Avoiding Infantry blobs. Change their Cost to 3.2!

I should also add that for a “bid”, we give the US “improved shipyards” and that seems to balance things out.

Yeah that makes sense

Research is super fun, but can seriously unbalance the game if a player gets lucky with their first couple rolls. Therefore, we play that the player chooses which tech to research, however better techs have a lower chance of being successfully researched.

The mechanism of researching is the same, you buy research tokens (dice rolls), roll for success, if none hit the tokens are banked for next turn and can roll again at no cost, if successful the tech is gained and the tokens are removed and must be rebought to do more research . The cost of each token (die roll) is increased to 8 IPC (normally is 5). But, tier 1 techs will be successfully researched with a roll of 3 or lower, tier 2 with roll of 2 or lower, and tier 3 with roll of 1:

(3/6 chance) 1. adv artillery, inc factory prod . || mech infantry, war bonds
(2/6 chance) 2. long-range aircraft, radar . . . . || paratroopers, rockets
(1/6 chance) 3. heavy bombers, super subs . . || jet fighters, improved shipyards

To balance out how multiple techs are gained, we separated complimentary tech into opposing groups to prevent them from easily being researched too quickly back-back and becoming OP. To research a tier 2 or 3 tech at least one tech from the tier below must be already obtained from WITHIN the branch. Note, the techs are separated into left and right branches.

So to get heavy bombers (left, tier 3), you could research adv artillery or factory prod (left, tier 1) then radar or long-range air (left, tier 2). Then, to get jet fighters (right, tier 3), you’d have to also research 2 corresponding lower tier techs in the right branch, because adv artillery/radar/etc. don’t count towards the necessary lower tier techs for the right branch.

Thoughts?

@RogerCooper said in "East & West" by Imp Games - Discussion:

@barnee I will use an option on the defense strength of tanks, with a default of 3. I have started working on this for a bit every day. Right now I am adapting everything to the Big_World map. When that is done I will create a custom map for East & West.

For completeness, there are two tank types: the tank attacks at three and defends at two. The heavy tank attacks at four and defends at three. The soviets start out with access to both tank types.

Considering different values for infantry depending on power:

Germany 2-2
Russia 2-1, cost 2 (1914 1-1)
Italy 1-1 (1914 1-2)
Japan 1-2
Austria (1914 1-1)
France 1-1 (1914 1-2)
Britain 1-1 (1914 2-1)
USA 2-1
China 0-1

@Dauvio:

To bad you don’t have the VANN FORMULAS, that will tell you exactly what you need to know.  8-)

You wrote this on my YouTube channel… tell me why I shouldn’t block you from making these types of comments.

“I’m all for custom maps, but please game masters only stick to that, and nothing else. Leave the rest to the Grand Masters.  I wish us Grand Masters can tell that to Larry Harris (SO CALL WAR GAMING) that!!!  He is exactly like Ernő Rubik the inventor of the Rubik’s Cube, but Ernő Rubik didn’t know how to solve it.  Larry Harris is a embarrassment to the Grand Master’s community of games (that’s all the board, and video games that ever existed).  He is only there to make money on all you people on selling you flawed A&A games. He doesn’t care about anybody else except himself.  And for those who follow him like a god, your lucky you didn’t bump into a Grand Master in person either!!! SO SAITH A GRAND MASTER!!! Yeah it’s my PATTON, STEVE JOB’S attitude again. Without guys like use you people would still be stuck in the stone age, and Larry Harris is below the stone age, and us Grand Masters is the highest level you people can get which I highly doubt you will ever get to that level because of Larry Harris!!! :D :D :D LOL!!! And that is me being very generous with you people. HAPPY HUNTING EVERYONE!!!”

That’s an interesting idea.  Indeed, the actual history justifies fighting for specific islands and this would help to reinforce that as well as promote action in the Pacific.  Something to ponder….

A lot of this could have dropped a few days ago Red. Let’s say YG had purposely moved your thread. Well only moderators can do that not YG. You wanted the board policed and actively lobbied for it and you got it. Now that the rules aren’t acting in your favor you’re upset and insulting people…again.

In your deletion thread you started acusing anyone against you point of view as throwing temper tantrums. I and some others simply pointed out there were reasons to delete threads you started hurling the insults. If YG’s friends are backing him you shouldn’t wonder why. He’s  done more for this site and the game than a lot of people and has helped people readily with courtesy and knowledgeable advice.
So yeah his friends will go to bat for him.

You haven’t been here that long as well as some of your lobbyists for no thread deletion. You guys lobbied for a site change people didn’t like for reasons other than censoring you.

This site has a culture and most of us can get along just fine without going ballistic. I even posted that I could see why you guys were mad about lost threads and suggeated burying the hatchet. You didn’t. Apologies were made and that still wasn’t good enough. So you escaleted it. You wanted intervention well you got it.

There are plenty of rivalries on this site and people who flat out don’t like eachother at all. However few of them have ever lobbied for a dramatic change over one thread. If you want to sit and talk the way you do to people like you have, I guarantee people will rally against it.