Technology

lol…maybe they can get a defense boost of some kind?

Italy’s defense boost was Germany.

France’s defense boost was UK, USA, and drum roll please CANADA (for all you Canadians)

Maybe italy should just buy some infantry

@idk_iam_swiss:

Maybe italy should just buy some infantry

Infantry is the best buy for everyone.

bleh…it makes the game no fun…only do it if you play with two people.

@Brain:

Italy’s defense boost was Germany.

France’s defense boost was UK, USA, and drum roll please CANADA (for all you Canadians)

UK, USA and who?  You must’ve meant ANZACs…  :lol:

@allboxcars:

@Brain:

Italy’s defense boost was Germany.

France’s defense boost was UK, USA, and drum roll please CANADA (for all you Canadians)

UK, USA and who?  You must’ve meant ANZACs…  :lol:

I was talkin’ history, not the game.

@Brain:

I was talkin’ history, not the game.

yeah figured that BD.

anyway, historically, except for the UK would that be a defense boost for France?

#460

What I meant was US and UK defended France, not the french.

France surrender you say?

If paris falls on the first turn then at the end of the victorious nations turn (Germany or Italy) do the following. Roll a die, any French units AND/or territories (that do not contain other allied units) convert to axis units if they are the able to be reached from france by any route in the number of game spaces shown on the die. If other allied land units are present then those french units remain free french. French naval vessels also convert BUT are scuttled if they convert and vessels of any other nation are present (including the allies)

So based on the die roll, a radius of french stuff wil convert automaticly to the axis

Is this your Vichy France rule?

Basicly

They convert to german units….Thre is no need to have a new power with a capital in Vichy (~2IPC) and Morocco (1IPC) and Algeria (1IPC)

A random ammount turn German. Boats either scuttle or turn German…that is what happend.
It should be represented somehow, and this way is really simple

@Brain:

What I meant was US and UK defended France, not the french.

Well my point was that I really don’t know if you can say the US were on hand to defend France… little late for that.

Now as an offensive boost?  
Definitely!!

In fact, maybe there should be one of those 1:1 matching rules: for every US, UK, Cdn or Polish land unit present the French player can prevent one of his French units from surrendering / imitating an AA50 auto-killed transport?
LOL

#463

Okay, now you are getting all technical on me.

@allboxcars:

@Brain:

What I meant was US and UK defended France, not the french.

Well my point was that I really don’t know if you can say the US were on hand to defend France… little late for that.

Now as an offensive boost?  
Definitely!!

In fact, maybe there should be one of those 1:1 matching rules: for every US, UK, Cdn or Polish land unit present the French player can prevent one of his French units from surrendering / imitating an AA50 auto-killed transport?
LOL

#463

thenshot them then all the french will be mine :evil:

@Brain:

Technology should be eliminated from the game.

I’ll agree with you up to a point. I have never really liked the way technology was implemented. Too luck-based! Even in the Anniversary Edition rules set, there’s the luck element of the time delay; plus the luck element of whether you ultimately end up with a tech you wanted.

Chief Technical Officer: How is that research coming on that new tank?
Researcher: It’s coming! It should be ready any minute now.
Chief Technical Officer: Good. We need those improved tanks yesterday.

Later . . .

Chief Technical Officer: How about those new tanks?
Researcher: You’re going to be excited. Just not in the way you might think.
Chief Technical Officer: What do you mean?
Researcher: Think of this like Christmas. You never know what you’re going to get until you unwrap the present.
Chief Technical Officer: I don’t think I like where this is going.
Researcher: It turns out that when you sent us off to develop improved tanks, some of us got a little distracted, one thing led to another, and before you knew it, we’d developed super submarines! Our submarines will be the best in the world, hands down, no holds barred.
Chief Technical Officer: We don’t even have a sub fleet. We have no plans to build a sub fleet, because we’re locked into a land war. The very existence of our nation requires us to at least hold our own in that land war! Why would you develop an improved submarine instead?
Researcher: These things happen.
Chief Technical Officer: What do you mean, “These things happen?” Who on Earth sets about trying to develop an improved tank, only to develop an improved submarine instead? When someone proposed an improved tank turret, did someone else respond with, “Tank turret. Submarine conning tower. Same difference.”?
Researcher: You know how these things go.
Chief Technical Officer: No, I don’t know how these things go. I want that improved tank, and I want it yesterday!
Researcher: That brings me to my other news. The funding for this research project was pretty much used up by that improved sub we just designed. If you want us to improve your tanks, we’re going to need some more cash.
Chief Technical Officer: What guarantee do I have that, this time, I’ll get the improved tank?
Researcher: Some of the guys were tossing around ideas for improved tanks. Maybe those will go somewhere. Then again, there are other schools of thought out there. Some feel that since we now have the world’s best subs, it’s time to improve our naval shipyards. So you never know where your research effort is going to go! :)
Chief Technical Officer: What?!?!

Fortunately, the above problem is solved in my rules set. There is no luck element to technology research, and you always know in advance exactly which tech you’ll be getting.

@KurtGodel7:

@Brain:

Technology should be eliminated from the game.

I’ll agree with you up to a point. I have never really liked the way technology was implemented. Too luck-based! Even in the Anniversary Edition rules set, there’s the luck element of the time delay; plus the luck element of whether you ultimately end up with a tech you wanted.

Chief Technical Officer: How is that research coming on that new tank?
Researcher: It’s coming! It should be ready any minute now.
Chief Technical Officer: Good. We need those improved tanks yesterday.

Later . . .

Chief Technical Officer: How about those new tanks?
Researcher: You’re going to be excited. Just not in the way you might think.
Chief Technical Officer: What do you mean?
Researcher: Think of this like Christmas. You never know what you’re going to get until you unwrap the present.
Chief Technical Officer: I don’t think I like where this is going.
Researcher: It turns out that when you sent us off to develop improved tanks, some of us got a little distracted, one thing led to another, and before you knew it, we’d developed super submarines! Our submarines will be the best in the world, hands down, no holds barred.
Chief Technical Officer: We don’t even have a sub fleet. We have no plans to build a sub fleet, because we’re locked into a land war. The very existence of our nation requires us to at least hold our own in that land war! Why would you develop an improved submarine instead?
Researcher: These things happen.
Chief Technical Officer: What do you mean, “These things happen?” Who on Earth sets about trying to develop an improved tank, only to develop an improved submarine instead? When someone proposed an improved tank turret, did someone else respond with, “Tank turret. Submarine conning tower. Same difference.”?
Researcher: You know how these things go.
Chief Technical Officer: No, I don’t know how these things go. I want that improved tank, and I want it yesterday!
Researcher: That brings me to my other news. The funding for this research project was pretty much used up by that improved sub we just designed. If you want us to improve your tanks, we’re going to need some more cash.
Chief Technical Officer: What guarantee do I have that, this time, I’ll get the improved tank?
Researcher: Some of the guys were tossing around ideas for improved tanks. Maybe those will go somewhere. Then again, there are other schools of thought out there. Some feel that since we now have the world’s best subs, it’s time to improve our naval shipyards. So you never know where your research effort is going to go! :)
Chief Technical Officer: What?!?!

Fortunately, the above problem is solved in my rules set. There is no luck element to technology research, and you always know in advance exactly which tech you’ll be getting.

LOL.  Yeah, this pretty much sums up Axis and Allies tech.  What’s even worse is that you can’t really PLAN on any particular tech, you just have to roll for them all and expect the best.  Bombers are always a good bet since 3 of the techs will help them out, but a lot of the time you can’t plan on building many of them.  What’s worse is that the Allies usually have an unfair advantage in developing tech since two of their powers aren’t usually in dire threat of invasion; and the Axis powers are forced to economize every IPC for land forces in holding Europe or invading Asia/Russia.

Also, a LOT of the tech in A and A is pretty useless for many of the powers anyway… Like the US getting radar, or Italy getting mechanized infantry.  War bonds???  Jeez I could of just not rolled for tech in the first place.  Where is the German supertank technology, anyway?

I generally ignore Tech development.  I prefer NAs.  As has been said by others, I find Techs to be a gamble and overweighted in their influence of the game. I totally agree with the KurtGodel7 and his scenario.  In my European hex game I make techs into NAs that are timed.  For example, I have Light, Medium, Veteran and Heavy Tanks.  I use the original AA tanks as lights, and I mark or paint the individual sculpts for the other three types.  Veteran tanks are mediums such as the T-34 and the Panther.  Lights are the Grant, Pz ii.  Mediums are the Sherman and Pz iii & iv. Heavies are the Churchill, Tigers and Soviet KV-1 & IS-2.  For dice rolls, I use D-12s: Attack and Defense: Lt 5-3; Md 6-4; Vt 7-5; Hy 8-8.  Heavies are 2 hit, but move at one.  Light have a movement of 3. In my view tanks were designed to attack; defence goes to the infantry.  How does this fit into my NA/Techs?  All countries in 1939 have Light tanks.  Only UK, Germany and USSR have a limited build of medium tanks.  France and USSR also have a limited build of Heavies.  In 1941 USSR gets to build Veterans (T-34).  In 1942 the US gets Mediums and the Germans get Veterans.  The US and UK never get Veterans, while the Germans get Heavies in 43 and the US in 1945 ( the US heavies get to move at 2 - the T26 Pershing).

Also, lol, just thought of this.

General:  Well, well, looks like we finally have a break through in our tank research development…  Mechanized Infantry, you called it?
Researcher:  Yes, sir!  We have our tanks, and…  we let infantry ride on the backs of them to their destination!!!  It will be revolutionary!
General:  MY GOD. 
Researcher:  Yes, as long as our war machine keeps producing enough IPCs for maximum production, and we can still afford to produce tanks, we’re good!
General:  This could mean… dear god, it won’t take two turns to move infantry two spaces anymore!  As long as they’re paired up with a tank!
Researcher:  This is just what we need!  This will win the war for sure!..

Later that turn, the US rolled Heavy Bombers, and promptly nuked Berlin into the Stone Age.  Axis promptly surrendered.

Yeah, pretty bad synopsis of Axis and Allies tech.

Mike, Is that you in the MSU uniform?