This topic has been moved to Axis & Allies Customizations.
U-505, or other AARe player
-
Yea, I’d have to say America and Germany would be more historically accurate when it comes to immunity from submarines.
However, a good way to balance CR would be very simple. Submarines engaged in CR would have to roll to hit. 1d6 each, they hit on a 1 and do the appropriate damage given their distance.
Now it’s not automatic damage forcing the suicide of naval units to stop it or just accepting the passive damage.
Also, reducing HBs to LHTR damage would help out as well.
Otherwise, I could see the game being reduced to who can do the most economic attacks successfully, not who can out position the other.
-
@Cmdr:
Also, reducing HBs to LHTR damage would help out as well.
How is the better of two dice +1 so much better than the sum of two dice?
Recall there already is a 10 limit on bombing (Berlin), so you can throw away a 12 and 11 outcome.The better of two dice (LHTR) will most likely yield a 5 or better.
Typical two dice is 7 (A&ARe). Wow $2! GAME BREAKER!
even at a max… $10, that’s $5 a turn.yes it’s broken… totally. You’re 100% correct… NOT!
MORE IMPORTANTLY:
LHTR nuetered HBs so much militarily, they’re not even worth buying as a tech (only 1 hit?)
They’re not heavy bombers then, just REALLY accurate ones WRT military capabilities. -
Well, I’m not talking militarily. But economic attacks are less a part of the game then tech or NAs and we routinely through out techs and NAs, hell we, cant use either in league or tournament play.
So if we MUST have economic attacks, why should we have so many?
I do have a compromise to allow economic attacks without overly nerfing bombers or rockets, etc. Just limit the amount of damage done to the Industrial Complex cap for a full game turn? That way Berlin cannot be hit by each ally up to 10 IPC each for 30 IPC total. It makes no sense that you have to pay more to fix your complex then you can possibly earn from it.
Just limit the damage you can do. You can still reduce a nation to no income, but now you have to own all the land except what they have complexes on and you have to bomb them down to zero.
To allow anymore then that is broken.
-
@Cmdr:
Just limit the amount of damage done to the Industrial Complex cap for a full game turn? That way Berlin cannot be hit by each ally up to 10 IPC each for 30 IPC total. It makes no sense that you have to pay more to fix your complex then you can possibly earn from it.
Many realism arguments for and against. But not important as AARe is about gameplay options not realism. To convince AARe team you need to talk in terms of gameplay.
There are many reasons why “negative territory income” is bad. Imagine an IC you don’t even use anymore being SBR/rocket/CR for crazy. Enemy does not even want to capture it.
Lets say UK gives up on India IC because Japan just shore bombards the crap out of it. Germany and Japan however does not take it because they can economic attack it for 9 IPC per turn.
This is why economic attack limit should be per round not per turn. Its a logical and intuitive change that AARe can take on imo.
-
@Cmdr:
Just limit the amount of damage done to the Industrial Complex cap for a full game turn? That way Berlin cannot be hit by each ally up to 10 IPC each for 30 IPC total. It makes no sense that you have to pay more to fix your complex then you can possibly earn from it.
Many realism arguments for and against. But not important as AARe is about gameplay options not realism. To convince AARe team you need to talk in terms of gameplay.
There are many reasons why “negative territory income” is bad. Imagine an IC you don’t even use anymore being SBR/rocket/CR for crazy. Enemy does not even want to capture it.
Lets say UK gives up on India IC because Japan just shore bombards the crap out of it. Germany and Japan however does not take it because they can economic attack it for 9 IPC per turn.
This is why economic attack limit should be per round not per turn. Its a logical and intuitive change that AARe can take on imo.
My response is as you have predicted: game play testing!
I have not seen that economic damage is so lopsided as to break the game.I am not opposed to altering rules (we have done so when game brealers were done in the past).
I will try to test this theory out in my next few games as the allies in my FTF player group.I do not think CR’s should be reduced however (like Jenn’s roll a dice suggestion). We want to encourage naval warfare, and sub CR damage is a payoff for sub purchases. Also, CR should remain seperate from economic attacks, specifically since they’re done at different times.
-
I’d relinquish the CR damage done by submarines if the damage was capped to territory limit.
Other option, or maybe in addition, give the defender the option to destroy the Industrial Complex instead of paying to fix it? So if you SBR the Indian IC with Japan and do 1-6 IPC in damage, England just decides to destroy the complex instead of pay the money to the bank. England’s out an Industrial Complex (15 IPC) but Japan’s also just cost themselves the IC by attacking it financially instead of invading it outright.
Sure would put a new spin on things!
-
Hopefully there are enough gameplay issues that AARe revised without game breakers.
Though I guess not all AARe changes were due to game breakers but also other gameplay issues.
So there is still a chance even if tiny that AARe would change economic damage to per round limit hehe.Destroyable IC opens up another game option. Wonder if AARe team considered it before.
I do not think CR’s should be reduced however (like Jenn’s roll a dice suggestion).
I wonder if player should have the option to not deploy at that particular IC that turn and not cop the damage.
Ok probably too complex for AARe style.I’d relinquish the CR damage done by submarines if the damage was capped to territory limit.
CR damage IS capped to territory income value.
Don’t you remember how you parked 5 submarines (and not anymore) off US west coast in the 1st game? -
Destroyable IC opens up another game option. Wonder if AARe team considered it before.
I think we discussed ‘scorthed earth’ but settled on mobile industry NA for Russia.
True it is only for Russia, but it is another counter to the Axis economic attacks
-
Tekkyy, I meant capped damage at the IC per game turn, sorry, I didn’t clarify it enough. (Not country turn, game turn.)
And the scorched earth would be for every nation, 505. That way it would be risky for you to bomb a complex, if the gun didn’t get you, then you just bombed your new factory into rubble and your enemy didn’t rebuild it for you. (After all, SBR damage is just taking time and manpower away from building war materials, thus you have less IPC that round for war materials because you are repairing your factories. Well, what if you don’t WANT to repair them?)
-
To be honest, I’ve always thought it was weird the enemy SBR your territory and capture it at the same time.
Yet you pays for your enemy’s repair costs.As you can see it didn’t take me too many games of OOB/LHTR rules before I got pissed. Just one too many of these funny gameplay.
-
Yea, I like the bugged version of TripleA for that. you Bomb it then take it, you pay the money. :)
But to be honest, it really should be up to the defender to decide if they want to repair it or not. And if it is damaged and not repaired, you cannot damage it further.
Suggested Topics
