Is it just me or does China in 1942 look a lot stronger than in 1941?
It seems to me 4 inf + fighter, is alot weaker than 8 inf + 1 fighter (the fighter is now protected by 2).
I don’t see how in 1 turn china can go from 4 => 8. Most likely it will go from 4 => 0. Unless of course the Japanese set up is wrong =P
Looking just at BGG: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/30876
I can tell 3 things so far
So the XP is not per unit. Its more like money.
We currently keep track of money pretty well, how hard is it to count the total value of IPC units you lost this turn?
Thats how much XP/Tech you got just “earned”. Its definitely hard to balance, but i think their could be some benefit.
I never understood, how researching a technology would instantly upgrade your units for 0 cost. While doctrines is a change in tactical thinking, using units differently. You don’t actually have to build anything or upgrade anything, but the techniques in battle change and represent a learning experience.
In real life:
Germany focus on armored manuver warfare, to encircle their enemies.
France focused on static defenses.
US focused heavily on heavy bombers and daylight raids.
While Brittain focused on night bombers.
Russia focused on heavy preliminary artillery bombardment, for battles.
while the US had artillery available quickly to lower lever units. (“RADIO”)
Japan developed the expertise and techniques for night battles.
I think these things add a little bit to flavor in the game.
Doctrines are similar to technology, they give certain bonuses to units, and a deterministically chosen by the player. They however are not, created with ipcs or dice like research but are gotten through wartime experience/combat.
You gain points when your units DIE. Necessity is the mother of invention, people will innovate when glaring weaknesses are exposed, when your winning no one wants to change the system. Also acts as a nice catch up mechanism, to balance some of the luck factor of the game. At least new battle tactics are being developed from those defeats.
You can as much XP as the cost of the unit was worth. So if you loose a fighter you get 10 XP in air. Loose an infantry get 3 XP for land.
Germany/Japan having been fighting longer, would start with some of their XP partially filled.
Doctrines are broken up to groups land/sea/air. Each bought with different experience
Some Ideas/Examples
Land:
Rolling Barrages[XP cost??]: Arty gets a free bombardment shot, before battle. A hit means that unit may not fire back that first round.
Panzer Blitz[XP cost??]: Tanks may blitz after winning a battle that only lasts 1 turn.
Mobile Infantry [XP cost??]: Tanks can carry 1 infantry with them in the non-combat move.
-comments?
As for HBs, I think everyone may be going a touch overboard. Without playing this NEW GAME with these tech rules you dont really know how powerful theyll be, actually there are reasons why ‘winning’ HB in the tech lotto can be a bad thing and is prolly why Ive never tried for tech. If you get HBs you almost HAVE to make use of them and your whole game turns into a bomber-fest. I personally dont find that a fun way to play.
The bomber has been cut to only 12 ipcs in cost, so they are only 2 more than fighter.The main issue is the balance between bombers and naval units.
If you have the heavy bomber tech, you can produce bombers and simply destroy navies.
The cheapest sea unit is a sub that costs 6 but cannot shot down an airplane. All other ships cost at least 8+, a heavy bomber costs 12 but can roll 2 [4] attack dice. While the 8 ipc destroyer only rolls a [2] and the 12 ipc cruiser rolls a [3]. A strong bomber force can quickly decimate and enemy navy.
Problem is, A&A is really an not a strategy game but a game of economic warfare and attrition. If you think about it, its impossible for 2 nations that are equally matched ipc wise to kill each other (asuming equal skill and luck).
HB tech gives players a way to kill units at too effectively, thus making one sides economic advantage too great. Since he can simply trade kills at a better rate, gaining territory and continue trading.
I have on very good authority, that the delay was to include a new naval unit.
Does tech take effect as soon as you mark it? This gives a 1 turn advantage since purchased units can only be used next turn, while tech can be used instantly…
@Craig:
Phase 1: Research & Development
Note: This is an optional rule- players should decide whether or not this phase will be included in their game.Research & Development Sequence
1. Buy researcher tokens
2. Roll research dice
3. Roll breakthrough die
4. Mark development
Turg I like your math but I look at it slightly differently
Also while a bomber costs 12, it does 1/60+5/6(3.5) SBR a turn = 2.92 IPC a turn that means the opportunity cost of delaying a bomber purchase by 1 turn is 2.92 IPC that you could of taken away from your enemy, while gaining 12/IPC a turn income for yourself. The damage done by a SBR with the tech is 1/60+5/6(2+12)/2 =5.83, which is a gain of 2.92 IPC/turn.
So lets say i delay 5 bomber purchases for 1 turn each, to buy 2 tech dice. I could of had 5 more bomber turns, which i could of done 2.92 damage x 5. HVY bombers would make up the difference in 1 turn, by doing on avg 5.83 dmg a turn, if i had 5 bombers.
Now if we can determine the IPC value of Heavy Bombers vs.we can a make cost analysis. Since heavy bombers attack twice, their cost is best compared to simply buying a second bomber…
Heavy bombers cannot undertake separate missions, roll two ones or take two hits on defense. But if we are just comparing their SBR capacity: heavy bombers take neither an extra AA gun hit nor do they offer a second target, compared to a second bomber. Since AA guns have less than a 50% chance of hitting, this makes heavy bombers worse by (16.7% - 16.7%) or 2 IPCs. Thus heavy bomb tech is worth 10 per existing bomber
So given the choice with 36 IPCs to buy 3 bombers or 5 tech rolls what is the proper choice? Three bombers is worth exactly 36. But as we’ve seen 7 tech rolls only has a 12% chance per turn to get heavy bombers. (Granted it has a 72% chance per turn to get some tech, but 35 for any OTHER tech is ludicrous).
Because there is no way to dig in vs bombers besides tech, there is no way brace for an attack. Waiting to a turn to build a bomber, does not allow the opponent to build up defenses, like you can for sea and land battles. Tech purchases have value of time bonus, since they stick around if you miss.
1 tech rolls = 1- (5/6) = 1/6 = 16.67%
2 tech rolls = 1- (5/65/6) = 11/36 =30.55%
3 tech rolls = 1- (5/65/6*5/6) = 42.12%
4 tech rolls = 1- (5/6)^4 = 51.7%
6 tech rolls = 1 -(5/6)^6 = 66.5%
8 tech rolls = 1-(5/6)^8 = 76.7%
9 tech rolls = 1-(5/6)^9 = 80.6%
Now Since die are carried over from turn to turn… They have a cumulative effect… notice the pattern bellow:
1 tech roll change to hit in less than
1 turn : 16.67 … less than 2 ( 1/6+5/61/6) = 30.5% less than 3 (1/6+1/65/6+5/65/61/6) = 42.1%
2 tech roll change to hit in less than
1 turn : 30.55% less than 2 (11/36+ 25/3611/36) = 51.7% less than 3 ( 11/36+25/3611/36+25/3625/3611/36) = 66.5%
Rolling 2 twice and hitting in 1 turn is just as probable as rolling 1 twice and hitting in at least one of the two turns. This works with any dice combination, rolling 8 dice in turn has the same chance as 4 over 2, or 2 dice over 4 turns.
I think the optimal way to play this strategy is to buy 1 bomber a turn. If you hit a tech that turn buy 2 tech dice instead. Hitting Bombers alone will pull you ahead under my strategy, if you have enough bombers still alive to take advantage of it.
I new to A&A gaming, I was wondering if any knows of such a mod. Basically in the Red Alert, universe Einstein goes back in time and kills Hitler, thereby preventing WW2. German never rises to a full power, and Stalin left unchecked sets his sights on Europe triggering WW2, between the USSR and the Allies.