Re: G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread

simon33

This is potentially a real issue for marines.

I’d have to say that I don’t fully understand it for normal transports - I guess the idea is to prevent gamey plays but at least you could be exempt from the need to drop in a hostile land zone when you start in a hostile SZ.

Rules are rules though.

Adam514

@simon33:

This is potentially a real issue for marines.

I’d have to say that I don’t fully understand it for normal transports - I guess the idea is to prevent gamey plays but at least you could be exempt from the need to drop in a hostile land zone when you start in a hostile SZ.

Rules are rules though.

Whether you are starting in a hostile zone or not doesn’t change anything. You only have to amphibious assault with the loaded units if they were loaded in that combat phase.

simon33

@Adam514:

@simon33:

This is potentially a real issue for marines.

I’d have to say that I don’t fully understand it for normal transports - I guess the idea is to prevent gamey plays but at least you could be exempt from the need to drop in a hostile land zone when you start in a hostile SZ.

Rules are rules though.

Whether you are starting in a hostile zone or not doesn’t change anything. You only have to amphibious assault with the loaded units if they were loaded in that combat phase.

It changes the option to move in the NCM phase - removes it.

Adam514

@simon33:

@Adam514:

@simon33:

This is potentially a real issue for marines.

I’d have to say that I don’t fully understand it for normal transports - I guess the idea is to prevent gamey plays but at least you could be exempt from the need to drop in a hostile land zone when you start in a hostile SZ.

Rules are rules though.

Whether you are starting in a hostile zone or not doesn’t change anything. You only have to amphibious assault with the loaded units if they were loaded in that combat phase.

It changes the option to move in the NCM phase - removes it.

Yes of course.

gamerman01

Personally, I’ve been strongly against the Mongolia rules ever since they were introduced. Too complicated, and incongruous with all prior A&A rules. Same reasons I don’t like Vichy rules.

That said, it is kind of pointless to criticize the established and existing rules that everyone is playing unless you’re going to make your own house rules and you have someone who agrees with you.

I could make quite a list of rules I think are ridiculous, but I’ll just leave you with this one, that I never see anyone else complaining about - the way convoy damage is done. It is ridiculous that you can destroy all the income of a territory that is not wholly dependent on income from the sea. Prime example: Zone 101. It is possible to destroy ALL 32 income of EUS and CUS by having warships in Z101. Indeed, it would be possible to destroy 30 IPC’s of income of the USA with a mere 5 submarines. In the vernacular of my area of the country…… that ain’t right

gamerman01

I understand that the “balanced mod” represents an opportunity to change any previous rules of A&A, but I’m glad that most were left alone. One reason is, it is easier to transition from 2nd edition to BM and back. So it’s good if the Mongolia rules are exactly the same.

I started making my own modification before I ever heard of the balanced mod (and who knows - may even complete it, but the need was drastically reduced with the introduction of this mod) and the convoy rules will be overhauled. Also, to pique your interest, I am looking at returning to 6 playable powers ala AA50 by eliminating ANZAC and France. For one, this was my way of eliminating the problem of the huge disincentive of vanilla to liberate Paris, a problem the BM team took care of with the sacking capitals rule change. For two, ever since P40 was introduced, I’ve thought it ridiculous that ANZAC is a separate playable power from the UK.

Introduction of a “mid” complex that can produce 5 units, adding VC’s to the Pacific and requiring Japan to get 8 VC’s, and more. For you, Simon: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ujxn3r0e5sekcVPS8CbkH3KByB1iVrNJimiwA3e_BiI/edit#gid=7
That is where my work in progress was when I stopped. If people start getting tired of BM from playing it so many times (this happens to every version after a few years) I am likely to complete this project along with the continued help of league players and we might all have a brand new game to play.

Keep in mind I haven’t touched this since balanced mod came out, and I would probably immediately make several tweaks to this based on my knowledge and experience of balanced mod

simon33

Can’t say that I can recall ever seeing a convoy roll for either western or eastern USA. Maybe just remove the convoy zones. Would have no effect on the game.

gamerman01

Sure, but like I said, that was the prime example

Another culprit is Z97. You shouldn’t be able to convoy all of the nation of Italy’s income, nor should you be able to rob Germany of Yugoslavia and Greek income

simon33

Interesting GM. What about SBR? There’s a lot of complexity in all that - too much IMO.

Definitely agree on SZ97 though. Maybe just house rule out that it can affect either northern or southern Italy? I.e. make one of them immune.

Anyway, I still think that nullifying Mongolia on a USSR DOW on Japan is a logical and sensible move that would be better for game play.

-Pete

@Gamerman01:

Sure, but like I said, that was the prime example

Another culprit is Z97. You shouldn’t be able to convoy all of the nation of Italy’s income, nor should you be able to rob Germany of Yugoslavia and Greek income

Why? Yugoslavia and Greece drained Axis materiel and manpower… there was no oil or ore to plunder there; just partisans.

-Pete

I mean you’re not saying the Axis is that short on net income obviously…

gamerman01

@-Pete:

@Gamerman01:

Sure, but like I said, that was the prime example

Another culprit is Z97. You shouldn’t be able to convoy all of the nation of Italy’s income, nor should you be able to rob Germany of Yugoslavia and Greek income

Why? Yugoslavia and Greece drained Axis materiel and manpower… there was no oil or ore to plunder there; just partisans.

So how does a fleet in Z97 affect anything
You don’t seem to understand my point. The point is Z97 has nothing to do with Germany getting increased income from Greece or Yugoslavia

-Pete

Why should you not be able to convoy away all of Italy’s income in the med?

-Pete

If a zone has a convoy square it means the territory is economically dependent on sea trade to produce a surplus(PUs)

gamerman01

Oh, so the United States is dependent on sea trade to produce a surplus?

-Pete

If the USA was blockaded on both seaboards, what do you think the economic situation would look like?

gamerman01

You’re dodging the question that I asked first

gamerman01

BTW and FYI, this thread has been split off from the balanced mod thread, so no need to be related to BM :-)

simon33

@-Pete:

Why should you not be able to convoy away all of Italy’s income in the med?

Because Italy has its own industry and natural resources AFAIK. Or is it more like the UK with industry and few resources?

Re: SZ101, I’m inclined to think that is kind of realistic though. Operation Drumbeat aka second happy time resulted in large losses to the allies, much more than they needed to lose. Technically it was its allies which lost out but that is difficult to model in the game.

-Pete

@Gamerman01:

You’re dodging the question that I asked first

No, I was answering it with a question.

Re: G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

L26 BM4 Avner(X) vs msoot(L+22)

L26 BM4 msoot(Axis) vs discalced (Allies+20)

dawgoneit +15 Axis. VS surfer Allies, PTV

PTV 25 playoff rd2 Stucifer v 666 (axis+10)

discalced Allies +25 VS dawgoneit Axis BM

L26 OOB Knusperheinz (X) vs. Martin (L) - no bid

2v2 Final: Daaras and FranceNeedsMorePower (L) vs Gamerman01 and Booper (X)

L25 G40 OOB Gamerman01 (x) v VictoryFirst (+50)

14

18.1k

40.9k

1.8m