Agreed. What is “WE”?
Again, I’m delusional.
@SuperbattleshipYamato yeah but a whole turn to move ships only 2/3 across the Atlantic would make america less enjoyable. Some maps only had 2 spaces between east US and africa.
@Manzgame oh it would make America unplayable completely.
Those games had no naval bases (pretty sure you already knew that, but…).
As I said, it’s probably fine that US ships can move from Eastern United States to Morocco in one turn, because the US spent most of early 1942 building up men, not sailing across the Atlantic.
And others have already given explanations for naval bases.
Definitely.
@SuperbattleshipYamato they also didn’t need them (again fewer sea zones / shorter distances )
@SuperbattleshipYamato I agree. My point ,i guess is that Eliminating the naval bases ruins the maps that have them, which I think everyone agrees. The older games worked without them but the sea zones were different.
Exactly.
Agreed.
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
Agreed. What is “WE”?
What Ever
Thank you for clarifying and responding.
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
As I repeated, bombers from Midway cannot attack Japan.
It’s much harder than you think, landing in occupied areas.
Most of those territories that you can land in will be unflyable unless Japan is losing.
And the upgrades to B-25s are not the long range technology in the game. They were merely modifications so they can take off from a carrier at all.
The technology means the B-29.
It is correct that B-29s should not be able to bomb Japan from Midway.
Limiting aircraft range isn’t the solution though.
Limiting aircraft range makes it impossible for even B-29s to bomb Japan from Guam, when that historically wasn’t the case.
What should be done is add a sea zone or two between Japan and Midway.
You can bomb japan from midway, SZ25-16-6-japan-6-korea. Just need russia to occupy korea. So it can be done, this was no way possible in the real war.
I agree with you that the world is weird in A&A, some zones are way to small others are way to big.
The mentioned operation pedestail shows that the med is way to small. And maby the atlantic is to small as well.
But also russia, germany was in smolensk less then 6 months after the invasion but still in ukrain. Yet ukrain is 2 steps away and smolensk is 3 steps away.
So that would give tanks 1.5 turns to go 6 months in central russia but only 1 turn in the south.
There is no clear line how long a turn is really, time is flexible in this game, distances as well. Some bombers can fly 4000miles others can barely make 1000. Same bomber different part of the board.
Its just a bit unfortunate because it would be much more accurate if time and space was equal all over the board. This also affects air and naval bases, some just make the range accurate again, some make it insane.
@shadowhawk said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
As I repeated, bombers from Midway cannot attack Japan.
It’s much harder than you think, landing in occupied areas.
Most of those territories that you can land in will be unflyable unless Japan is losing.
And the upgrades to B-25s are not the long range technology in the game. They were merely modifications so they can take off from a carrier at all.
The technology means the B-29.
It is correct that B-29s should not be able to bomb Japan from Midway.
Limiting aircraft range isn’t the solution though.
Limiting aircraft range makes it impossible for even B-29s to bomb Japan from Guam, when that historically wasn’t the case.
What should be done is add a sea zone or two between Japan and Midway.
You can bomb japan from midway, SZ25-16-6-japan-6-korea. Just need russia to occupy korea. So it can be done, this was no way possible in the real war.
I agree with you that the world is weird in A&A, some zones are way to small others are way to big.
The mentioned operation pedestail shows that the med is way to small. And maby the atlantic is to small as well.
But also russia, germany was in smolensk less then 6 months after the invasion but still in ukrain. Yet ukrain is 2 steps away and smolensk is 3 steps away.
So that would give tanks 1.5 turns to go 6 months in central russia but only 1 turn in the south.There is no clear line how long a turn is really, time is flexible in this game, distances as well. Some bombers can fly 4000miles others can barely make 1000. Same bomber different part of the board.
Its just a bit unfortunate because it would be much more accurate if time and space was equal all over the board. This also affects air and naval bases, some just make the range accurate again, some make it insane.
Well there ya go. Now you can make your own game and make it correct.
@General-6-Stars
O my bad, i though we had a mature discussion not 12yo trolling.
@shadowhawk said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
@General-6-Stars
O my bad, i though we had a mature discussion not 12yo trolling.
Hey just saying. It was a mature suggestion. Ain’t 12 y old and ain’t a troll.
While all that is true and valid, if you want to talk unrealistic rules, I don’t think anything comes close to the fact that all the countries stay idle until its their “Turn” to do things.
Some things have to be abstracted to make a game work.
It was only impossible to land in Korea because:
A. The Allies could never capture it.
B. Again, the Soviets weren’t in the war.
And in my experience the Soviets never get Korea unless they get significant reinforcements anyway.
Which is why hexagon-based maps are more accurate than normal maps.
Also why Battle of the Bulge is one of the most accurate Axis and Allies games.
Time and space are so weird.
Yep.
