@Cmdr:
I can see that, James. Honestly, I’d rather have “total” victory instead of VCs and accomplish that by weakening the United States greatly and/or buffing the Axis.
I doubt the game designers want to move in the direction of a game that takes several hours to get to the point where either the Axis have won or it is apparant they can’t win to a game that takes two or three times that long to play to total vicotry.
Yeah, the last time we decided to “play it out” from an official Axis victory, it really stretched out the game. The Axis won in round 8 I think. Basically, it was one night’s worth of playing. When we kept going, eventually the Allies overwhelmed the Axis and it took 19 rounds. That took all of the next day plus into the next weekend. I should point out that before the Axis won with 8 VCs on the Europe board, Japan had already been taken out due to a huge blunder of leaving their capital unprotected. They had a decent navy in SZ 6, but NO land or air units on Japan itself. The US went in with anything that could reach and it was a tough naval battle. However, the US land units just had to walk into Tokyo. After that, the rest of the Japanese navy was hunted down and they had to push through a rather large army presence on the mainland. If Japan hadn’t made such a blunder, who knows how long the game might have lasted.
Yes, that is why I put in the Financial victory rule.
@Cmdr:
I can see that, James. Honestly, I’d rather have “total” victory instead of VCs and accomplish that by weakening the United States greatly and/or buffing the Axis.
I doubt the game designers want to move in the direction of a game that takes several hours to get to the point where either the Axis have won or it is apparant they can’t win to a game that takes two or three times that long to play to total vicotry.
Yeah, the last time we decided to “play it out” from an official Axis victory, it really stretched out the game. The Axis won in round 8 I think. Basically, it was one night’s worth of playing. When we kept going, eventually the Allies overwhelmed the Axis and it took 19 rounds. That took all of the next day plus into the next weekend. I should point out that before the Axis won with 8 VCs on the Europe board, Japan had already been taken out due to a huge blunder of leaving their capital unprotected. They had a decent navy in SZ 6, but NO land or air units on Japan itself. The US went in with anything that could reach and it was a tough naval battle. However, the US land units just had to walk into Tokyo. After that, the rest of the Japanese navy was hunted down and they had to push through a rather large army presence on the mainland. If Japan hadn’t made such a blunder, who knows how long the game might have lasted.
Exactly, it does not take much. Just enough to be too costly for Germany or Italy to attack and enough transports and ground forces to put “threat” on Italy. After you get that established, it’s only 23 - 27 IPC worth of ground units being shucked into Africa and walked over to the Middle East or dumped in Gibraltar to run into Spain once large enough.
Are we a bunch of negative Nellys if “the worst of” poll boasts 5 pages, and “the best of” poll has less than 1?
@Young:
Are we a bunch of negative Nellys if “the worst of” poll boasts 5 pages, and “the best of” poll has less than 1?
There’s a best of? Dang. ^_~
@mantlefan:
@Young:
Are we a bunch of negative Nellys if “the worst of” poll boasts 5 pages, and “the best of” poll has less than 1?
No.
The best of where people can say “I like this” and that’s all that needs to be said. Here is where people present problems they perceive. Then come attempts at solutions. The fact that many of these “worst” things are and have been problems means there’s a lot of disagreement and therefore more posts.
I guess you’re right, because there’s not much disagreement in regards to scrambling being the best improvement, but this poll is very diverse.
Best of:
AA Guns
Scrambling
Worst Of:
Setup changes
Russian NO
Indifferent:
Convoys
I voted for the aa gun, it seems the most obvious fail with far reaching effects.
Scrambling- best in Alpha over OOB
Convoys- A3 system is warming to me, however I think some ships should be excluded from raiding, making less units capable of doing it. Perhaps only Subs, CA’s, and tac bmbs.
SBR- meh, I liked A2 for the logic of the system, but I rarely bomb as is.
NOs-A2 NO’s were good other than US and USSR, and A3 has not improved those.
unit setup-all FUBAR’ed because of the aa gun mishap that near breaks the game.
Political-still very wrong, why is it that we cannot have a sleak DOW system? No more ‘leave it up to the players to make a pact’. Also fix the neutrals so they are a part of this game, Larry took the time to add them to the board and put units on them…
Tech- I don’t tech and see it as the one area that is easiest to house rule.
AAguns-projectile vomits
Kamikaze- how has these changed? I was unaware.
Turn order-I still think Italy should be moved up to before UK, add more UK units if needed.
Mongolian rule-A3 tried to fix this, but didn’t go far enough. Take Mongolia out of the ‘true neutral’ camp and make it dependent on Jap/Rus relations. I do prefer those 6 scattered inf to the 12 ipcs of A2.
I voted for the aa gun, it seems the most obvious fail with far reaching effects.
Scrambling- best in Alpha over OOB
Convoys- A3 system is warming to me, however I think some ships should be excluded from raiding, making less units capable of doing it. Perhaps only Subs, CA’s, and tac bmbs.
SBR- meh, I liked A2 for the logic of the system, but I rarely bomb as is.
NOs-A2 NO’s were good other than US and USSR, and A3 has not improved those.
unit setup-all FUBAR’ed because of the aa gun mishap that near breaks the game.
Political-still very wrong, why is it that we cannot have a sleak DOW system? No more ‘leave it up to the players to make a pact’. Also fix the neutrals so they are a part of this game, Larry took the time to add them to the board and put units on them…
Tech- I don’t tech and see it as the one area that is easiest to house rule.
AAguns-projectile vomits
Kamikaze- how has these changed? I was unaware.
Turn order-I still think Italy should be moved up to before UK, add more UK units if needed.
Mongolian rule-A3 tried to fix this, but didn’t go far enough. Take Mongolia out of the ‘true neutral’ camp and make it dependent on Jap/Rus relations. I do prefer those 6 scattered inf to the 12 ipcs of A2.
Battleships should disrupt convoys, that was the main goal for releasing the Bizmarck.
@Young:
I voted for the aa gun, it seems the most obvious fail with far reaching effects.
Scrambling- best in Alpha over OOB
Convoys- A3 system is warming to me, however I think some ships should be excluded from raiding, making less units capable of doing it. Perhaps only Subs, CA’s, and tac bmbs.
SBR- meh, I liked A2 for the logic of the system, but I rarely bomb as is.
NOs-A2 NO’s were good other than US and USSR, and A3 has not improved those.
unit setup-all FUBAR’ed because of the aa gun mishap that near breaks the game.
Political-still very wrong, why is it that we cannot have a sleak DOW system? No more ‘leave it up to the players to make a pact’. Also fix the neutrals so they are a part of this game, Larry took the time to add them to the board and put units on them…
Tech- I don’t tech and see it as the one area that is easiest to house rule.
AAguns-projectile vomits
Kamikaze- how has these changed? I was unaware.
Turn order-I still think Italy should be moved up to before UK, add more UK units if needed.
Mongolian rule-A3 tried to fix this, but didn’t go far enough. Take Mongolia out of the ‘true neutral’ camp and make it dependent on Jap/Rus relations. I do prefer those 6 scattered inf to the 12 ipcs of A2.Battleships should disrupt convoys, that was the main goal for releasing the Bizmarck.
They do. 1d6 max 3 dmg
Read JimmyHat’s post, Jen.
any ship should dissrupt convoys if you really think about it. a destroyer is the same thing as a battleship against an unarmed merchant vessel. In axis and allies turns it is like killing a transport. No big deal. The battleship bissmark was intended to disrupt convoys and lower the morale of the United Kingdom, while as a destroyer would easily be destroyed and not thought twice about. All ships should be able to do damage to convoys. Get rid of adding more dice to the game. Alpha 2 had it right.
any ship should dissrupt convoys if you really think about it. a destroyer is the same thing as a battleship against an unarmed merchant vessel. In axis and allies turns it is like killing a transport. No big deal. The battleship bissmark was intended to disrupt convoys and lower the morale of the United Kingdom, while as a destroyer would easily be destroyed and not thought twice about. All ships should be able to do damage to convoys. Get rid of adding more dice to the game. Alpha 2 had it right.
Jen, I think you need to get offline and play more table top, the physical act of rolling dice is suspenseful and fun, but I can see how you would want less rolling if you were constantly commanding the computer to do it for you.
@Young:
any ship should dissrupt convoys if you really think about it. a destroyer is the same thing as a battleship against an unarmed merchant vessel. In axis and allies turns it is like killing a transport. No big deal. The battleship bissmark was intended to disrupt convoys and lower the morale of the United Kingdom, while as a destroyer would easily be destroyed and not thought twice about. All ships should be able to do damage to convoys. Get rid of adding more dice to the game. Alpha 2 had it right.
Jen, I think you need to get offline and play more table top, the physical act of rolling dice is suspenseful and fun, but I can see how you would want less rolling if you were constantly commanding the computer to do it for you.
But you did not quote me!
@Cmdr:
@Young:
any ship should dissrupt convoys if you really think about it. a destroyer is the same thing as a battleship against an unarmed merchant vessel. In axis and allies turns it is like killing a transport. No big deal. The battleship bissmark was intended to disrupt convoys and lower the morale of the United Kingdom, while as a destroyer would easily be destroyed and not thought twice about. All ships should be able to do damage to convoys. Get rid of adding more dice to the game. Alpha 2 had it right.
Jen, I think you need to get offline and play more table top, the physical act of rolling dice is suspenseful and fun, but I can see how you would want less rolling if you were constantly commanding the computer to do it for you.
But you did not quote me!
LMFAO! I think I’m going to take a break for a while, signing off.
I like the Research and development from the Anniversary Edition
Our group never seems to spend the money on Technology, when we were doing the Anniv you would see it on the board, now as before the risk of getting one vs using the money on something else just dosent pan out
The group wants to try a game without any N.O.'s just to see how it plays out….I think Japan could become very powerful if the U.S.A. has to wait until the end of three to come in. should be interesting
Japan would be super powerful! GL and let us know how it turns out. Should be fun.
@suprise:
I like the Research and development from the Anniversary Edition
Our group never seems to spend the money on Technology, when we were doing the Anniv you would see it on the board, now as before the risk of getting one vs using the money on something else just dosent pan outThe group wants to try a game without any N.O.'s just to see how it plays out….I think Japan could become very powerful if the U.S.A. has to wait until the end of three to come in. should be interesting
Try my house rule… “Any power that has $30 or more to spend at the beginning of their turn, may roll 1 free die @6 during phase 1 of their turn to win a tech, powers may never buy rolls.”
that might be a fun houserull, but what happens if say germany gets rockets or america gets heavy bombers? for free no less?
that might be a fun houserull, but what happens if say germany gets rockets or america gets heavy bombers? for free no less?
As long as you have $30 or more, you get a free roll, regardless how you got $30 or how many tech weapons you already have.
@Young:
that might be a fun houserull, but what happens if say germany gets rockets or america gets heavy bombers? for free no less?
As long as you have $30 or more, you get a free roll, regardless how you got $30 or how many tech weapons you already have.
Interesting rule. I just play with Tech Tokens myself…that way you dont lose your investment if you don’t make a break through. Does end up with America getting 4 or 5 technologies however.
@Young:
Battleships should disrupt convoys, that was the main goal for releasing the Bizmarck.
Yes I know, and I am glad you found 1 example, but this game has a larger scale than 1 ship, and BB’s in general were not used for convoy raiding. I will give my reasoning as to why these units should raid and others not.
CAN CONVOY
Subs-arguably their primary role, subs should be able to convoy raid and even get a bonus over other units.
CA-a fast capital ship, they were often used for convoy raiding, to supply some oomph to the surface fleets. This also would help to make CA’s worth 12ipcs.
Tac-considered the close air support aircraft, I think it is easy to take their dive bombing skills to the water or vice versa.
DD-an argument could be made for their inclusion, lots of smaller vessels can conduct a pretty decent blockade provided no bigger ships or aircraft arrive on scene. They also have the speed and ASW capabilities to help.
CANNOT CONVOY
Ftrs-already a really awesome unit, and needs to focus on its air superiority mission over ground attack.
BMB-same as above, they already kick lots of a** and have that huge range.
BB-I can’t think of any nation in its right mind that would use BBs in this exposed mission unless that power had no chance to contest naval superiority and had nothing better to do with those ships.(Germany)
CV-same as above, to valuable of an asset for this mission type. They would be covering the raiding DD’s and CA’s, but not doing it themselves.
Of course I am bringing in wayyyy too much logic into this game, it is evident that logic is not Larry’s cup o’ tea. (see my comments on aa guns)
EDIT: a** is a swear word? I’m all for a swear blocker because I’ve got better things to do than read that, but who’s the evangelist that decided which words were swears? I guess what I am asking is where is the list of the 7 words you can’t type on A&A.org?
