That’s right…
@Momentum - I am happy to teach you how to do play by forum if you are interested to know more - it is easy to set up and it’s really great for AA since it’s not easy to find F2F opponent to play AA, but then it seems no way at the moment to simulate a G40 setting in 42 board as Baron suggested. : -(
@innohub Thanks for the offer anyway. I might solo the first round soon.
That’s awesome! I will definitely give this one a spin within the next few weeks!
Thanks
@ Corpo24: Thank you for telling me you will try it out.
@momentum. - Sure. Remember all you need to prepare are:
1. REgister for a dice server (search dice server in this forum and you will find more info)
2. Start a new thread and track the topic number (for example if the weblink is something like http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?action=post;topic=40342.0;num_replies=10 then the number is 40342)
3.Using this number, your email name and fill in the info.
You are ready to go! Ping me (or any folks in this forum) if you need more info.
I played A LOT more after finding this option!(which feels like heaven…be careful getting addicted to it. :evil:)
@innohub: Thanks for the information.
looks awesome will look at the setup in detail later.
Think that 5 IPC is a bit much for taking india, Karelia, Russia, maybe 2-3 or not at all because these can be captured in most games.
Wish we had some NOs to give more of a Battle of the atlatic/island hopping aspect to this game, like a quasi-convoying income stealing maybe/?
Finished a Round 1 solo playthrough.
I like the setup for the most part and addressed a few issues with an update.
Notes: I did not like the allied navy being so strong, so I re-examined the G40 setup as I needed to get it more close to half (as I tried with most placements) anyway.
The Mediterranean was awful, it was not dynamic and UK was way to strong. � I split the Italian navy up and remove the UK Figh. in Gibraltar.
I move a 2 USSR Inf. to Yukat SSR. to make the Japan-USSR/China fight more dynamic.
Please let me know what you think of these changes.
@ taamvan: About those NOs being to powerful: Remember this is a different setup, and taking said spaces are not necessarily as easy. (Not opposed to changing, just don’t want to change as it is not tested enough)
About the Atlantic/Island NO purposed: Might add if other NOs are to powerful/weak or game is not dynamic enough in the Atlantic/Pacific. (I think these are great ideas, if more people want them I might go ahead and change this.)
This looks very well executed! It’s a very different design than the one I chose for my 1940 Scenario on the 1942.2 map, but I like your design very much also.
I do agree with taamvan that your national objectives are overpowered – I’m not convinced that it’s harder to take any particular territory in your setup – if anything, it might be easier/faster to do so, since the territories are closer together. Keep in mind that you don’t need to hold a territory for most NOs; you just need to be able to trade it so that you own the territory at the end of your turn. If you reduce the income from territories by 30-40% (as well as starting army size) because of the shrinking of the map, but you leave the income from national objectives constant, then you’re going to create a dynamic where seizing national objectives is pretty much the only goal that matters, and players will be forced to sacrifice troops, sacrifice territories, etc. just to make sure they keep claiming as many NOs as possible each turn.
Fun set up! Just finished a game with this set up and it was really fun! Game lasted 11 rounds with an allied victory. Love the national objectives on the 1942.2 map. Also having tac bombers and mechs and bases add more flavor to the game. Great job and I would defiantly try it again in the future. 👍
@ Argothair, Sorry for not responding. I have been very busy over the past few months. About the NOs being to powerful. I reduced the NOs power by cutting down on the amount of NOs that are available instead of reducing the IPC bonus for collecting each. And about the territories being faster to take, that is the whole point of the scenario, that it is faster. This doesn’t mean I am set in stone on the NOs staying the same though, but I need data from games to edit/remove/add them.
@Corpo24: Thanks for playing! Can you please provide some pros and cons you experienced?
To be honest, the game was pretty much all positive feedback. It was well balanced and played out really well. The Japanesse had a few bad luck battles that put the allies on the offense for good. Will probably give it another spin soon, but I liked it and I was a happy camper with the way it played out.
@Corpo24: Thank you for posting and playtesting. Glad to hear you found it balanced, but if you find a overpowering strategy please just post it here.
Not a problem. Will do! 👍
