Do you want europe NAs like in AAR??

As long as it doesn’t ruin the game balance. I always thought that the allies having 18 NAs and the axis having 12 in the revised edition was a bit unfair. So I made it so that each of the allies only got 4.

I think the NOs were their attempt to replace NAs but it doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to see them in globabl game, not just europe.  And as for complicating the game more, once you wrap your head around all of the rules it just adds more to the richness and depth of the game.  I say bring on more unique things to make it an even more insane board game.

Heavy Bombers was always a game ender.

@Brain:

Heavy Bombers was always a game ender.

I thought heavy bombers was a tech not a na

Tech, NA what’s the difference?

I Lot less Lulz

@idk_iam_swiss:

I Lot less Lulz

Translation please.

meaning a lot less fun. Techs are game ending but can typically be achieved by any side. (especially the way i play with techs larrys way gaurountees they will be universally ignored. as they were.

NAs are those things that give specific countries specific bonuses. for example Russian winter or Japanese bonsai soldiers Typically made the games NO FUN. I cant tell you how un-fun it was to stay up past midnight playing with friends and have that dumb russian winter. Plus america had better “NAs” while japans “NAs” were terrible. They were subjective. and dont even get me started on how awful the axis advantages were when compared to the allied.

@idk_iam_swiss:

meaning a lot less fun. Techs are game ending but can typically be achieved by any side. (especially the way i play with techs larrys way gaurountees they will be universally ignored. as they were.

NAs are those things that give specific countries specific bonuses. for example Russian winter or Japanese bonsai soldiers Typically made the games NO FUN. I cant tell you how un-fun it was to stay up past midnight playing with friends and have that dumb russian winter. Plus america had better “NAs” while japans “NAs” were terrible. They were subjective. and dont even get me started on how awful the axis advantages were when compared to the allied.

I know the allies advantages were so much better

Just do away with these rules and keep everyone on an even playing field.

Yeah cuz we all know the war was such_an even playing field_

Although a lot of the na’s were good, from what I remember (haven’t touched revised since I’ve played aa50 and aap40) lend-lease was the killer one for the axis. It in effect put the Germany at 40 ipcs against russia 24 ipcs, like 15 of britain’s ipcs (which I used to invade norway and just send units and fighters every turn into russia which became russian) and anything that America could give (which was quite a lot seeing as it could dominate Japan w/o too much trouble with help from India (made possible by another allied bonus the colonial garrison). In the games I played as the allies, I was able to dominate as Russia. They were always on the offensive.

@idk_iam_swiss:

Yeah cuz we all know the war was _such_an even playing field

It is more difficult to balance a game with variables such as NA’s__

True. I like them both. Personally I dont like that technology is obtainable by any country. Meaning russia can develop radar. Which is unlikely. It would be cool if each country could have 3 technologies they COULD invest in. The way I do techs is you can gamble for 5 ipc and maybe get it. OR you can pay 15 no gambling and get it. Because thats how war techs really work. You throw money at it. Stuff will get invented.

@i:

so your saying paying 15 bucks as germany you get jets?

Hell, yeah, man, I would like this idea a lot more.  Germany already had the tech going into the war, they just never developed it early enough…  If you were taking over as a new Supreme Leader at game start you could take other options available.  I like this idea better than simply rolling for it as tech and hoping you get a historical result.

Thank you and yes. Technological advancements are really based on money. and a substantial investment ALWAYS got results. At least in this time period. And in this specific war.

Balancing the game with na will be hard. In revised, allied NA were so much better than axis NA. Joint strike, Ic for UK… Lend lease…

Their is enough randomness in this game due to the dice, we don’t need to throw in NA’s as well.