[Global 1940] One rule to balance it?

@timothy-gengarella said in Air Bases:

ff in a land zone that does not have a airbase but land in a territory that has a airbase do you still get the bonus movement?

Youll get the movement bonus next turn.

You dont get extra movement to reach a base.

@The-Captain

Sweet!

You got me thinking on how now to force attacker to take a bomber instead of a fig in SBR dogfights. Thinking if interceptor rolls a 1 it forces attacker to take a bomber casualty. This way don’t have to raise defense on a interceptor. Just thinking here.

May add this to land naval combats to

Okay, it sounds reasonable then. As Escorts primary purpose (from a game play perspective) is to take interceptor hits instead of bombers (the ability to shoot down interceptors seems incidental in comparison), I’m inclined to pair it with a rule that escorts can each protect one bomber, but any unprotected bombers take interceptor hits first. This way at least you have a reason for intercepting escorted bombers.

Here is a rough for the victory points on my map. It may not work with OOB rules but I’m working on two sets of rules to be used with OOB and another with extra pieces. Link for the map is here: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38048.0

Number axis have for allied win – historical number – number for axis to win
        Europe pacific global
Turn4 Jun 42 23-31-39 12-18-24 35-49-63
Turn5 Dec 42 24-32-40 12-18-24 36-50-64
Turn6 Jun 43 21-29-37 11-17-23 32-46-60
Turn7 Dec 43 15-23-31 9-15-21 24-38-52
Turn8 Jun 44 12-20-28 7-13-19 19-33-47
Turn9 Dec 44 3-11-19 3-9-15 6-20-34
Turn10 Aug 45 0-(3)-11 1-(7)-13 0-(7)-21
Over Time         Lose-win
Turn11 Dec 45 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn12 Jun 46 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn13 Dec 46 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn14 Jun 47 0-8 0-6 0-14
Turn15 Dec 47 0-8 0-6 0-14
Optional: Japan surrenders if they have 40 or less income after turn 9 and the factory in japan is bombed to its maximum hit points.

I’ve always felt the same way as the jetset. For me the dice rules are an important part of the narrative aspect of the game. They allow for more surprises or turn arounds or crushing upsets at the last minute, the kind of thing that allows you to build out a uniqur story around what just happened in a given combat.

I understand the appeal of Low Luck, but the gameplay is substantially different.  A build or combat strategy that is guaranteed to come off in LL, could fail miserably in a dice game. Sure you might be able to model averages for expected results using an LL scheme to map your strategy in a dice game, but there’s always a chance that the dice end up disagreeing with you ‘that time.’

In that respect I don’t see a huge amount of cross over. Playing 100 dice games won’t really prepare you or teach you a whole lot about what to expect in an LL game. As mentioned before low luck alters a lot of things, with respect to deadzoning and strafing, the number of defensive units required to back down an attack entitely, the way the airblitz works, the way anti aircraft fire works, etc. Just too many differences to really say that a strategy that anticipates the one style of combat is going to graph onto the other consistently.

I think after playing a few games, most players are able to determine which style of gameplay they prefer. If you love the consistency of LL, and hate the unpredictably of dice, then wait for a match with another LL player. If you hate LL, but love dice, then wait for a match against a dice player. Especially in a long game like global, if you start a playing with a combat system you dislike, then chances are that the game won’t be very satisfying for you. There are enough players out there who enjoy both ways of playing that you can probably find a likeminded opponent if you just stick it out for a little while.

To the initial question about why LL isn’t used more often, the answer is probably just because the manual doesn’t offer a description of how Low Luck works, or provide the kind official endorsement for that combat system that would probably be necessary for a larger groundswell of support. In regular tournament play it foes have a bit more cache, since that is where the systemperature was first put into practice… Fortunately for those who do enjoy Low Luck, tripleA  created simple “click tab” option in the game options menu, that allows any game to be played with universal LL rules, which I think has done a lot to popularize that style of play. There are also tripleA scenerios out there which were designed from the ground up with the LL playstyle in mind, which helps. I don’t know if the G40 designers took LL into account when they created the set up. If it was designed for LL, I imagine some of starting unit distributions might have been a little different. But again the game is pretty flexible, so even a game that wasn’t created with LL in mind, can still be adapted pretty easily, although the playtime required or the usual bids might be slightly different.

@SpitfirED:

I know this topic has been dormant for some time but thought it would be better to say here that I play with heavy tanks on a cost: 7/ att and def: 4 basis but with a move of just 1.

I like to keep house rules ruthlessly simple and eliminating the suggested heavy tank non combat move of 2 also helps to ensure the unit doesn’t become too overpowering. (Also helped by the fact that I also play with heavy artillery on a cost 5, att/def 3 and move 1 basis so both attacker and defender have access to a unit with +1 hit for +1IPC compared to OOB).

:-)

Someone voted please tell me your reasoning(rakeman most likly)