LHTR: Larry Harris Tournament Rules

But if you chose them all the time, most NAs will never get used, while Enigma Decoded and Colonial Garrison will be used almost 100% of the time. (It is, after all, the best complimentary set of NAs in the game, especially in a KJF scenario!)

That would do it, Switch, but most players are used to two random NAs per nation, one choice for Germany, Japan and one for the allies.

In the “standard” version of 2.0’s NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

We do not use NAs to balance games, we use NA to have variation in the games. Frankly I like the NA from LHTR 2.0 as I like the NA from LHTR 1.3.

To have balanced game we play without NA, and we have started to use the bid.

@Jennifer:

In the “standard” version of 2.0’s NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

Voice of experience?  Seems you thought the NA’s in the previous version were way to much in favor of the Axis, and the new ones were even more so.  :roll: :evil:

I had this view too…but now I’m thinking that they may be a little more balanced than it appears, it boils down to “how you use them”.

No, in the original the NAs were stronger for the Axis.  In the new LHTR the NAs are back to being stronger for the allies.

Why can’t we just have NAs that are balanced for Axis and Allies?

Anyway, I’ll give 2.0 3 more games, if after 5 games, there’s no demonstrable way for the Axis to win without lucky dice, I’ll write off LHTR as allied propaganda and go back to 1.3.

@Jennifer:

No, in the original the NAs were stronger for the Axis.  In the new LHTR the NAs are back to being stronger for the allies.

Why can’t we just have NAs that are balanced for Axis and Allies?

Anyway, I’ll give 2.0 3 more games, if after 5 games, there’s no demonstrable way for the Axis to win without lucky dice, I’ll write off LHTR as allied propaganda and go back to 1.3.

When we’re done with our current game, I’ll take the Axis, no bid. Roll for NA’s.

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

@Emperor:

@Jennifer:

In the “standard” version of 2.0’s NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

Voice of experience?  Seems you thought the NA’s in the previous version were way to much in favor of the Axis, and the new ones were even more so.  :roll: :evil:

I had this view too…but now I’m thinking that they may be a little more balanced than it appears, it boils down to “how you use them”.

I agree, NAs usefulness is connected to their utilization.
For this reason we allow the chosing of NA. For example, if someone would try the submarine warfare with Germany, may choose the NAs related to the UBoote, etc.
They are not to balance the game, but to differentiate strategy and planning.

@Jennifer:

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

hehe…shouldn’t take that long…I see storm clouds gathering.

Which is the latest edition of lhtr, and where do I find it?
I think that the first post of this thread should be edited, so that it contains a link to the  latest verision of lhtr.
cheers  /  Perry

Go here: Home » House Rules » Axis & Allies Revised.

Or use the URL : http://www.axisandallies.org/LHTR

By the way I am having a big doubt on Strategic Bombing Limitation. LHTR states:
“The maximum combined damage inflicted in one turn by all strategic bombing raids on one
industrial complex and any rocket attack on the same industrial complex is the territory’s income
value.”

It means that If I am UK and I SBR GER then I may inflict a maximum of 10 IPC of combined damage to Germany.
Moreover if also USA SBR GER, in the same round, the maximum damage is still 10 IPC.
So in one round Germany may receive a maximum damage of 20 IPC. Is this correct?

That’s correct if you only target Germany’s IC.  If you have more than one bomber you can target Germany and Southern increasing UK’s damage potential to 16 and the US’s potential to 16 for a total of $32. You would need at least 3 UK bombers and 3 US bombers to theoretically reach the maximum potential.

Thanks!

Realistically you should expect to lose 1 bomber each (1 US, 1 UK) in that engagement.  So it’ll cost Germany 32 (max) and the allies 30.

Why?  50/50 you lose one bomber in each attack for 15 IPC.  I assume the wrong end of the 50/50.

I always avoid SBR.  :-D
A new player in our group is willing to try it, and so I had this doubt about the rules.

Only avoid it if you need that bomber badly.  Otherwise, I use it on whatever nation I happen to be targetting for destruction. (Usually little point in SBRing a nation you are not trying to subdue actively.  Why SBR England if you are trying to get Moscow?)

It’s my belief that you should SBR Russia with at the very least the Japanese bomber, if not also the German bomber.

On mathematical average they will deal 15.5 IPCs before going down, which is about 5 infantry’s worth. After those first few battles in which you do absolutely need your bomber to do things, it’s unlikely that your bomber will cause that much IPC damage. Think, in a normal battle, in order for a bomber to kill 5 infantry on average it has to survive about eight rounds of attacks. Even the biggest capital battles don’t last more than maybe 5-6 rounds. It’s very unlikely that you will get 8 rounds of true bomber usage (your fighters should be more than enough for the small engagements prior to capital assault), and 8 rounds is simply to break even.

As for the other bombers, there is more gray when thinking about them. Germany might need every bit of strafing power available, and UK/US might need every bit of dice to overpower W. Europe, so you might not want to risk them doing SBR. Generally I would still be in favor of them SBRing, but there is a little more to think about.

And get Rockets!

I’ve had many games where bombers survive through the whole game without being shot down.  I have no problem using my bombers for SBR, however I rarely purchase additional bombers.