A&ARe (Enhanced) tech rules in AA50

Honestly, we’d have to divvy up the 12 technologies to determine major, minor and intermediary technologies. (6 IPC per roll, 5 IPC per roll, 4 IPC per roll with a -1 for shared tech of course.)

Then just roll tech like we did in AARe

I have like 60 some odd, I stopped counting at 61.

If I had to pigeon hole the technologies right now, based only on what I’ve been able to do and what I’ve seen done here is the break down I think would work best:

Advanced Technologies:  Cost 6 IPC per researcher and include

Long Range Aircraft (This one is just crazy powerful in this game due to it coming the instant you discover it.  Suddenly naval assets you thought were safe are artificial reefs for the fishies.)
Improved Factories
Mechanized Infantry
Heavy Bombers (Just as powerful as you think they are.)

Moderate Technologies: Cost 5 IPC per researcher and include

Jet Fighters
Improved Shipyards
Radar (I would add this to Battleships)
Paratroopers

Minor Technologies: Cost 4 IPC per researcher and include

Advanced Artillery (You would think this is higher, but it’s just so hard to get Artillery to the enemy in this game!)
War Bonds (I would amend this so that a roll of 6 allows you another roll added to the first)
Rockets
Super Submarines

I would also give all Battleships, regardless of technologies, the right to have AA Guns on them and make all Aircraft Carriers two hit units.

Earlier in the game this will really help Japan, but later it will really help England and America, so it balances out.

I dropped Rockets to Minor because they have lost a lot of strength in this incarnation.

For instance, Germany only owns 1 AA Gun vs Russia who has 2, England who has 3, etc.  Meanwhile, the nations that own more than one gun, can only hit one place with it realistically.  Germany only has the one complex, so you can’t hit them twice! (To clarify what I meant.)

Also, new guns are 6 IPC now, not 5.  That detracts from it’s value as well.

Then there is the counter balance of Improved Factories and War Bonds that negate and reverse the affects of Rockets.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying it’s not worth having, but when compared to the other 11 technologies, I think it’s luster is a bit lower.

BTW, I would add AA abilities to all Battleships and radar would apply if you had it. Not sure if you caught that or if you thought radar was the only way to get AA Guns on Battleships.  Obviously, only 1 gun in a sea zone could fire, so it wouldnt matter if you had 1 battleship or 1,000 battleships.

Looking to put together a “beta” version for AA50 over the weekend.  It’ll be very heavily borrowed from the Revised edition since many of the rules would transfer nicely.

I’ll consider adding in a couple new units as well, to add some deeper dynamics to the game.  We can always ask Holkann, very nicely, to add the new icons to the game for them. (think I might even have a version of battlemap that has some extra icons…)

here is a tech chart that i made for my axis and allies game,
start the game with 1 researcher, you may buy a researcher for 3 i.p.c. no more than 3 researcher’s,
a dice roll cost’s 1 i.p.c.
buy as many dice as you want, when you get to the end of the research track, the tech is developed,
your researcher may start a new research, when the tech has been developed

the picture did not load, the chart has track’s, of up to 35 space’s, each tech has a different number of space’s, move the research token along the track, after the dice roll,

if you roll 3 dice for radar and get , 3, 5, 2, the chart would look like this

RADAR 15  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  :? 0 0 0 0 0 0
                                        ^
                                        researcher

Obviously I would post the entire rules once I finish typing them up for review.  Right now I am more interested in getting the already existing rules into compatible form and adding in some of the changes we’ve been discussing in various threads.

Battleships - + AA Guns (Increases with Radar Tech)
Escort Carriers - Att 0, Def 1, Move 2, Carrier 1 Fighter, Cost 8
Light Cruisers - Att 1, Def 2, Move 2, Shore Bombard @1, Cost 7
Submarines - Get all the blessings (including CRD) from AARe

Technologies come into effect at the end of the round and are 100% targetable.  Still splitting between Major/Minor based on game performance that I’ve witnessed.  I still want a three way split, but I’ll settle on two since it’s what people seem to have been asking for.

Income is collected at the start of your round, not the end. (Should cut down on the scale of armies significantly.)

Any of that you want to change while I mentioned it?

First:  IL had a brilliant idea of using Pocket Battleships in place of Light Cruisers.  They’re 4/4 units with 1 hit to sink.  I’d probably peg their build cost at 18 IPC (cost of a carrier in Classic.)

Second:  I believe, in my heart of hearts, that escort carriers would add a serious ability to the game to split fleets up and make life more fun.  Right now, with the cost of everything, it’s harder to have two battle fleets in the Pacific.  Obviously, my efforts could come for naught, they may work out, or they may need to be tweaked.  But that’s what playtesting is for, right?

Third:  Submarines would almost completely cease to be a combat unit in this edition.  They’re main function would be almost exclusively CRD.  I’m toying with making their defense value 0 since Submarines did not defend themselves, they flooded their ballast tanks and dove for cover as deep as possible.  If I did that, the attacking destroyers (only ships able to attack Submarines) would have to hit them to sink them, otherwise, they’d just dive for cover and be allowed to retreat one zone to safety. This would help balance their abilities.

Why 18? 14 is best cost. IN AA50 the BB is 20, so why is the one hit BC going for only 2 IPC less?

I think 14 is perfect

also, the escort carrier is perfect at 8 IPC. The small nations cant afford 14 and may not even have 2 fighters so its wasted.

These cheaper alternatives are good for cash strapped nations who need some halfway decent navy.

I like the IL’s new battlecrusier idea, but what happens to crusiers? should there price/combat values decrease, maybe they should have 3 movement points or no shore bombardment, otherwise you just have two very redundant units

perhaps crusiers should just be gotten ridof opting for a light cursier and battlecrusier unit

they stay at OOB.

look at it this way a Battlecruiser or Pocket Battleship was designed as having the firepower as a battleship, but with lighter armor plating.

Graff Spee
Alaska
Kongo
Gneisenau and Scharnhorst
Hood
Prince of whales

Battlecruisers shared the very large main armament of battleships, and were generally as large and costly as battleships of the same generation. They traded off armour or firepower for higher speed

so how best to do that?

4-4 but only one hit. Also the idea of a 3 MP ship would result of a cost boost and i dont think its enough to make sence. I prefer no ships moving 3 unless you have technology that may allow other ships to do this… otherwise having one ship do this makes it too important, when Carriers were fast as well.

14 IPC is a decent cost…cruisers are 12…so perhaps 15-16 IPC is better but i think thats out of reach of the cash poor nations. I just want a cheap filler ship for the Axis and UK

plus the old MB AA Battleship looks like a battlecruiser. its perfect.

I think crusiers should be called light cursiers and given additonal movement as well as carriers being able to move 3
light crusiers should also not be able to shorebombard or only at 1 or 2, maybe also it should ASW

The units are just too similar otherwise

also, where can I get a set of MB pieces, I am a relitive newcomer to A&A  and never got the original

Fast Carriers existed in Revised (LHTR) which allowed Carriers to move 3 spaces.  So the idea is not unprecedented.

Here’s my idea:

Mechanized Infantry National Advantage is changed to Fast Carriers for America.
Super Submarines Technology is replaced with Fast Destroyers

The problem with Fast Carriers in AAR/LHTR was that the only thing you could bring with them were fighters!  It made them targets.  However, if you could bring destroyers along, at least you’d have some fodder to go with the carriers.

I think making cursiers faster makes is more realistic than fast destroyers

also why should we make subs even more useless by removing one of the few techs that help them

Because submarines won’t be used in combat, they’ll be used for CRD.

Also, it’s much easier to get the speed of a small destroyer up to 48 knots then it is to get the speed of a battlewagon up to 48 knots.  More realistic to have the smaller ship go faster than the bigger ones.

Also, I should note, if you are using submarines for naval combat, you are not using them properly in this edition.  They’re really designed for harrying the enemy, which is why the destroyer is so bloody cheap!

Giving submarines CRD would at least give them a use.

Now, if you prefer I could make Super Destroyers take precedence instead of Fast Destroyers.  That would make destroyers attack at 3 instead of at 2, which is inline with them taking over the role of cannon fodder naval unit.