To design a fort unit into the A&A system.
Inf cost 3 IPC, and def on 2 and att on 1, for a total of 3 combat values, so lets say 1 IPC equals 1 combat value.
Tanks cost 6 IPC and have a total combat value of 6. The benefit of movement seem to be an extra reward for buing this expansive unit.
Artillery cost 4 IPC and have a total combat value of 4, plus it boost up one matching infantry, making a total combat value of 5.
Blockhouse could cost 5 IPC. The fortification units had lesser men than infantry units or armour units, but heavier guns, so lets pretend it has 1 IPC-worth of infantry, 2 IPC-worth of heavy artillery, 1 IPC-worth of concrete bunker protection and 1 IPC-worth of mine-fields, anti-tank obstacles and barbed wire.
The Blockhouse could roll a die on 4 or less for hit, and take two hits like a battleship.
The Blockhouse could roll 3 dices on 3 or less for hits, and take only one hit, just to simplyfie the system, but this would also depart from the classic system.
The Blockhouse could half the attacking value, so 4 attacking infantry can only roll like 2 dices, or a tank hit on 1 only.
I think there is a point to which a game can be complicated, or modeled in depth. Axis and Allies is complicated already compared to some games, but not nearly as much as some others. So in my book I still consider it simple enough to play enjoyably. It is basically RISK on steroids with the ability to buy different units and some other basic rule differences. RISK is over-simple and can lead to some amount of boredome. Axis and Allies allows the player more options.
While I am generally a proponent of bigger is better, too many options isn’t always a good thing. And the less complicated a game is, the better its success. My point here is that I don’t think blockhouses are a necessary addition, perhaps even a smart one. The recent addition of Mech Infantry, Tac bombers and Cruisers have been very helpful and have added to the game dynamic. Blockhouses or other fortifications just seem… to be pushing what we need for the game. I guess I’d like to see how it would work out in practice, but to me fortification pieces would add another step and be another distraction to a moving game… Making AA a little too detailed if you will.
Hoffman, I couldn’t agree with you less. This game need a distinctive defansive unit like a Blockhouse. Fortifications was a big part of WWII, but that is not modelled well in this game. What do mechanized infantry, tactical fighters and cruisers add to the game ? Absolutely nothing.
Hoffman, I couldn’t agree with you less. This game need a distinctive defansive unit like a Blockhouse. Fortifications was a big part of WWII, but that is not modelled well in this game. What do mechanized infantry, tactical fighters and cruisers add to the game ? Absolutely nothing.
I think they add choice… choice of what to buy, and they expand different special abilities that were definitely present in the war. They add combat dynamic and they provide different choices in different situations. I am not saying blockhouses were not important, it’s just that strength in mobility was a new and defining feature of this war.
Like I said, I wouldn’t mind seeing how a blockhouse piece might work out in practice… I just have preconceived doubts about it. They were important aspects of the war absolutely, but I question whether we need to go that far in AA.
The problem with the blockhouse / fortification is the scale of the territories in this game.
Not only is it hard to outflank entire countries but fortifications generally don’t provide 360 degrees of protection. The maginot line didn’t face Spain, for example.
So, nice piece but hard to scale the effects properly.
#549
I feel that a blockhouse piece would be an unnecessary addition. You guys complain about representing all elements of the war, but it’s not a very good representation if a line of fortifications costs the same for a small territory and a large one. For accurate representation, you would almost have to make a chart stating how much the unit costs in different sized territories. The addition of mechs and tacs has increased the focus on speed and manueverability for this particular game, but a blockhouse piece would just slow things down again.
Ah yes! … I have rallied support.
Blockhouse could cost 5 IPC. The fortification units had lesser men than infantry units or armour units, but heavier guns, so lets pretend it has 1 IPC-worth of infantry, 2 IPC-worth of heavy artillery, 1 IPC-worth of concrete bunker protection and 1 IPC-worth of mine-fields, anti-tank obstacles and barbed wire.
The Blockhouse could roll a die on 4 or less for hit, and take two hits like a battleship.
The Blockhouse could roll 3 dices on 3 or less for hits, and take only one hit, just to simplyfie the system, but this would also depart from the classic system.
The Blockhouse could half the attacking value, so 4 attacking infantry can only roll like 2 dices, or a tank hit on 1 only.
For blockhouses or fortifications you’d have to come up with a slew of new rules and contingency plans. Plus, with the rolling scheme you outlined, blockhouses would be extremely powerful, especially if you were allowed to buy them indiscriminately (as many as you want). Nothing that rolls on 4s, or rolls 2 dice should cost only 5 IPCs … nobody would do any attacking for fear of getting slaughtered. And rolling three dice for one unit, I am sorry, but that just seems rather bogus.
A little more thought may provide some useful possibilities though. I mean, why not think it out. You’ve got nothing to lose. And if you really wanted to make a house rule for them you could… you might need to buy an extra set of AA D-Day for some more blockhouse pieces though.
I seriously doubt that there will be any blockhouses or similar units in AAE40. It’ll just make an already-complicated game even harder to understand, without adding that much to the gameplay.
They’d be a good house rule to add, and they would better represent the Maginot Line, but I don’t think they’ll be in this game.
Blockhouse could cost 5 IPC. The fortification units had lesser men than infantry units or armour units, but heavier guns, so lets pretend it has 1 IPC-worth of infantry, 2 IPC-worth of heavy artillery, 1 IPC-worth of concrete bunker protection and 1 IPC-worth of mine-fields, anti-tank obstacles and barbed wire.
The Blockhouse could roll a die on 4 or less for hit, and take two hits like a battleship.
The Blockhouse could roll 3 dices on 3 or less for hits, and take only one hit, just to simplyfie the system, but this would also depart from the classic system.
The Blockhouse could half the attacking value, so 4 attacking infantry can only roll like 2 dices, or a tank hit on 1 only.
I’m reluctant to use these types of blockhouses in the game. I think they’re far too powerful for their cost. If they only cost 5 IPCs, they should defend on a 4 (with only 1 roll, not 3), not move, and maybe have some other special power, like boosting another unit’s defense. I don’t think I’d add them into my games, though. They just make the game more complicated and encourage stagnant defense (like infantry stack) rather than the mobile attacking that the mech inf and dive bombers help provide.
I think pillboxes are far too tactical for a game at this level.
#568-563
@i:
fine call them fortifakations. i havnt eat anything today so im not thinking straigh
LOL I wasn’t picking on the terms :-D
Even if you call them fortifications I think the scale of the game doesn’t suit the piece… but that’s just me.
#564
Same here. I think at certain levels, the game is assumed to model certain aspects of the war, or at least have them “taken care of”. What I mean by that is… you don’t see yourself having to move convoy ships around the board, or make sure you have supply tokens so you can conduct operations, or send out search planes on recon for the enemy… All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. I don’t mean to say that the inclusion of fortification pieces would instantly create all this extra work, but it adds to what is already there. Plus, I would assume that nearly every territory on the board would have some level of fortification. Whether or not they are as large and intensive as the Maginot Line, Seigfried Line or the Atlantic Wall, or as relatively isolated as city defenses… I think they all sort of even out in the end. It is like one of those invisible items that is assumed to be involved and taken care of, without you having direct control over it. Because really, everyone had fortifications, everywhere. But with the advent of real air power, fortifications mattered less in World War II than other weapons and equipment.
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
ASL? What is that?
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
ASL? What is that?
Sorry, Advanced Squad Leader. If insurance companies made wargames they’d have rulebooks like ASL.
#577
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
ASL? What is that?
Sorry, Advanced Squad Leader. If insurance companies made wargames they’d have rulebooks like ASL.
#577
Looks like you got the spelling right. If you had another point here I am afraid I have missed it.
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
ASL? What is that?
Sorry, Advanced Squad Leader. If insurance companies made wargames they’d have rulebooks like ASL.
#577
Or like world in flames
Maybe I am slow… are you guys comparing complicated rulebooks from different games to this discussion? If so, I get it now. Congradulations me. It does not help that I have never played the games you two spoke of.
Maybe I am slow… are you guys comparing complicated rulebooks from different games to this discussion? If so, I get it now. Congradulations me. It does not help that I have never played the games you two spoke of.
neither have I. ASL is a tactical wargame based on hexes. The size of one hext corresponds to a very small piece of land. This is fine for single battles, but world in flames uses hexes for the entire globe :-o :-o :-o
All of these were major aspects of the war, but it becomes too tedious to model every detail. The game would become mind dullingly long and over-complicated. .
And how do you spell ASL?
#574
ASL? What is that?
Sorry, Advanced Squad Leader. If insurance companies made wargames they’d have rulebooks like ASL.
#577
Looks like you got the spelling right. If you had another point here I am afraid I have missed it.
[OK knowing that if you have to explain a joke……]
Well anyway, my point was that you sounded like you were describing ASL.
Perhaps I’m dating myself by using the tagline from the Rolaids commercials (how do you spell relief / R-O-L-A-I-D-S) to make the simile.
The fact that I was asking how to spell an acronym was additional self-deprecating humour. Or an attempt at same.
Ahhh nevermind.
#579
