@black_elk Rock On !!!.png
G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
-
@Shin:
Esp since so many of these NOs are supposed to represent morale and whatnot.
correct. morale = war bonds . 8-)
-
Give germans King Tigers!
-
what if u required an allied land unit to stop vichy, but gave the brits a marine in gib? that way they have a choice to use the marine and sacrifice the ca or burn up a tt
Soulbighter, see my last post for why an immediate G1 Vichy conversion is not workable (p.s., was originally coded that way months ago, and changed after play testing revealed these gameplay issues). When u getting that BM game started? :evil:
Also, I think I agree with the general thrust of MrRoboto’s post. Would requiring UK land units to prevent Vichy conversion allay these concerns? This way, thwarting Vichy involves sacrificing a transport and higher opportunity costs (still a reasonable option, but costlier). Perhaps even just adding +5 for Axis control of London would be sufficient to make UK think twice before throwing fighters at the problem?
Anybody think its fine the way it is?
-
Well I think the goal is to maybe make securing Vichy a little easier for axis. Adding a marine to gib would make it harder (causing God knows what other sorts of havoc). Also, we have really tried to avoid making changes to the starting unit set up cuz doing so opens a Pandora’s box and gets everyone’s jimmies rustled.
-
no more than +3 or just +2, if even……
keep in mind that taking london means another 8pc from just the territories, along with a strong strategic position loaded with air and naval bases. and of course don’t forget the huge surge in ipc like 30 or more from capturing the capitol, and also the usual 20 or more gain in tuv from the battle (usually if germany goes SL it will ensure overwhelming odds).
other NOs are usually on top of a much smaller ipc gain, for example, novg or volg.
@Shin:
I think making it a land unit is a good call, as is adding the +5 to Germany for Axis occupation of London.� Getting London is tough under the best of circumstances - there should be a reward for that.� Esp since so many of these NOs are supposed to represent morale and whatnot.
-
no more than +3 or just +2, if even……
keep in mind that taking london means another 8pc from just the territories, along with a strong strategic position loaded with air and naval bases. and of course don’t forget the huge surge in ipc like 30 or more from capturing the capitol, and also the usual 20 or more gain in tuv from the battle (usually if germany goes SL it will ensure overwhelming odds).
other NOs are usually on top of a much smaller ipc gain, for example, novg or volg.
@Shin:
I think making it a land unit is a good call, as is adding the +5 to Germany for Axis occupation of London.� Getting London is tough under the best of circumstances - there should be a reward for that.� Esp since so many of these NOs are supposed to represent morale and whatnot.
London is considerably harder to hold by Germany in Balance Mod since US can liberate UK without the fear of Germany plundering UK income again. In my opinion +5 is probably just right.
-
no more than +3 or just +2, if even……
keep in mind that taking london means another 8pc from just the territories, along with a strong strategic position loaded with air and naval bases. and of course don’t forget the huge surge in ipc like 30 or more from capturing the capitol, and also the usual 20 or more gain in tuv from the battle (usually if germany goes SL it will ensure overwhelming odds).
other NOs are usually on top of a much smaller ipc gain, for example, novg or volg.
@Shin:
I think making it a land unit is a good call, as is adding the +5 to Germany for Axis occupation of London.� Getting London is tough under the best of circumstances - there should be a reward for that.� Esp since so many of these NOs are supposed to represent morale and whatnot.
I’m inclined to agree. Plus there’s a certain elegant simplicity in having all the vCs worth +5 pus
London is considerably harder to hold by Germany in Balance Mod since US can liberate UK without the fear of Germany plundering UK income again. In my opinion +5 is probably just right. -
Yes. The fact that you can’t just take and retake those IPCs makes even fairly desperate liberation attempts a pretty sound policy. Germany needs the +5.
-
My only fear with the +5 is it might be making sea lion too appealing to resist even without the UK ftr loss. Russia is such a bear now why not shoot for sealion 4 or maybe even 5 as an every game option…
A third option could be that if vichy requirements are met any turn after turn 1 that you ignore the, “3. There are no non-french, Allied units in Southern France.” If at any french turn after turn1 there are allied units in southern france the territory becomes hostile, but since germany cannot move into southern france, the ftr/units get a turn to move out and all they have accomplished is delaying vichy 1 turn. Probably too hard to code though…
-
@Infrastructure:
A third option could be that if vichy requirements are met any turn after turn 1 that you ignore the, “3. There are no non-french, Allied units in Southern France.” If at any french turn after turn1 there are allied units in southern france the territory becomes hostile, but since germany cannot move into southern france, the ftr/units get a turn to move out and all they have accomplished is delaying vichy 1 turn. Probably too hard to code though…
Probably unnecessary since it is extremely easy for Germany to air nuke Southern France on round 2 (if it really wants to), and there is little reason for UK to keep supplying southern France with fighters to prevent Vichy after round 1, since the strategic benefits of Vichy France go down considerably after the first round (most of the French units, including the fleet in sz 93, will move out on the first round).
That said, Vichy France does occasionally happen on the second round. An example is my ongoing game with Shin Ji.
-
An example is my ongoing game with Shin Ji.
. . . my ongoing game against Mr. Roboto.**
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37496.msg1514464#msg1514464
-
This might be worth testing, but maybe giving the Japanese a minor in kiangsi or manchuria at start of the game might be an idea.
-
We’ve tried to avoid changing unit starting setup for reasons discussed above (that’s what bids are for).
Jdow take you up on yer offer of a game yet?
-
We’ve tried to avoid changing unit starting setup for reasons discussed above (that’s what bids are for).
Jdow take you up on yer offer of a game yet?
JDOW and I are going to play a non league BM game soon.
-
Hey all. The Mod Squad has been wrestling with the idea of adding a +5 National Objection for German occupation of London. We’ve heard Axis-Dominion’s reasoned objections to it. And we’ve also played a couple Sealion games since the proposal was made.
The concern is this: a +5 bonus may make Sealion too attractive in borderline cases (maybe even overpowered), especially when coupled with Vichy France, and the requirement of using UK lland units to counter Vichy French conversion of territory. On the other hand, it does seem that something is needed to keep UK honest the first couple of rounds.
So here’s another proposal for a Sealion-related NO: Germany gets +5 if it has a land unit in either Egypt or the United Kingdom. This, obviously, would replace Germany’s existing Egypt NO.
What do you guys think? Axis-Domion?
-
I’d say it’s a bit on the weak side, but I’m fine with it.
One thought that occurs to me, perhaps the Germans could get 3 IPCs for any round where the Atlantic did not have transports? Historically, U-Boats sinking commercial shipping was pretty important.
Hrm. Maybe Germans can get a bonus of 3 IPCs anytime their U-Boats are convoying in the Atlantic?
-
So here’s another proposal for a Sealion-related NO: Germany gets +5 if it has a land unit in either Egypt or the United Kingdom. This, obviously, would replace Germany’s existing Egypt NO.
What do you guys think? Axis-Domion?
I like your suggestion guys.
-
another possible consideration would be to leave Egypt NO alone, but add that if the germans occupy all of the brit isles they earn the bonus. so long as they keep the allies off they earn it. i think that isn’t so overpowering but still offers a significant incentive.
-
@Shin:
I’d say it’s a bit on the weak side, but I’m fine with it.
One thought that occurs to me, perhaps the Germans could get 3 IPCs for any round where the Atlantic did not have transports? Historically, U-Boats sinking commercial shipping was pretty important.
Hrm. Maybe Germans can get a bonus of 3 IPCs anytime their U-Boats are convoying in the Atlantic?
Interesting ideas, but they ain’t really Sealion specific, which is what we’re trying to address.
Axis-dominion, while your idea could certainly work, it does increase the total amount of PUs Germany can obtain from NOs by 5. Do you think this idea is more or less ‘overpowered’ than the idea of keeping the total amount of Germany’s NO Pus the same, but making the Egypt NO easier to achieve (by adding the UK route)?
Also, would your proposed NO include Ireland?
-
Yea, I know my idea wasn’t Sealion-specific. But since y’all want a compromise solution, I was thinking that my idea might help to give Germany that extra oomph it needs.
3 IPCs for dominating the Atlantic (pretty tough to do in most games) seems reasonable to me. Then we can just go with the shared Egypt and London NO.
Suggested Topics
