Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Am I winning or Losing: data analysis of high-level BM4 games:

Interestingly, Moscow and India hold for a much longer time than in the “old” days. This isn’t surprising as the balance mod gives more income to Russia and handicaps Japan.

The India NO of +3 that is easy to hold is also quite significant. +9 instead of +6 per turn

I’ve never done high bid OOB, where like a fighter to India and infantry in a couple territories around there would seem to basically make up for this NO

But like you said “old days” when everyone did small bids like 10-20, India was a house of cards and Russia had a pretty bad time, yes.

@tomcoll67

Hello, I am interested in helping you create rules for such a scenario. To begin, I have some suggestions for unit and weapon rules.

D6 system

Land Units:

Infantry
cost-3 ipc A1/D2/M1 (A2 when supported 1 to 1 by artillery)

Mech Infantry
cost-4 ipc A/1/D2/M2 (A2 when supported 1 to 1 by artillery)

Artillery
cost-4 ipc A2/D2/M1 (first strike)

Self-propelled artillery
cost-5 ipc A2/D2/M2 (first strike)

Tank
cost-6 ipc A3/D3/M2 (can blitz)

Commando
cost-5 ipc A2/D2/M1 (target selection on a roll of 1)

Air Assault Infantry
cost-4 ipc A1/D2/M1 (M3 from airbase)

Surface to air missile
cost-6 ipc A2X3/D2X3/M1

Weapons:

Rockets

Cruise missile
cost-8 ipc M2 (launched from cruisers, destroyers, airbases and naval bases. Role 1 D6 for damage inflicted, 1-2= 1 hit, 3-4= 2 hits, 5-6= 3 hits.)

Anti-ship missile
cost-8 ipc M2 (launched from cruisers, destroyers and naval bases. Role 1 D6 for damage inflicted, 1-2= 1 hit, 3-4= 2 hits, 5-6= 3 hits.)

Sub launched ballistic missile
cost-12 ipc M2 (launched from subs. Role 1 D6 for damage inflicted.)

Intercontinental ballistic missile
cost-20 ipc M10 (launched from missile silos. Role 2 D6 for damage inflicted.)

@blakeadam who are you talking to?

@The-Janus said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

@RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

is there any plausible reason to attack a major neutral except maybe USSR attacking the Arab league?

It’s kinda been theorized that USSR might want to attack China, in certain situations.

If China isn’t defending North Korea, or worse, if they’re actively letting NATO move units through their territory, the USSR might be better off attacking.
The other thing is that the complication table is weighted more toward China’s outrage than the other 2 majors, so if the USSR has the ability to send nukes, it’s also generally assumed that they will, whereas the US is less likely to use them; in a long enough game, that will swing China towards favoring NATO, so the USSR might pre-empt that at some point.

The other option is as a game-ender, towards obtaining an economic victory. In fact, such a thing is probably pretty impossible without invading most of the neutrals on the Eurasian continent.

P.S. I still think modeling neutral contributions as N.O.'s is an option to keep in mind

Implementing the complication table would be difficult. The game rules already suggest dropping the complication table as an optional rule. Note that it would be possible to use having a nuclear weapon as trigger but not using a nuclear weapon. I think that in practice the high cost of nuclear weapons is more of a deterrent than the nuclear complication rules.

Using National Objectives for neutral contributions is fine.

Did you get that from Historical Board Gaming? I downloaded the same map and rule set. Since then I’ve completely reworked the map and rules. I’m currently in the process of possibly getting it published.

and a green canadian dice too

@Tater_07:

Sounds like it could be interesting. I will have to get into miniatures and see if I like it. Thanks for the help!

My pleasure.  Something else to keep in mind is that there are additional differences between various game levels.  The higher the game level, the more the combat process is abstracted; conversely, when you go all the way down to skirmish level, the combat processes can be so finely detailed that they can involve the effects of individual weapons being fired at individual targets and inflicting specific damage on them.  Another difference is the level of command represented by the player himself.  Way up at the grand strategy level, the player basically has the role of a country’s national command authorities (the top civilian and military leadership running the war).  Down at the skirmish level, the player would probably have the role of a squad or platoon leader.

What exactly are you asking for?

Games of any type with a Napoleonic theme?

Or Variants of games ( in Axis and Allies style) only posted here that are free download, but indexed so you dont have to search for them?

I have a few things to offer, but seek your clarification first.