Technology

Ok, well we are making some progress.

Id like to stick with 12 techs though. 6 is neat, simple, condensed. But 12 has been the standard for games of this scale for 5 years now and counting.
The 6 techs seems like a step backward, just like taking away tech tokens was a step backward.
Perhaps if we have 12 techs we could have 2 charts, one with techs favorable to the allies, some with techs favorable to the CP, you can research either chart, but the UK might not want to risk getting advanced subs.

Now for some counter criticism. ill try to rationalize how I came to these suggestions a little bit and why.
1. Undersea Warfare wrapped advanced subs into it so the Central powers can use the tech too.
2. This is a no brainer tech
3. Wrapping this into #1 would make that tech a paragraph long though perhaps 3 & 5 could merge
4. This was a way of getting better artillery without cutting and pasting the standard “Advanced Artillery” from 1940. Also, this makes it an AIR breakthrough, that planes can neuter.
5. Not necessarily updated mines, but MORE mines, MAGNETIC mines, or DUMMY mines (to make mine clearing take longer) Think of this as similar to the Radar tech in 1940
6. Im surprised you like this one, it has gone through a few incarnations, but this seems to be the most reasonable approach so far.

1. Also surprised you like this, but seeing as 6 IPC is being rumored as too much for tanks, this might be a good tech. OR bumping tanks defense to ‘2’ as an alternative?
2. I ripped this off 1940 to fill up the chart, and its something ECONOMIC. Best of 2 dice makes it not god awful like it is in 1940
3. Chem warfare, as we have discussed seems to have been fleshed out well enough.
4. Conscription is another grasping at straws I made for an ECONOMIC tech, something like Improved Shipyards instead? Or perhaps heavy industry? Artillery are 10 IPCs for 3?
5. Im actually kind of proud of this one. I watched ‘The Lost Battalion’ recently and radio directed artillery was an important development of the war.
6. I want this tech rule set to be STAND ALONE. I know people are going to make rail rules later, so I could ignore rails, but if someone doesn’t use some other rail rule set and only uses these techs I still wanted a movement bonus tech in here somewhere. Perhaps just “your Infantry can move 2 amongst territories you control” but that tech would be trash for the US.

@ossel:

6. Naval Aviation - Your Battleships may serve as a landing space for one of your own aircraft. Battleships attack and defend at 5 with naval air superiority.

I assume you’re referring here to HMS Furious, the hybrid carrier/dreadnought, but I’d argue against this upgrade.  First, Furious wasn’t a battleship; she was a one-off (and extreme) battlecruiser design, with the armour of a light cruiser and with outrageously large (18") guns – of which she carried only two, which was completely inadequate for proper salvo firing.  The combination of a light hull with oversized guns resulted in a ship in which sheared rivet heads would fly around inside the vessel every time her main battery went off.  Her ability to function as a capital ship was almost worthless, and she carried nothing like the eight or more main guns (12", 13.5", 14", 15" or 16") of a real battleship.  Second, in order to have an experimental flight deck fitted during construction, she had to sacrifice 50% of her planned main armament, bring her down to a single 18" gun.  So the idea of a battleship gaining a flight deck while losing none of its capabilities doesn’t work: Furious was a battlecruiser conversion, not a battlecruiser tech upgrade.  Third, as I recall, the first attempts to take off and land from Furious (in 1917, I think) were less than stellar: I think the pilot performing these experiments was killed on his second or third try.  Naval aviation at that time was more of an experimental technique than a viable combat method.

Like ossel, I’m for 6 techs, a la A&A Classic.

Instead of a reroll for Chemical warfare, how about the following to simulate gas masks:

If Chemical Warfare is successful against you, halve the number of infantry immobilized, rounded down (4 becomes 2, 3 becomes 1, 2 becomes 1, 1 becomes 0).

For Radio Communication:

For each artillery unit of an ally in the same territory, one infantry or tank is promoted to the with artillery support box. Allied artillery does not participate in battle.

Instead of Advanced Aeronautics:

Strategic Bombing - Fighters within 2 spaces of an enemy capital may perform a strategic bombing raid (Thus Germany can hit Paris or London from Belgium) instead of engaging in combat. Each fighter in the raid rolls one die, deducting 1 IPC from the attacked power’s treasury for each 1 or 2 rolled (the airborne version of USW).

For Undersea Warfare (Anti-Submarine Warfare):

Your Cruisers prevent enemy subs from submerging in battle or moving through a sea zone you occupy at a 1:1 ratio.

Since the first aircraft carrier wasn’t operational until October 1918, change Naval Aviation to:

Your fighters may be assigned to a naval combat in a sea zone adjacent to the territory they occupy. Fighters in naval combat behave in the same way as in land combat: establish air supremacy, strafe enemy ships, boost surface ships’ combat values by 1.

Replace Tanks with AA Guns, which were pretty much born in WWI, although primitive:

AA Guns - If enemy aircraft are present in a battle, roll one die before the battle for air supremacy begins. On a roll of 1, an enemy fighter is destroyed. If an enemy is conducting a strategic bombing raid, roll one die before the enemy fighters roll to determine IPC damage. On a roll of 1, an enemy fighter is destroyed. - Could be changed to roll one die per artillery unit, but getting the altitude right was tough in WWI.

All in all, I’d say that for chemical warfare smoke shell was more important than gas. It was heavily used in the last year of the war; essentially it simulates the effects of fog - cancelling out the defensive advantages of entrenched infantry.
But this would need to be coordinated with a range of weather effects, which in turn means each turn being a specific season.

@oztea:

5. Not necessarily updated mines, but MORE mines, MAGNETIC mines, or DUMMY mines (to make mine clearing take longer) Think of this as similar to the Radar tech in 1940

Magnetic mines were a WWII invention.  They were first used in 1939 by Germany, and they initially baffled Britain until they captured one and figured out how they worked.

For economic, why not consider the old A&A Classic: everything costs one less.

Because I like making rules. Here is some rules I can fire out real quick to reflect these via the game mechanics.
Im not saying Im for throwing all mine out that you don’t like (we need more people to participate in this discussion as you and I are)
But if the consensus is that some need swapped out I am all for that.

Anti-Aircraft guns - During the dogfight phase any number of your artillery may fire at enemy planes, scoring hits on 1. Any artillery that fire in this way may NOT fire in normal combat.
Bombers - your aircraft may attack enemy supplies. When strafing, instead of attacking an enemy unit, roll a die, the enemy must surrender that many IPCs to the bank. The number may not exceed the printed value of the territory ( I really don’t like the bombers tech, there was really no industrial bombing in WWI)
Stormtrooper tactics (both sides) - In one combat on your turn, Roll a die, that many of your infantry attack at 3
Long-range battleship bombardment (Replacement: Cruiser Bombardment) Your Cruisers may fire during offshore bombardment.
Creeping Barrage - Your artillery may fire two shots at 2 instead of their normal shot at 3. With air supremacy they may fire two shots at 3 instead of one shot at 4
Pill Boxes  - You may treat one infantry as if it were a tank (absorbs a hit, defends at 1) in any battle in your original territories.

@wove100:

For economic, why not consider the old A&A Classic: everything costs one less.

Infantry would be a steal at 2 IPC

@oztea:

Bombers - your aircraft may attack enemy supplies. When strafing, instead of attacking an enemy unit, roll a die, the enemy must surrender that many IPCs to the bank. The number may not exceed the printed value of the territory ( I really don’t like the bombers tech, there was really no industrial bombing in WWI)

I see World War I bombing as an anti-morale exercise, that’s why I think it should be limited to a strategic bombing raid type of move, with the IPCs being deducted representing a nation’s decreased productivity due to bombing. No problem with maxing it out at IPC value.

It would be all non infantry units cost one less.

I am firmly against any form of economic bombing in this game.
It was a RARITY in WWI, and even so caused minimal damage. More was done with blimps, which harmed morale not industry. (though that could affect IPCs)
But still, economic bombing was more rare than some of the other things I proposed.

As for Naval Aviation, you may be right.
But the game mechanics make it difficult. unless we only let planes particpate in coastal naval conflicts.
Or, conversely, the Battleship that is carrying the plane CANT ATTACK but the plane boost the attack of the cruisers to 4?
What about that.

6 techs is a step backward. Is the problem that you don’t think we can get 12 good techs?
My problem is that if we only have 6 really good techs people will be constantly researching. There needs to be some so-so techs to make the process a little more risky and a little more flavorful.

@wove100:

Instead of Advanced Aeronautics:

Strategic Bombing - Fighters within 2 spaces of an enemy capital may perform a strategic bombing raid (Thus Germany can hit Paris or London from Belgium) instead of engaging in combat. Each fighter in the raid rolls one die, deducting 1 IPC from the attacked power�s treasury for each 1 or 2 rolled (the airborne version of USW).

I actually like this as a placeholder for ‘bombers’ until we get actual sculpts (from WOTC or elsewhere). Maybe have it have a morale or unit damage effect though, instead of economic.

Yea that makes sense for a bomber piece, but not for the fighter piece we have.
It was an exercise in attacking enemy morale, not industry.

Is this a good replacement for conscription?

Industrial Might - Fighters, Transports, Cruisers and Battleships cost 1 IPC less

We need to get these down to “Larry Simple” Techs. So perhaps the way to go is divide the charts into ALLIED and CENTRAL POWERS
You can research on either chart, but some techs on the other chart might not help you.

Allied Powers Techs
1. Destroyers - Your Cruisers prevent enemy subs from submerging or moving through them at a 1:1 ratio
2. Tank Pioneer - You may build tanks before turn 4, after turn 4 you can buy tanks for 5 IPCs.
3. Advanced Aeronautics - Your aircraft become 3/3/3 (up from 2/2/2)
4. Radio Communications - During combats where friendly forces are also in the contested zone, roll a die. That many friendly artillery may be used to boost your attacking forces.
5. Industrial Might - Fighters, Transports, Cruisers and Battleships cost 1 IPC less
6. Creeping Barrage - Your artillery may fire two shots at 2 instead of their normal shot at 3. With air supremacy they may fire two shots at 3 instead of one shot at 4

Central Powers Techs
1. Chemical Warfare - In one attack this turn, roll a die: 1-4 that many infantry do not roll defensively; 5-6: No effect. If the defender also has the Chemical Warfare Breakthrough he may have the die rerolled.
2. Advanced Submarines - Roll a die, that many of your subs can submerge before the first round of combat. (if permitted)
3. Battle Cruisers - Nominate one cruiser in any battle, that cruiser requires two hits to sink and can bombard.
4. Rail Artillery - Your artillery in uncontested territory may support a unit in a battle in an adjacent territory.
5. Stormtroopers - In one attack this turn, roll a die. That many of your infantry attack at 3.
6. Barbed Wire - When defending roll a die, that many enemy infantry are reduced to attacking at ‘1’

Another thing we should consider is the cost of techs-  With no National Objectives, contested territories, low IPC territories outside western Europe and capitals, and Africa not worth much, there won’t be a lot of money to go around, at least until an Allied or CP country falls.

I mean, Germany starts with 35, a good sum (and the most in the game), but may not rise much higher for a few turns.  It will likely lose its Africa territories and make slow gains in Europe (one combat round and not making money off of contested territories).  With two or three fronts, can Germany afford to put 5 IPCs into Tech?

Britain?  30 IPCs, likely gain a couple from German Africa territories.  They have to split their income between India and UK.  Not likely to want to put 5 IPC into Tech.

Austria?  26 IPCs.  not likely to grow above 30 quickly.

Russia, France, Ottoman, and Italy will likely fall below 20 in the first few turns.

The US only gets 20.  They need transports and troops.

I suppose one could invade a few neutrals to gain more IPC’s/turn… but is it worth it?

So who will roll for tech?

But IPCs aren’t just money. They also represent manpower and productivity. They represent the total resources of a nation. They are also the only way in the game to represent morale without designing and adding a morale track. WWI bombing affected morale, which affected manpower, which affected production.

Reduce it further. In a strategic bombing raid, only a roll of 1 deducts 1 IPC. Even max it out at half of the capital’s IPC value, so the most that can be lost in a turn is the cost of 1 infantry (London, Paris) or 1 artillery (Berlin).

By restricting it to capitals it makes it less likely to happen. I would say reduce it to adjacent territory, but then Germany can’t hit London. It should be a tech modifying fighters because we ain’t getting bombers in A&A1914 any other way.

Well it has been suggested you get a free tech every 4th turn (or maybe 3rd)

However, we could consider alternatives: such as

Method A:
Rolls cost 1 IPC. Roll the dice, then those are your options to buy this turn.
If you roll a 3, 5, and 6. you can then BUY any one of those techs for 4 more IPCs
If you rolled doubles or triples that tech is FREE

Method B:
Tech Tokens

Method C:
Research as normal: 5 IPCs per roll. But get a FREE tech every 3rd turn (random of course)
The allied/CP separate charts would help here.

Method D:
WOAH NELLY
Free Tech every 4th turn
Pay 2 IPCs every turn to keep your research teams funded. and on the 4th turn get 2 Free random techs.

@BJCard:

Another thing we should consider is the cost of techs-  With no National Objectives, contested territories, low IPC territories outside western Europe and capitals, and Africa not worth much, there won’t be a lot of money to go around, at least until an Allied or CP country falls.

I mean, Germany starts with 35, a good sum (and the most in the game), but may not rise much higher for a few turns.  It will likely lose its Africa territories and make slow gains in Europe (one combat round and not making money off of contested territories).  With two or three fronts, can Germany afford to put 5 IPCs into Tech?

Britain?  30 IPCs, likely gain a couple from German Africa territories.  They have to split their income between India and UK.  Not likely to want to put 5 IPC into Tech.

Austria?  26 IPCs.  not likely to grow above 30 quickly.

Russia, France, Ottoman, and Italy will likely fall below 20 in the first few turns.

The US only gets 20.  They need transports and troops.

I suppose one could invade a few neutrals to gain more IPC’s/turn… but is it worth it?

So who will roll for tech?

I’ve never played A&A50, so I don’t know tech tokens from my elbow, but what about something along the lines of paying 1 IPC to get a die roll toward a particular tech. If you roll a 1, you get the tech. If you roll a 2-6, nothing happens. The following turn, you can spend 1 additional IPC to research the same tech. On a roll of 1-2, you get the tech. If you roll 3-6, nothing happens. Or, you could just roll again without spending any additional money, hoping for a roll of 1. Continue in this vein until you get the tech (guaranteed in 6 turns).

Or, perhaps each alliance researches tech together, guaranteeing a tech in 2 turns if each power puts 1 IPC toward it (this does, of course favor the allies, since its 4 vs 3, then later 5 vs 3). Perhaps only 2 or 3 IPC may be spent each turn by each alliance.

Additionally, money spent researching cannot be reallocated to another tech. If you’re going after Naval Aviation, you have to stick with it, or abandon the previous IPC sunk into research to go after another tech.

Edit: deleted an extra “if.”

Tech tokens was:
Buy tokens for 5 IPCs
Roll as many dice as you have tokens
If you get a tech, discard ALL your tokens.
If you don’t, save your tokens for next turn.

Repeat process next turn.
So it made sense for everyone to have one token, and roll every turn. It was fun.

I would suggest.
A) Make tokens 3 IPCs; AND/OR
B) If you get a tech, discard HALF your tokens

That way if you invest heavily in tech, you get to keep some investment.
(^honestly this may be the way to go, Keep half your tokens^)

@oztea:

1. Destroyers - Your Cruisers prevent enemy subs from submerging or moving through them at a 1:1 ratio
3. Battle Cruisers - Nominate one cruiser in any battle, that cruiser requires two hits to sink and can bombard.

Number 1: this kind of implies that your cruisers have been “upgraded” to destroyers (which would in fact be a downgrade because destroyers are smaller).  Fitting depth charges on cruisers wouldn’t work either because they’re not fast or agile enough to make a decent attack run against a sub.  Maybe you could say that the cruisers are now escorted by destroyers…but it sounds odd for a tech upgrade to refer to an invisible unit.

Number 3: Battlecruisers (a.k.a. “eggshells armed with hammers”) weren’t necessarily much better armoured that heavy cruisers, and at least three British ones were only armoured on the scale of light cruisers.  Giving them just improved firepower would be better.

Comments noted.
But giving cruisers powers vs subs is much more Larry-esqe than the tech saying

You can build destroyers. Open up your box of 1940 stuff (or 1942) and bust out the destroyers, unless you forgot them at home. Now paint them, or assign mismatched colors and confuse everybody at the game table.

From a simplicity standpoint we can imagine a destroyer is tacked on to a group of 3 or 4 cruisers.

Perhaps battlecruisers would be better if your cruisers attacked at 4 and defend at 4 on the first round of naval combat?

@CWO:

Number 1: this kind of implies that your cruisers have been “upgraded” to destroyers (which would in fact be a downgrade because destroyers are smaller).� Fitting depth charges on cruisers wouldn’t work either because they’re not fast or agile enough to make a decent attack run against a sub.� Maybe you could say that the cruisers are now escorted by destroyers…but it sounds odd for a tech upgrade to refer to an invisible unit.

But we don’t have destroyers. Cruisers are the closest we’ve got, so that’s why the ability gets added to cruisers. I suppose you could add it to transports to simulate convoys, but they’d still be sitting ducks without protection.

Plus, one cruiser in A&A does not equal one cruiser in real life. Think of the scale. A cruiser in A&A clearly represents multiple cruisers. With this tech it would now represent both cruisers and destroyers because we don’t have a destroyer sculpt.