@poptech said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
the most unrealistic thing
It’s a game. With little plastic pieces. That uses dice to simulate combat.
@govz said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
@poptech said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
the most unrealistic thing
It’s a game. With little plastic pieces. That uses dice to simulate combat.
In that case can we add UFOs?
@poptech Everything about this game is unrealistic nonsense, but it is fun and plays well. Air bases and naval bases both help balance the game (without them the allies would be at even more of a disadvantage) and add to the complexity of the game. You don’t have to like it and can play without if you wish. There are other games that prioritize realism, and you can always try one of those if ‘realism’ is something that you want in a board game.
Sure you can. Just put more barrels in the plane (for refuelling at a smaller airfield). And there are more barrels of oil at more developed airfields to make that happen.
Facts right there.
Straw man fallacy!
Exactly. I even sent the guy some games that are more realistic.
Sure. Of course they can refuel in normal fields.
But there are significant benefits for having an airfield, which is why the countries built one in the first place.
Honestly even removing the bonus movement still keeps it unrealistic. If you think one plane moving is the equivalent of one flight, then it doesn’t make sense for strategic bombers to fly from Perth to Kenya in one turn. Even the B-29 is off by 500 kilometres (using ferry range), to say nothing of lesser planes. The Indian Ocean is bigger than what the game simulates.
Exactly. More often. And since as I said, a turn is 6 months, a plane can fly several times. Enough extra flights and stops and you’ll have moved the equivalent of an extra one territory/sea zone.
@poptech said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
In that case can we add UFOs?
Would they get a bonus movement from an airbase?
@farmboy said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
@poptech Everything about this game is unrealistic nonsense, but it is fun and plays well. Air bases and naval bases both help balance the game (without them the allies would be at even more of a disadvantage) and add to the complexity of the game. You don’t have to like it and can play without if you wish. There are other games that prioritize realism, and you can always try one of those if ‘realism’ is something that you want in a board game.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_in_Flames
lol
You nailed it farmboy. I’m surprised I’m interacting lol
Looks so much fun! If only I had more time… maybe when I’m retired.
@farmboy Actually no the bonus movement is not an abstraction of anything, it is a magical power. Something you find in fantasy games.
The game is largely unbalanced because of Japan and Russia and a total lack of proper play testing. When people do not know how to design a game they add in nonsense instead of fixing the actual problem.
It is not about prioritizing realism, it is about making things semi-logical. Nothing about bonus movement has been argued successfully by anyone here.
@superbattleshipyamato You can put more barrels of fuel in a plane anywhere it can land. Here is an aviation fuel dump in China during WWII;
Show me any documentation that planes leaving from an airfield can now magically travel hundreds to thousands of miles further.
@superbattleshipyamato said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
Sure. Of course they can refuel in normal fields.
But there are significant benefits for having an airfield, which is why the countries built one in the first place.
Those “advantages” have nothing to do with magically allowing planes to fly hundreds to thousands of miles further.
Honestly even removing the bonus movement still keeps it unrealistic. If you think one plane moving is the equivalent of one flight, then it doesn’t make sense for strategic bombers to fly from Perth to Kenya in one turn. Even the B-29 is off by 500 kilometres (using ferry range), to say nothing of lesser planes. The Indian Ocean is bigger than what the game simulates.
I never said removing the bonus movement made the game “realistic”, I said it made it more realistic which is something a larger version of this game should being move towards not away from. Everything else you mention are additonal problems.
@govz said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
@poptech said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
In that case can we add UFOs?
Would they get a bonus movement from an airbase?
I am going to refer to it from now on as magic movement.
Also they should allows tanks to be able to blitz 3 spaces if they leave from a factory something that happens in real life because you can strap fuel cans to the back.
That’s less realistic. Also straw manning and not answering the question.
@poptech said in Bonus Movement is Unrealistic Nonsense:
I never said removing the bonus movement made the game “realistic”, I said it made it more realistic which is something a larger version of this game should being move towards not away from. Everything else you mention are additonal problems.
True.
Now you’re just assuming things and saying thing you have no proof of about the development of this game.
I already told you how that was possible. There’s more fuel in air bases so you can stuff more fuel in a plane, allowing it to fly further by taking off more often.
