standard game lines. And even if occasionally the techs make for lopsided games, they would still be interesting.

Any lopsided techs could be offset by assigning random techs before the bid. Then each player can do their own analysis of how they like the odds, and bid for the Axis accordingly. You might even see some Allied bids.

I’d be interested in trying a game like this after the tournament. - Maybe soon lol, I just got 2 of my Germany Ftrs blowed up on US2 - Doh!  :oops:

[newpaintbrush]

@Jennifer:

Exactly, lots of players use NAs, more and more every day

I say that more and more people STOP using NAs every day.

pwned?

[Jennifer]

@newpaintbrush:

@Jennifer:

Exactly, lots of players use NAs, more and more every day

I say that more and more people STOP using NAs every day.

pwned?

if they do it’s cause they don’t know how to dominate with the axis NAs.

[critmonster]

i feel the purpose of NA’s is to replace a bid and/or balance the game vs. experience levels

[OutsideLime]

I think the purpose of NAs is to inject a little variety into the game.  NAs allows the player who has them to adopt strategies to use them affectively, and forces the opposing player to develop strategies to counter them.  I find that they make each game fresh and fun as players explore various combinations and discover what works well, and the offbeat tactics that can result.

~Josh