I’m playing an opponent who is preventing Vichy from occurring by having the UK attack Italy’s destroyer and transport in SZ96 from SZ98 with a destroyer, cruiser, tactical from aircraft carrier in SZ98 and a fighter from Malta. Italy’s destroyer is sunk (and transport). Then in the Non-Combat phase, UK loads the transport in SZ98 and lands UK troops in Southern France. Since France is still an ally at this point, this is legal and effectively prevents Vichy mode, since Germany will now have to take Southern France on its next turn. There isn’t any way to prevent this as far as I can tell.
G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
-
did you guys know that gamerman is really gamertron, and that he’s a super intelligent AI system? :lol:
of course i’m just messin’ but thought the name sounds pretty cool……
-
Was just checking on a preview of today’s NFL game, and this was on the side…… :lol:
It’s about the strategic importance of islands :evil:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-10-18/why-china-s-territorial-disputes-could-mean-war??cmpid=taboola.video
-
Ps. I agree with axis that this whole thing about islands can only be settled by a G40 balance mod death match between gamer and Adam. Gamer, you game?!?
-
^^loser quits g40 forever :wink:
-
not really. it will just be fun to see a clash of the titans! lets go. You DTF, Gamer?
-
Curious if there would be any interest in a mod which changes 1/10 of what Balanced Mod does. So keeps the SBR changes and changes a few NOs but doesn’t add any in the Med, for example.
-
::crickets:: on proposed death match. Gamer. . . . . . . . .
-
Re-playing Skyrim, this time on the console, so <gasp>haven’t been online for several hours
Yeah yeah I knew it was only a matter of time before everyone wanted a match
There’s a good chance we’ll be meeting in the playoffs in a month anyway - you know, as long as we don’t meet up with JDOW</gasp> -
My two cents about the Med Islands: Sicily should be treated as an adjacent land territory to Southern Italy. That would make things interesting!
-
My two cents about the Med Islands: Sicily should be treated as an adjacent land territory to Southern Italy. That would make things interesting!
I agree, but I think that’s outside the realm of BM. It might be useful to keep this idea in mind though.
-
It sure would, because it’s not easily accessible to the Germans like North Italy
-
My two cents about the Med Islands: Sicily should be treated as an adjacent land territory to Southern Italy. That would make things interesting!
Woah, u just blew my mind Karl. And actually it would very easy to modify the XML so that Sicily is considered adjacent to Southern Italy for TripleA purposes. Would the consequences be staggering? How do you foresee this affecting the game?
-
My two cents about the Med Islands: Sicily should be treated as an adjacent land territory to Southern Italy. That would make things interesting!
Woah, u just blew my mind Karl. And actually it would very easy to modify the XML so that Sicily is considered adjacent to Southern Italy for TripleA purposes. Would the consequences be staggering? How do you foresee this affecting the game?
It would provide a “soft” Allied beachhead in the south that they could give/take without having to go “all in” as if they were hitting Rome. Attacking S. Italy straight on is a rarity these days. The give and take of the Island would lend a little historical credibility to a Southern European campaign.
Plus it would allow Italy to deprive the UK NO, giving a lot more land-play in the Med instead of just Italy just hunkering down in Rome.
-
I like the idea of the Sicily link too.
-
The Sicily idea is cool Karl7.
I would like to see a territory value of 1 put on Mariannas.
We may take 1 out of Tokiyo to keep the same income for Japan (or somewhere else ich don’t mind). -
Why and why precisely Mariannas?
-
Why and why precisely Mariannas?
- Mariannas would be historically better embeded in the game.
- BM 2.0 provides a bigger area for new strategys and is helping to take advantage of the full size
of the board. - Mariannas will draw more attention being a 1 ipc territory an there for add more Salt into Japans and US gameplay.
-
interesting point. I should point out that Marianas is currently worth 5 to either side, if that side controls the other 3 islands in the “vital forward bases” NO. And it is often the last of the four islands to be taken in achieving the NO (and the first to be taken in defeating in it), so it does see quite a bit of action already?
-
Why does BM require you to sacrifice Vichy to execute the Italy Strong strategy? Any sensible Allied player would keep the British tank until last defending France so they can move it to Southern France. This prevents you from retreating from France as Germany.
Is this intended or is it an accident?
Second question: Why not require units to retreat to where they came from? The retreat to a single territory rule is gameable. Is the problem here just that the engine (I guess) doesn’t support it?
-
Why does BM require you to sacrifice Vichy to execute the Italy Strong strategy? Any sensible Allied player would keep the British tank until last defending France so they can move it to Southern France. This prevents you from retreating from France as Germany.
Is this intended or is it an accident?
Second question: Why not require units to retreat to where they came from? The retreat to a single territory rule is gameable. Is the problem here just that the engine (I guess) doesn’t support it?
1. As in Italy takes France? It would indeed be a sacrifice you would have to make if you are doing that, but it’s a really shallow sacrifice in any case.
2. To my knowledge, no game on TripleA works like that so it would have to be coded by hand. But one problem with units retreating where they came from is casualty choice. At best it complicates the process, and edit mode would certainly be required for every retreat. I personally prefer the current system even without those drawbacks.
Suggested Topics
