Rule number 1 does look like it might be good to include.
May Pacific be played with LHTR?
-
Excuse me for the trivial question then!
Anyway, I woukld like to tank you for the answer IL!
:-)
-
With all of this stuff– it is your game. You can play it any way you like. :-)
But it doesn’t hurt to ask about stuff especially if you have intentions of playing with folks outside your group.
Personally I haven’t played Pacific with any thing but the altered setup and OOB rules so I’m not really much help as to whether it is better or more fun or something. I certainly recommend the revised setup found in the FAQ here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/axispacific
-
I and my friends have played our first game with LHTR Rules and the Pacific specific Rules (CAP; first turn Japanese attack, DD rules, etc.)
We have played that IC in the Capital of a nation have not limitation for unit deployment. All the other IC, owned at start or build (only for USA) or conquered have a limit of unit for deployment. Then USA may deploy only two units at time in the Hawai IC. Strategic bombing have unbounded damage on capital IC, while alla the other have a maxim damage limited by the territory IPC value.
For the first match this was ok.
I am wondering how do you manage IC and Strategic bombing damage in Pacific using LHTR? -
I would never play AAPacific using LHTR, but then again, I’m a purist.
SS
-
Indeed also I have considered to play Pacific with OOB rules. I use LHTR only for convenience.
But my motivation is that my friends in my playing group are used to play revised and we use LHTR.
Now we are switching to Pacific and we have also intention to buy Europe.
My first idea has been to quickly start to play using LHTR rules.I think, however, that LHTR, being more clear, leave more space for problems during gameplay.
There is a point to consider carefully, change in cost, in deployment and in battle sequence may alter the balancing.
Until now we have played only one game (in the last week end) after some other games I may try to summarize my impression. -
Playing Europe or Pacific with LHTR is as playing AA:Classic with LHTR (that are for AA:Revised). I think is a mistake and unbalances the game. The best example is german subs toasted by airfleet in AA:Europe, thus ruining any convoy raiding strategy for Germany.
-
You are right. It is not possible to play Pacific or Europe with LHTR.
In fact I use the following game specific rule for Pacific:- first turn Japanese surprise attack;
- Sub cannot be hit by aircraft if DD is not present;
- CAP;
- Air base;
- Naval Base;
- Capitol IPC have no deployment limit (and no strategic bombing limit);
- IPC may be built only by USA. Built or conquered IC have a deployment limit (IPC territory value) and also a SBR limit (IPC territory value);
- Bomber in SBR may be escorted and may be intercepted;
- Convoy routes and convoy centers;
IMHO is more simple to move from one game to another of the A&A series if they have a common basis (LHTR) and scenario specific rules.
-
Thats not the interpretation that should be applied. All the rules that are not covered by AAP rules can be interpreted with LHTR. You are excluding AAP rules and seek to replace them with LHTR. I use the rules for interpretation of basic ideas…
example: Combat Air Patrol remains as a rule, while builds are limited to IPC value of factory territory value.
Submarine rules for LHTR apply
Transport rules apply
Bridging is not allowed
tanks are 3/3
planes cost 10
etc…
Its not the case where we throw out AAP rules, but add in and supersede LHTR where conflicts arise.
its not like playing AAP AS it was Revised.
-
It means end of balance. Subs as in revised mean end of German naval strat at Europe (as I said) and hit heavily them at Pacific. ICs building only to the limit of ipcs for territory means one turn far for american builds (Hawaii has only 2 IPCs) and kills totally India (only 5 builds by turn?, Kill India first is a sure shoot). Revised costs and stats for units means more unbalancing (in this case, with uncertain results). You should change all deployment and IPCs values for territories for all countries and make China totally different (1 inf at Sichuan’s IC? :-P). In fact, it would be another game if balance is wanted.
For a future AA Pacific Revised, could work, but as now, it would kill the game.
-
It would definitely unbalance the game to limit builds to the IPC value of the territory. The Allies have a hard enough time as it is preventing Japan from winning the game (especially to a 22 VP target). If you handicap them further by not allowing the US to build more than 2 units per turn in Hawaii, the game is lost for the Allies.
SS
Suggested Topics
