6. ATOMIC BOMB (Ultimate Tech, 15IPC/researcher)
-once per game, you may load a single BMBR with an atomic bomb
-The BMBR can only be loaded from one of your original ICs, and must have started it’s turn there to load it.
-Once loaded, the BMBR can only be used for strategic bombing, not combat. Roll any anti-aircraft (or interceptor) fire as normal. If the BMBR survives, roll 4 dice to determine SBR damage. For every 2 IPC of damage done, 1 IPC of damage is considered irrepairable on the opponent’s next turn.
i would see amirica buy that tech 10-100 times a game!!
Hi i rock
Nope, it’s only meant to be used once and cannot be re-researched
The strategic aspect here is to even up the odds against an enemy that’s stacking it’s capital
Classically, defenders have always had the edge over attackers
Players can always go conventional, and maybe go more HB, or regular bombers to use for that final attack, or they can go with something like this
To be honest, I’m a bit borderline about it’s inclusion in the game (a lot of overlap with HB strategic funtion) and could get rid of it if not very popular.
@i:
6. ATOMIC BOMB (Ultimate Tech, 15IPC/researcher)
-once per game, you may load a single BMBR with an atomic bomb
-The BMBR can only be loaded from one of your original ICs, and must have started it’s turn there to load it.
-Once loaded, the BMBR can only be used for strategic bombing, not combat. Roll any anti-aircraft (or interceptor) fire as normal. If the BMBR survives, roll 4 dice to determine SBR damage. For every 2 IPC of damage done, 1 IPC of damage is considered irrepairable on the opponent’s next turn.
i would see amirica buy that tech 10-100 times a game!!
Wouldn’t USA and Japan also require long range as well to use this against other Key capitals/IC’s?
Sorry, I should have been more clear
A loaded BMBR could still move about the map but would be designated as “The” BMBR that carries the atomic bomb
It would not be allowed to participate in any other combat or NCM other than the SBR on it’s final target
so for example, let’s say US rolls for the Atomic Bomb on Turn 5
On turn 5, US misses but they can move a BMBR to WEUS so that as of the 2nd time it rolls, the BMBR will be ready to be loaded and fly off
On turn 6, US succeeds and so the BMBR in WUS gets loaded with the A-bomb and can flies to Midway
On turn 7, The BMBR attacks Japan and does 4d6 damage of only which 1/2 can be repaired on Japan’s next turn. US should also position themselves to attack on turn 8 (as Japan will not be able to add as many new builds)
So for the Atomic Bomb tech, are you saying that the irrepaiable damage is permanent for the rest of the game? or just for the next turn only?
For the next turn only Bardoly
Half the damage can be repaired immediately, the rest could be repaired the following turn
This is why a player researching the Atomic Tech would have to be very careful about when they research it and most likely, should research it in advance just to guarantee it will be available when they need it
If the dropping of the bomb isn’t properly timed with the attack, the defending nation could recover fairly easily
(eg. on turn they are hit with the bomb, they could still repair what damage they can, develop Tech, produce units at other ICs, buy new ICs or save their money for a big buy the following turn)
Don’t get me wrong, the idea of the A-Bomb in A&A games has grown on me… but many of the rules I’ve read for this option I don’t like because they’re game-enders… but having said that, I think this use of the Atomic Bomb is far too weak. Not enough devastation. And (I’m wary to say it but) doesn’t effectively capture the use of the Atomic Bomb in comparison to history. I know, I know, A&A is not historically accurate (would take the fun out of the game IMHO), and one could say that dropping an A-Bomb is a game-ender. Well, it’s a game - and I’d like it to keep going despite the atom being split (sometimes, at other times it should end a prolonged game). I’m being picky perhaps, but I have the notion of something like this being (remotely) possible:
http://althistory.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Morgen_die_ganze_Welt
I’m not the sort to simply condemn something and not offer solutions… I do have some A-Bomb rules posted as well -
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16998.msg578901#msg578901
though I’m (and a few others in my gaming groups) not wholly satisfied with it. Hmm… I’m wanting an A-Bomb rule that can end a game, or swing the advantage to an underdog if that dog is worthy (isn’t to the point that they should’ve already conceded and they just keep playing because they’re stubborn). You know what I mean?
For simplification purposes, I think I’ll probably condense this down to just 4 new Global techs
-Air Transport and Atomic Bomb will be deleted
-Air Bases will be reduced to a minor Tech for 5IPC/researcher
**1. ESCORTS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Fighters can participate in strategic bombing raids. Attacking fighters may escort and protect the bombers, and they can originate from any territory, range permitting.
2. INTERCEPTORS (Moderate Tech, 7IPC/researcher)
-Any or all defending fighters based in a territory that is strategically bombed can participate in the defense of the industrial complex. The number of fighters that will defend is decided after the attacker’s Combat Movement phase is completed and before the Combat phase begins.
3. ASW-CRUISERS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Your cruisers now have the same capabilites as destroyers do against subs.
4. AIR BASES (Moderate Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Your fighters on islands (one land territory surrounded by one SZ) can now defend the adjacent SZ if attacked**
-Escorts and Interceptors are basically necessary vs. SBR strategies
-ASW Cruisers can be helpful for UK and for Jap/US in the Pacific
-Air Bases gives something to help Navies against HB
These are not techs:
1. ESCORTS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Fighters can participate in strategic bombing raids. Attacking fighters may escort and protect the bombers, and they can originate from any territory, range permitting.
2. INTERCEPTORS (Moderate Tech, 7IPC/researcher)
-Any or all defending fighters based in a territory that is strategically bombed can participate in the defense of the industrial complex. The number of fighters that will defend is decided after the attacker’s Combat Movement phase is completed and before the Combat phase begins.
Its like saying Fighters are a tech or bombers performing SBR is a tech.
Whats wrong with just keeping the OOB optional rules alone, rather than get players to buy them? People can play with them or not as they are so why do they need to change into a ‘tech’?
How does this add to the game?
@Imperious:
These are not techs:
1. ESCORTS (Minor Tech, 5IPC/researcher)
-Fighters can participate in strategic bombing raids. Attacking fighters may escort and protect the bombers, and they can originate from any territory, range permitting.2. INTERCEPTORS (Moderate Tech, 7IPC/researcher)
-Any or all defending fighters based in a territory that is strategically bombed can participate in the defense of the industrial complex. The number of fighters that will defend is decided after the attacker’s Combat Movement phase is completed and before the Combat phase begins.Its like saying Fighters are a tech or bombers performing SBR is a tech.
Whats wrong with just keeping the OOB optional rules alone, rather than get players to buy them? People can play with them or not as they are so why do they need to change into a ‘tech’?
How does this add to the game?
It adds to the game as you have to invest in these abilities to get them, and not just given to all countires
WHat :? That’s your only attempt to use an Atomic Bomb rule? It fails so you roll-over like a Frenchman? Aw c’mon, a little effort. :wink:
It adds to the game as you have to invest in these abilities to get them, and not just given to all countries
of course they do but why do they have to be 'repackaged as technology" It makes no sence. Rather just leave them alone as optional rules.
House rules can be standard rules, but to arbitrarily now make them ‘technology’ does not make sence. Fighters already do this and its not ‘technology’ related. Its a function that is just more realistic to defend against SBR.
@Imperious:
It adds to the game as you have to invest in these abilities to get them, and not just given to all countries
of course they do but why do they have to be 'repackaged as technology" It makes no sence. Rather just leave them alone as optional rules.
House rules can be standard rules, but to arbitrarily now make them ‘technology’ does not make sence. Fighters already do this and its not ‘technology’ related. Its a function that is just more realistic to defend against SBR.
You state ‘of course’ and then go ahead and contradict your understanding with a statement that confirms you do not understand.
Optional rules apply to EVERYONE. That’s not strategic. Strategy involves moves one country does that another one doesn’t, or doing it better.
I don’t think you’ll ever get a more strategic game over a realistic/historical one.
All i know is they are optional rules and for some reason they got repackaged at “technology”
So by extrapolation the Dardanelles rules will now become a technology?
Technology is Technology and NA’s are NA’s and Optional rules are Optional rules. Mixing them is making no sence IMO.
If you make house rules they should be different for each version 1941 and 42 because technology was different
for 41 perhaps you get 1 and 42 each nation gets 2? and these can be real technology like radar or something inventive.
example: radar could be a starting UK tech, where defending fighters can assist in land attacks or air attacks from adjacent areas or sea zones.
But too me to rehash the problems of the OOB technology too keep it KISS, while inventing such things as a ‘special free uk factory’ makes little sence.
I am quite sure to just say that the optional rules are standard gives the player the options and is more realistic than repackaging them as “technology” they they have to roll dice to see if they can get a basic function of a unit that already exists.
I will work on a KISS set of techs to illustrate latter.
@Imperious:
All i know is they are optional rules and for some reason they got repackaged at “technology”
So by extrapolation the Dardanelles rules will now become a technology?
Closing a territory is not based on a unit, so how can you ‘develop’ a unit to have that capability?
I think you are just being flippant.
please, post your NEW thoughts in a separate thread.
This thread is ABOUT AA50 Strategic.
Closing a territory is not based on a unit, so how can you ‘develop’ a unit to have that capability?
This is not an answer, War bonds for example are just extra IPC and have nothing to do with units or technology. Its just extra money that could be used to repair factories too.
And i am not sure why you don’t ever answer the first question which was asked twice already?
here it is again:
Why repackage optional rules as new techs, rather than just keep them as they are optional or standard rules, like NO’s and techs.
if they are on then all players gain more options. to limit them to ‘technology’ also limits them to players because they have to roll dice to get them and may never get them. So if you want more options you make them standard and required and make original house rules to support them right?
The other question was why and how can you apply the same exact rules for 1941 and 1942 such as the UK free factory , when clearly the value of this is not clear at all as a blanket fix for ALL the balancing issues of all 4 games?
And also please don’t get personal with me too. ok?
Personally axis_roll, I’ve just come to the conclusion that Imperious is obsessed with “Historical Realism” and there’s nothing wrong with that.
I suppose one can think that I’m more obsessed with “Increasing Strategic Options and Variation in Playout”, and that’s OK too.
I think that when we see each of us comes to these forums with our own particular biases, then we come to understand each other and there is not always a need for a response. I just chalk it up to Imperious being Imperious :-)
My only hope, is that maybe one day Imperious can see that this vairant is mainly about Strategy and Playout, rather than history, and just chalk it up to cousin_joe being cousin_joe. That’s when we’ll have progress :-D
How about it Imperious? :-)
Of course your original premise among other things was being more realistic as well as more options and strategy.
If realism is of any concern and if options are, then why not make the optional rules standard rather than techs. What is the advantage in this?
That was my question and too me it does not address either issue as an advantage to either realism or options.
Nothing i have posted is somehow ‘not relevant’ Just trying to contribute ideas so it can be more ‘out of the box’ thinking or something like that. Thats what i try to represent but AR just wants to think i am devious or something. I am not.
Also, its really good if you got input from all types of references and not ‘close off’ people. Let anybody and everybody help out and be courteous. I will do the same ok?
We are all on the same side here. Down the road i will sticky the main thread once its final so you can use it to link.
Huh… I agree with this statement:
“Also, its really good if you got input from all types of references and not ‘close off’ people. Let anybody and everybody help out and be courteous.”
I’m not part of the close off club, so my Atomic Bomb post was for naught. Damns… how do I get membership?
just post what you think is best based on your own ideas.
