WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread

@regularkid Pejon 88 made an underpowered attack into normandy, which i scrambled to, the land units killed each other and the plane had to land in normandy. 1 quick escape to Blighty on the french turn, and we now have double the amount of garlic munchers over here…a mixed blessing I suppose…:grinning: :grinning:

I thought the same as you about the mech, Simon, but I didn’t realize they defended on a 3 when they are with a tank. It’s definitely a change, along with Strat bombers attacking on a 3 and carrier planes being able to defend land and neighboring sea zones. I’m still playing my first PtV game so am also trying to reserve judgment. When you’re so used to the old way, these significant changes take some getting used to.

The mech change does succeed in reducing the amount of mech (but not eliminating) and increasing the number of tanks in the game again, and I think that’s a good thing. They wanted to reduce the cheesy numerous fast cannon fodder mech were at 4, I believe. Sometimes I wonder if it would be a good idea to double all the IPC values of everything so that we could fine tune the values a little more on certain territories and units. Then mech could be 9 (not 8 or 10), effectively a 4 and a 1/2. If PtV isn’t finalized yet, maybe this is something to consider? Obviously a departure from all past A&A (goodbye 3 IPC infantry), but so is a lot of other things you guys have done here, so why not? :)

Oh, and I don’t mean doubling all the values just because of the mech. I think it would allow you to fine-tune the values of various territories, NO’s, as well as certain unit costs. Could be a very beautiful thing.

There’s another way, maybe. You can have a cost of i e 4,5 always rounded up. When buying two you get them for 9. Buying one would cost 5.

@regularkid hey guys…quick question…Im playing a game trying to attack a lone tt with a dd in celebes surrounded by carriers…the new version of the game states that a combat unit is needed for a carrier adjacent scramble but when i attack it gives the scramble option. Back on pg 7 of this thread you seemed to give the impression this wouldnt be the case in the new version. Any ideas on which is right?

@wizmark Game will give the option to scramble, but if you’re playing the newest version you aren’t allowed to scramble unless there are surface warships defending the sea zone.

@Adam514 we are playing version 4.0…just tested in offline mode…the anzac dd went to celebes to attack an undefended tt, the scrambles came up and both planes scrambled into the combat. I guess i can just choose the no scramble option to move on but wanted to check which option is ‘correct’!

@wizmark You must choose no.

There is an error where it is forcing me to go through manch to attack korea instead of directly from the seazone below korea and manch. This adds an extra movement to the planes. Is this a known issue?

@Adam514 said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

@wizmark Game will give the option to scramble, but if you’re playing the newest version you aren’t allowed to scramble unless there are surface warships defending the sea zone.

Will this be fixed in the next version, or something all players have to be aware of? This is the first time I can remember hearing about it, by the way.

@regularkid What about tech? It doesn’t appear to be working. I know we played a game and realized the option for airborne forces never came up after a player had developed it. I’m pretty sure something wierd is going on with jets as well. The image of the fighter on the board does not change. Super subs dont get strips, etc. Thanks. Love the map/

@regularkid

Ill sign up for a year on the nerdherd group $10/month option str8 away if you fix tech and an an options to develop tech on both charts at the same time, get multiple techs on the same turn, keep tokens on both charts. Thanks again

I have to reiterate: The DOW-situation between Japan and Russia is just simply bad. What I can see there’s a 100 % RDOW before turn 6. Japan has no incentive whatsoever to waste land-units up north until the RDOW comes.

I think the construction in BM3 is so much better.

@trulpen said in WW2 Path to Victory - Feedback Thread:

I have to reiterate: The DOW-situation between Japan and Russia is just simply bad. What I can see there’s a 100 % RDOW before turn 6. Japan has no incentive whatsoever to waste land-units up north until the RDOW comes.

I think the construction in BM3 is so much better.

I haven’t noticed any difference. What is the difference? And how do you see it affecting games?

There’s a big difference.

P2V: “Mongolia: If Japan declares war on Russia, Mongolian territories and units will automatically turn Russian at the end of Japan’s turn.”

BM3: “An additional 2 PUs per each “open” Lend-Lease lane, when Russia is at war with European Axis, if Japan has also declared war on Russia” along with the original Soviet-Mongolian Defence Pact.

In effect this means that a JDOW on Russia activates Mongolia for the russians. Strong incentive for Japan not to. It also means that Russia won’t negate any income-increase when DOW on Japan, which makes a lot less of incentive not to.

I can simply say that in my handful of games the effect is not what the creators wished for. Very anachronistic.

I’d like the BM3-construction to be active in P2V as well. It made for a lot more tension up north, both Russia and Japan hesitating to DOW and wanting the other nation to do it.