Let me discuss some of the finer points of the rule.
1) The Free Dice Chart is there to reward countries for existing, that is why you get 1 die for pretty much not being captured. If you cannot qualify for that one die, you are probably about to be captured, so you won’t be too worried about technology (At least the imaginary people living in your country) as you are probably too busy packing all your belongings and becoming Refugees anyway!
2) From there the price chart increases SIGNIFICANTLY. 50 - 89 IPC for 2 rolls is about where Japan, Germany and the United States are going to be for most of the game, everyone else will be at 1 roll per game. That seems about right, these were the three biggest economies and militaries ON THE GAME BOARD for most of the time Global has been out and played. It is only appropriate that the United States, Germany and Japan have more resources to throw away on technologies than, for instance, Italy or Australia.
4) The technology tree is really my baby. What I did here was to take some of the technologies usually looked down on (War Bonds, Rockets, Radar) and combine them with the ones everyone seems to drool over (Long Range Aircraft, Heavy Bombers). The idea was to match them in a realistic fashion and in a way that a technology perceived as stronger off set the technology perceived as weaker. Then some tweaks were added in, some originally, some from the discussion thread. For instance, Battleships getting AA Gun was from the thread - it was originally 3 hit battleships. War Bonds being best of 2 dice +2 was an original submission and was designed to offset SBR damage. That was the motivation behind the technologies in the way they were combined. Lastly the reason it was combined into one chart was two fold: A) It was plain easier to add two technologies together for all 12 technologies and reduce the chart to six options. and B) we only have six sided dice. (Fine, you and I might have 30 sided dice, 8 sided, whatever. Joe Schmuck who just bought the game and never played RPGs probably only has 6 sided dice to be found anywhere on his block, let alone his house.) That pretty much locked us into 6 technologies, or 2 trees and I wanted to avoid having people who already only had a 3% chance get dropped to less than half of that.
5) The turn order was changed REALLY early. The idea was to negate “ambushes” ala Axis and Allies Revised - Out of the Box rules where LRA on Germany 1 became an “I win” button. So we applied the same solution that Larry Harris applied for AAR, we moved the application of technologies to the end of the round. Since that was moved, and since it was voted on to have free dice based on what cash you had, it only made sense to have the actual dice rolls at the end too. So basically, you buy your units and your technology dice during purchase units and after you collect your income, you determine how many total dice you have to throw.
6) So essentially, I took all of what was said and agreed upon, made sure it did not violate what was voted on (at the time, none did - only when the you only count certain income complaint was issued did we have a contradiction between the two) and put it in one coherent post. Later I expounded upon what exactly each technology said (instead of a brief description like LRA means your figs, tacs and strats get +2 range - which works for us, but not for those unfamiliar with our terminology.)
@mantlefan:
Great. Now you’ve unilaterally determined what the final rule is. You admit it wasn’t codified, but then say it’s the final rule. So much for democracy.
She does that, don’t worry about it.
On your scenario with your child.
1: why are NO’s not included?
2: How is counting your money simpler than looking at your income token and then adding the NO’s you hold?
I did not see them.
Because the INCOME COLLECTED is based on where the marker is on the Collect Income chart - which does not include National Objectives. Either we’re counting everything, in which case, let’s count everything, or we’re only talking about what territories you control at the end of the round.
Because you do not have to explain to someone that has never played why half their income does not count. It’s an argument I want to avoid by making this as simple as possible. You collect 100 IPC, you look at the chart. You collect 3 IPC, you look at the chart.
CHina was not included because China is the most likely to save income because it can place unlimited units.
Also this whole tech structure puts the corn cob to the minor powers. Guess it might only be best in 2v2 games or less.
How so? Now these minor powers actually have a chance to get technology - whereas before they had no chance to get technology. If anything, it gives them an actual shot at participating and thus not getting over run just because Japan decided to drop 60 IPC on the market over 6 turns and got every major technology out there.
Yeah, simple. Like take your current income from the income token…currently at the beginning of your turn…add NO ipcs from NO’s you hold currently…like right now. And then see how much tech you have.
@Cmdr:
Also this whole tech structure puts the corn cob to the minor powers. Guess it might only be best in 2v2 games or less.
How so? Now these minor powers actually have a chance to get technology - whereas before they had no chance to get technology. If anything, it gives them an actual shot at participating and thus not getting over run just because Japan decided to drop 60 IPC on the market over 6 turns and got every major technology out there.
wrong. All nations were on par for tech. You pay 6 ipcs, you get a die. Then you roll to see if you get tech. With your system the little guys are getting the shaft because they cannot afford 15ipcs for a die let alone 48 for 4.
@mantlefan:
Because the income you save and the income you plunder do not represent your per turn production capacity.
Also, Jen, that long post of yours at the end of the last page only shows how one person who maybe thinks they are acting objectively in reality puts a bunch of subjectivity in. What makes your changes minor enough to still be along the lines of what was voted other than that they are yours? Why are you right when you say a change is too big but if someone disagrees they are wrong?
The income you plunder represents resources, materials, bullion, scientific research, valid intelligence and other goods taken from a nation. It does TOO represent national production, you don’t have to produce as much because you stole it!
wrong. All nations were on par for tech. You pay 6 ipcs, you get a die. Then you roll to see if you get tech. With your system the little guys are getting the shaft because they cannot afford 15ipcs for a die let alone 48 for 4.
No. No one has to buy a die. Major nations get 2, minor nations get 1. It’s the way it’ll mostly turn out, I don’t expect people to buy dice. If we’re worried about them buying dice, raise the price to 30 IPC a die! I want free dice, I just dont want to ban purchased dice!
Please God make it stop.
@Vance:
Please God make it stop.
2
@Cmdr:
wrong. All nations were on par for tech. You pay 6 ipcs, you get a die. Then you roll to see if you get tech. With your system the little guys are getting the shaft because they cannot afford 15ipcs for a die let alone 48 for 4.
No. No one has to buy a die. Major nations get 2, minor nations get 1. It’s the way it’ll mostly turn out, I don’t expect people to buy dice. If we’re worried about them buying dice, raise the price to 30 IPC a die! I want free dice, I just dont want to ban purchased dice!
notice my use of past tense, as in earlier versions of the game.
I just wish she’d respond to me sometimes. Instead of misreading what I wrote or ignoring it all together. Not like I didn’t call it though.
I’ll vote for anything, just please make it stop.
I CAN’T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!
I just wish she’d respond to me sometimes. Instead of misreading what I wrote or ignoring it all together. Not like I didn’t call it though.
I do, I did not feel it necessary to state to you that the idea behind this whole thing was to give the minors at least one free chance a round to get a technology and thus not infringe on their ability to keep themselves sovereign. Perhaps I should have, you were not there for the original discussion. It was later added that it should be based on what cash you have so that you could save a few IPC and still get your free die. Then we wondered how it would work for bigger nations - after all, they have stronger economies, more resources and more historical accuracy in actually developing weapons, but we did not want it to get out of hand, so a tiered system was created. This discussion was to determine 3 things:
All changing the income brackets would do - in effect - is to destroy the original premise of the rule: To give minor technologies easier access to technologies. Anything that makes this fundamental change moot, should be immediately discarded. We had two votes, both votes were to make it easier for minor countries to get technologies.
Now, your request to make it optional was reasonable, it did not effect the ease of minor countries to get technologies, and was incorporated with little debate. YG and Vance, primarily, wanted application of technology at the end. To be honest, I thought it already was in Global, and Anniversary and basically everything since the first day LHTR 2.0 came out for Revised! Otherwise, I would have stipulated it to begin and it would have been copied over when YG copied the agreed upon rule for further refinement. Battleships went from being 3 hit to 2 hit but with AA Guns. Carriers went from carrying 3 fighters to being able to recover fighters when damaged. Etc.
Basically, refinements are getting in, clarifications are getting in. I am balking at acquiessing to having major changes that negate the purpose of the new rule from getting in unopposed. It could still get in - assuming we either have a vote or Vance and YG scream at me and tell me that we need to change it. Even then I’ll give it one more big push to keep it out - it violates the spirit of the rule! We wanted MINORS to have FREE access to technology. We did not want you to have to control half the globe to get one die.
Now, the price of dice are very high to prevent major nations from buying up a bunch of extra dice! Let’s be frank, Italy, England, Australia are not buying dice even at 5 IPC each. America, Germany, Japan would buy dice at 20 IPC each if they were motivated - they can afford it! They just won’t buy as many dice.
I’m good with discussing the price of extra dice. I really am. We can even discuss the brackets so that they are high/low enough that you are comfortable with them. What I won’t do is stop ANZAC (or someone) from saving 2 IPC to qualify for 1 die.
Okay, looking back through here is what we have for actual posted positions:
Young Grasshopper: Cash on Hand
Vance: Cash on Hand
Special Forces: Cash on Hand
Salan: Cash on Hand
Jennifer: Cash on Hand
JimmyHat: Income end of round (basically, cash on hand, but you cannot count anything saved.) - disclaimer, Jimmy has said he does not want to play with technology and we already appeased him by making it optional. :wink: Not saying his argument is invalid, just saying whatever we choose won’t effect him one way or the other as he won’t play with the rule.
Mantlefan: Either collected income, whatever you would collect at the start of your turn, only purchased dice, etc (he’s had like 6 or 7 submissions, none the same as the rest.)
Right now, just based on what I remember from the pages - as I went through and killed double posts (posts where someone says the exact same thing, just with different words) we have:
5 - Want Cash on Hand, you are allowed to save your income if you want. That the penalty for saving your money is enough to offset any advantage getting an extra die could possibly give you.
2 - Want (if I can force Mantlefan to agree with JimmyHat’s steady, unchanging request) only what you collect at the end of your round, nothing saved.
Given this, why not say a nation may save up to 5 IPC (since they come in 1s, 5s and 10s) in any given round to apply towards getting a free technology roll next round. This is about the maximal end of any nation’s realistic savings in any given round is far short of “buying” a die without spending money. We’ll also conceed that Treasury Money does not count for your free dice - but may be used to purchase dice!
National Objectives - the major source of Germany, Japan, Russia, America and Australia’s income (if attained) will count towards your “income” to determine what free dice you may or may not qualify for.
I hope this compromise is enough that nobody is happy, but all can agree so we can close this discussion and add the rule to the manuscript (which I am typing up, because I asked YG if I could and he said yes. :P So blame me for all typos!)
Jimmy: Do you object to this compromise? (You speak for Mantle now. IL banned him again.)
YG, Vance, Salan, SpecFor: Do you object to this compromise?
Let’s all just take a pause, nobody do anything irrational.
We have worked way to hard on this, and have come way to far to push it over the edge. We are a lot closer than we think, but we can’t rush it just because some people think there is a time limit or are getting frustrated with the process.
Here’s a suggestion, why don’t we play some A&A this weekend and refrain from burning this thread down to the ground.
Reflection breeds sanity.
My position(not mantlefans) is that limiting extra dice to 4-6 means minor nations cannot buy extra dice.
Secondly, I vote for going from CoH to Income at the beginning of your turn. NO’s included…that you hold at the beginning of the turn. Its very simple because you just look at where your ipc token is on the chart, and add any NO’s you hold right now.
I gave a bunch of reasons a page ago as to why this is the preferred method. Most of the reasons are one’s Mantlefan came up with, but that doesn’t invalidate them.
My position(not mantlefans) is that limiting extra dice to 4-6 means minor nations cannot buy extra dice.
Secondly, I vote for going from CoH to Income at the beginning of your turn. NO’s included…that you hold at the beginning of the turn. Its very simple because you just look at where your ipc token is on the chart, and add any NO’s you hold right now.
I gave a bunch of reasons a page ago as to why this is the preferred method. Most of the reasons are one’s Mantlefan came up with, but that doesn’t invalidate them.
I agree that Mantle fan brought up some good points about using income instead of cash on hand, however, I am reverting my support back to cash on hand because, I am a person of compromise and there are other aspects of this rule that are far more important to me than this one.
Jen and her 9 year old daughter wants it to be cash on hand, I say OK…… but I will expect her to compromise when discussing something in R&D that is important to me. we appreciate your impute Jimmy and we need your help bringing this home. When the time comes, Vance will lay out the versions to be voted on and we will all have a vote, that is unless we scared him away.
@Cmdr:
Given this, why not say a nation may save up to 5 IPC (since they come in 1s, 5s and 10s) in any given round to apply towards getting a free technology roll next round. This is about the maximal end of any nation’s realistic savings in any given round is far short of “buying” a die without spending money. We’ll also conceed that Treasury Money does not count for your free dice - but may be used to purchase dice!
No reason to limit the amount someone can save, it may be a poor tactic but lets not remove it from play. Also I agree that you can spend your ipcs any way you see fit and that includes tech.National Objectives - the major source of Germany, Japan, Russia, America and Australia’s income (if attained) will count towards your “income” to determine what free dice you may or may not qualify for.
I agree that NO’s should count towards this.
@Vance:
I’ll vote for anything, just please make it stop.
I CAN’T TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!
I think Vance may have turned his plastic gun onto himself.
Although i’m inclined to prefer income at end of turn, I think all the presented options are workable. So i have no objections really.
