Blockhouse Talk 101

LMFAO, I knew you had a good sense of humor.

Actually don’t laugh. I play games with Godzilla in them.

We call it berserker AA.

You play any AA game normally, then add in south Africa Godzilla. It moves randomly by placing dice 1-6 in each adjacent space, then you roll the die and it moves to that territory. It can never move in the same territory twice. ( use blocks to track its movement. Each turn it moves 3 spaces. For each factory it overruns it can move one additional space from that point forward.

In attacks it has 10 points to allocate as follows:

It can roll 4 dice at 2 or less, or 2 dice at 3 or less, plus one at 2 or less…. it can even allocate its points to additional movements at the cost of 2 points per movement point but at a minimum it moves 3 spaces and this does not count against its points.

The thing can only be hit with a roll of one and it takes 10 ones to kill it.  Each hit reduces its hit points from 10 to 9…etc… It really adds alot of laughs in games and this is best played with 4-6 players.

I can tell you that its really fun.

We do the same thing with giant ANTS taken from the concept from the movie Them!, but this uses the fortress America map.

LMFAO, You’re killing me, IL, you’re killing me!

Holy crap you have seen them! Man I have not seen that in a while, I wonder if it ever got released on DVD……

IL I almost hyperventilated.  I am ridiculously tempted to try that out.

pull the trigger. Start with Godzilla and have a go at it. Its really fun with lots of people because they could be forced into fighting the monster and it could wipe them out. You can get in a situation where all 5 players have to stop attacking and just fight Godzilla. This is a left curve that changes the game but makes it fun in a different way.

We have this thing we call it the “doomsday chicken” which is some painted chicken from a childrens game. I prefer to use it for the fun factor, where you lose your entire army to some 1,000 foot chicken.

I have a hard enough time getting people to play a serious game of A&A

Well a ‘doomsday chicken’ should liven it up a bit right?

Who knows that might just work.

What if blockhouse just supported artillery, and not infantry since infantry already get an defensive advantage and build fortifactions for themselves anyways. Usually armies put artillery in blockhouses, so it just seems to make sence.

The idea would have to be a 3 or less preemptively on first round for each artillery, which means the free roll would actually be the replaced with this roll as their defense and which the cost of BK would have to go down to something around 6.

1. shore bomberdment fire first–-remove loses
2. blockhouse fires ( all artillery defending fire at 3)–remove loses
3. attacking units fire
4. remaining defenders fire
5. remove loses from 3 and 4

like above?

@Imperious:

The idea would have to be a 3 or less preemptively on first round for each artillery, which means the free roll would actually be the replaced with this roll as their defense and which the cost of BK would have to go down to something around 6.

1. shore bomberdment fire first–-remove loses
2. blockhouse fires ( all artillery defending fire at 3)–remove loses
3. attacking units fire
4. remaining defenders fire
5. remove loses from 3 and 4

like above?

I think your on to something.

I really like those ideas for the blockhouse Emperor Taiki and IL

Well I dont, I think all firing should be simultanesly. No first shot pre-emtive strike. Just the usuall all attackers roll dice, then all defenders roll dice.

Blockhouse cost 6 IPC,  move 0, attack 0, defend 4 or less. This is strong enough.

Blockhouse cost 6 IPC,  move 0, attack 0, defend 4 or less. This is strong enough

Yeah, that was my original idea, I still kind of like it, but I am torn.

@Adlertag:

Blockhouse cost 6 IPC,  move 0, attack 0, defend 4 or less. This is strong enough.

Strong enough to never be purchased ever.  This is far worse than two infantry.

@zooooma:

@Adlertag:

Blockhouse cost 6 IPC,  move 0, attack 0, defend 4 or less. This is strong enough.

Strong enough to never be purchased ever.  This is far worse than two infantry.

Can you please expound upon that?

@Brain:

@zooooma:

@Adlertag:

Blockhouse cost 6 IPC,  move 0, attack 0, defend 4 or less. This is strong enough.

Strong enough to never be purchased ever.  This is far worse than two infantry.

Can you please expound upon that?

Okay.

Two infantry or one such suggested blockhouse have the same cost - six IPCs.  Either purchase gives you an average of two hits every three rounds of combat.  On the surface they look pretty much equal, but the infantry have a couple advantages:

• The infantry have the abilities of movement and attack.  This makes them far more versatile.

• Even when strictly in defense mode, the infantry will out preform the proposed blockhouse.  Why?  The two infantry can take a hit and keep on fighting at half capacity.  The blockhouse takes a hit and just dies!  The ability to absorb more hits than your opponent is a huge advantage - two infantry are a big favorite attacking just one even thought hey average fewer hits!

So, given the above, why would anyone ever buy the blockhouse instead of two infantry?  It’s worth mentioning that a blockhouse against a single attacking unit defends better than the two infantry.  The blockhouse still averages two hits in three rounds, but the infantry hit only five times every nine rounds.  This difference is not only slight, and obscure, but almost completely irrelevant.  There is no single unit which can soundly attack two infantry or one blockhouse.

Incidentally, infantry in defense mode is already by far the best bang for your buck.  I don’t see the need to further increase defense efficiency.

@Imperious:

Not problem solved for 20 invasions of France, Karelia, and Caucasus each game.

We’re talking about the new upcoming 1940 games aren’t we?  Maybe your games of A&A:Europe play out differently than mine?

@Imperious:

This can lead to long lags of all building and no fighting, or worse yet a complete stalemate.

This is your central point. It will defiantly lead to fewer invasions where double collection occurs which causes both sides to buy more units, hence more dice rolling, hence longer game.

The old 1981 Nova edition solved the double collection problem.  The turn you capture a territory you would collect income from the opposing player instead of the bank.  That way a war ravaged territory generates no income instead of double.

I’m also not convinced that each side buying more units slows the game down.  Nor have I ever played a very long game and credited the length to too many small battles or too much dice rolling.  Battles and dice do not make up the bulk of a turn.

@Imperious:

With the blockhouse people will make sure they have enough to take the spot from counterattack, which leads to a quicker result, rather than piecemeal attempts to secure the same territory over and over again with NO RESULT. I feel the game will have a quicker result.

There will always be dead zones in A&A.

Here’s a new take on a blockhouse unit:

Cost One IPC.

Move zero

Attack zero

Defense zero

If you buy three of these proceeding a battle, you are down one third of a hit in the first round.  But going into the second round (assuming the battle is large enough to lose all three the first round) you’ve lost three one IPC blockhouses instead of three three IPC infantry units.  Minus the infantry you could have bought instead of the blockhouse your net gain is two infantry, giving an instant return of two thirds of a hit!  Minus the third of a hit you lost in round one, your up one third of a hit.

Of course your opponent will get extra fire power on round two, but only to the tune of an extra one third of a unit.  This this is probably an attacking infantry, so your opponent only gains one third of one sixth of a hit, or one eighteenth.  Since you gained a whole third, my blockhouse (in the correct proportion) proves more efficient than defending infantry.

However, I think the above stats may still be overpowered!  Defending infantry is the most combat efficient thing that IPCs can buy.  I question the merit of adding a defense piece that’s more efficient still.  The greater the gap in efficiency between defense and attack, the more likely stalemate ensues.  If you’re not convinced consider the following extreme unit:

Super Defender - attack zero, defense six, cost one.

Add this to the game and nobody will ever capture a capitol again - complete guaranteed stalemate.  Obviously a less extreme defending unit will have a less extreme effect.

Right now the most efficient attack force is infantry plus artillery.  Twenty one IPCs buys six units at two for an average of two hits a round.  Twenty one IPCs in defense buys seven infantry defending at two, for an average of two and two thirds hits per round.  That’s an extra two thirds of a hit per round plus extra cannon fodder.  So as the attacker (all things being equal) I need an extra 3.5 IPCs a turn on the defender for every twenty one IPCs we each earn just to keep up.  That means producing 116 2/3 per cent of what the defender produces, just to break even.  I need more to actually gain an advantage.

Should we give the defender an even better way to spend those 21 IPCs, I will need even more than 116.6666667 % of their economy to gain an edge in battle.  If this number gets too high, the game breaks.  I simply suggest keeping this in mind when designing a new and better defending unit.