Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@AndrewAAGamer

👍👍

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@TheVeteran

I mean, I see it as being supposed to be an accurate historical simulator. You might say I’ve deluded myself over it.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@Manzgame

Depressingly it would be accurate for the US to take two turns to get to Africa because Operation Torch was 1942.

However, the delay could be a case of the US preparing and building up forces rather than it actually taking a year to travel from North America to Africa.

So the game could srill be accurate.

[TheVeteran]

@SuperbattleshipYamato it’s really not though.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@General-6-Stars

Agreed. What is “WE”?

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@TheVeteran

Again, I’m delusional.

[Manzgame]

@SuperbattleshipYamato yeah but a whole turn to move ships only 2/3 across the Atlantic would make america less enjoyable. Some maps only had 2 spaces between east US and africa.

[TheVeteran]

@Manzgame oh it would make America unplayable completely.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@Manzgame

Those games had no naval bases (pretty sure you already knew that, but…).

As I said, it’s probably fine that US ships can move from Eastern United States to Morocco in one turn, because the US spent most of early 1942 building up men, not sailing across the Atlantic.

And others have already given explanations for naval bases.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@TheVeteran

Definitely.

[TheVeteran]

@SuperbattleshipYamato they also didn’t need them (again fewer sea zones / shorter distances )

[Manzgame]

@SuperbattleshipYamato I agree. My point ,i guess is that Eliminating the naval bases ruins the maps that have them, which I think everyone agrees. The older games worked without them but the sea zones were different.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@TheVeteran

Exactly.

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@Manzgame

Agreed.

[General 6 Stars]

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:

@General-6-Stars

Agreed. What is “WE”?

What Ever

[SuperbattleshipYamato]

@General-6-Stars

Thank you for clarifying and responding.

[shadowhawk]

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:

@shadowhawk

As I repeated, bombers from Midway cannot attack Japan.

It’s much harder than you think, landing in occupied areas.

Most of those territories that you can land in will be unflyable unless Japan is losing.

And the upgrades to B-25s are not the long range technology in the game. They were merely modifications so they can take off from a carrier at all.

The technology means the B-29.

It is correct that B-29s should not be able to bomb Japan from Midway.

Limiting aircraft range isn’t the solution though.

Limiting aircraft range makes it impossible for even B-29s to bomb Japan from Guam, when that historically wasn’t the case.

What should be done is add a sea zone or two between Japan and Midway.

You can bomb japan from midway, SZ25-16-6-japan-6-korea. Just need russia to occupy korea. So it can be done, this was no way possible in the real war.

I agree with you that the world is weird in A&A, some zones are way to small others are way to big.
The mentioned operation pedestail shows that the med is way to small. And maby the atlantic is to small as well.
But also russia, germany was in smolensk less then 6 months after the invasion but still in ukrain. Yet ukrain is 2 steps away and smolensk is 3 steps away.
So that would give tanks 1.5 turns to go 6 months in central russia but only 1 turn in the south.

There is no clear line how long a turn is really, time is flexible in this game, distances as well. Some bombers can fly 4000miles others can barely make 1000. Same bomber different part of the board.

Its just a bit unfortunate because it would be much more accurate if time and space was equal all over the board. This also affects air and naval bases, some just make the range accurate again, some make it insane.

[General 6 Stars]

@shadowhawk said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:

@SuperbattleshipYamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:

@shadowhawk

As I repeated, bombers from Midway cannot attack Japan.

It’s much harder than you think, landing in occupied areas.

Most of those territories that you can land in will be unflyable unless Japan is losing.

And the upgrades to B-25s are not the long range technology in the game. They were merely modifications so they can take off from a carrier at all.

The technology means the B-29.

It is correct that B-29s should not be able to bomb Japan from Midway.

Limiting aircraft range isn’t the solution though.

Limiting aircraft range makes it impossible for even B-29s to bomb Japan from Guam, when that historically wasn’t the case.

What should be done is add a sea zone or two between Japan and Midway.

You can bomb japan from midway, SZ25-16-6-japan-6-korea. Just need russia to occupy korea. So it can be done, this was no way possible in the real war.

I agree with you that the world is weird in A&A, some zones are way to small others are way to big.
The mentioned operation pedestail shows that the med is way to small. And maby the atlantic is to small as well.
But also russia, germany was in smolensk less then 6 months after the invasion but still in ukrain. Yet ukrain is 2 steps away and smolensk is 3 steps away.
So that would give tanks 1.5 turns to go 6 months in central russia but only 1 turn in the south.

There is no clear line how long a turn is really, time is flexible in this game, distances as well. Some bombers can fly 4000miles others can barely make 1000. Same bomber different part of the board.

Its just a bit unfortunate because it would be much more accurate if time and space was equal all over the board. This also affects air and naval bases, some just make the range accurate again, some make it insane.

Well there ya go. Now you can make your own game and make it correct.

[shadowhawk]

@General-6-Stars
O my bad, i though we had a mature discussion not 12yo trolling.

[General 6 Stars]

@shadowhawk said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:

@General-6-Stars
O my bad, i though we had a mature discussion not 12yo trolling.

Hey just saying. It was a mature suggestion. Ain’t 12 y old and ain’t a troll.