Posts made by Lucifer

@ critmonster, I don’t think you know what impact the power-techs have in A&A.

A no-tech game, you still have to buy the right units, make the right combat moves, and make the right non combat moves. Decisions on techs is not strategic at all, compared to all the other factors in A&A, which decides who wins and who loses.

The only decisions with regards to tech is how much money to spend, and what chart to chose, and this is very simple, but most of all it is purely luck based.

As long as there are power-techs, any tech game will always be focused on who gets the power-techs first, and which country gets whatever power-tech.
A tech race is completely different from buying, combat moves and NC moves, b/c they will have much less effect once a power achieves a power-tech. And the result and impact of power-tech(s) is not based on decisions, b/c both players will spend money on tech, then all you hope for is to get the strongest techs as early as possible.

And the side that gets one or several powertechs before the opponent, will win the game (unless both sides gets the same amount of power-techs), not b/c of decisions, b/c both players made the same tech-decisions, and so the tech-game was won b/c of luck and not strategic skills. Which is the opposite of no-tech games, b/c in every game, reg.dice or LL, players decisions and moves are always different in different games.

Too complicated. Keep it simple s……

Other than that, I support the current capture capital rules. You SHALL protect your capital! Period.
And the capture capital rules is a pretty good abstraction of the real WW2. Did any country who lost it’s capital not suffered defeat, at least until it was liberated and held?

As for not producing units with captured factories, then the rules should be changed so that if a TT is captured the IC is destroyed, but then any AA guns must also be destroyed.

Then the occupying power must build a new IC if he wants to.
Don’t know if this rule is better than the current rules.

I don’t think we’re ever gonna agree with new a tech system. Some players think it’s fun with game breaker techs, and others disagree.

In another thread a guy said the reason why he didn’t use tech was b/c of the small/large numbers factor, so even if there is a lot of randomness in reg.dice, reg.dice is a game of big numbers, means bigger probability that luck will even out during a game. Not so with the current tech systems.

As Larry Harris said, “it has become the tail that wags the dog”.

Imo, with several power techs, any game with tech will be tech races, and the tech race will overshadow the current strategic elements in A&A. For realism to the real WW2 it is highly relevant, for competitive game, it reduces or destroys the game.

When I started playing online, it was (Revised) reg.dice and no-tech, but I was a newb so I had big problems winning games in the beginning, I had to play a lot of games before I won some games, firstly 2vs2 and then 1vs1 games.
So the randomness in reg.dice didn’t help me that much since I was playing against better opponents.
But with the current tech system in AA50, it is much easier to win a single game against a better opponent, than in a no-tech game.

I feel that is wrong, but other players feels fine when winning b/c of dice rolls and not players decisions.

Some players are OK with playing A&A as a game of luck and not a game of strategy. I beg to differ.

FDR said that if the invasion failed, they would try again.
I thought it was a general consensus that the Normandy invasion didn’t change much for WW2, it helped make it shorter, but mostly, it prevented Stalin taking over most of Western Europe. The Normandy invasion had a bigger impact on the cold war than WW2.

@Imperious:

yea but you know if the game needed 50 players, some people would still just play 1 vs 1, because no matter what they can’t get the concept that the key dynamic in these games is the idea of having a team of different strengths and loose coordination, rather than these home preparation of exact machine like coordination of pieces. It is more fun to have competing strategies just like in the real war.

You of all people should know that A&A is very, very, extremely and immensely far from the real world.

And it is very difficult to get more than one person to commit to more than 3-4 hours of play, but if I play 1vs1, it’s much easier to get that single person to resume the game the next day, or at least pretty soon. More than that, and it’s not gonna work, resulting in an unfinished game, that’s my experience.

No pun intended, I’m just stating facts :-)

@tkroll:

Missed out on AA 50.

You can play it for free with TripleA. Download and install the unstable version.

Whatever Rommel got, in 44 it was way to late. Germany could kill more allied soldiers on the beaches, or a few miles on shore, but it would only prolong the inevitable.

WW2 ended in 43, if not before, then it was absolutely done deal.

What many posters seem to forget is that when an A&A game starts, Japan and Russia are at war….  :roll:

You need more than a non-aggression treaty between Japan and Russia to make a practical and good solution, if the goal is that Japan and Russia are not allowed to attack each other. You need a completely different design within the aspects of the relations between different powers.

Also, the premise of A&A is that once the game starts, we can alter the history. If you don’t agree with this premise, then I’d suggest you design a game that is completely different from what every A&A (global) game is now.

Stauffenberg for the most serious attempt at killing Hitler, although it was 3 years too late, even if it had succeeded.

Otherwise, Joseph Goebbels, maybe he’s not underrated, but imo, he was a genius, a very evil genius, but there was no one on the allied side who could compete with Goebbels in the game of propaganda.

@spectre_04:

Yes!  I got them guys, thanks so much for the help.

Question, I am not a developer and I don’t know PHP or JAVA or really HTML in any decent capacity.
However, I am a graphic designer.  Would there be any need for any illustrations for maps, pieces, sprites?  I have the full adobe suite and I love doing WW2 related art.

If you enter the TripleA developing website, you can ask if someone needs help with some mods and maps.

Saving private Ryan for the best all time WW2 movie.

The Cruel Sea is one of the most underrated and best of the “unknown” WW2 movies, imo.

Edit: even if the title says WW2 movies, I will also mention the Battle of Algiers, not a WW2 movie, but obviously one of the best war movies of all times, and definitely the most underrated war movie since WW2.

I guess this thread perhaps belongs to another forum, but we had lots of discussions on the ipc values of different TTs, from Revised to AA50 and AA42, and what changes that should be implemented to make the game better, more historical, and more global.

@spectre_04:

Any updates on if AA 50 (anniversary) 41 and or 42 has a stable version with a lobby yet?  Also, is anyone working on AA Pacific 1940?

Someone is working on AAP40, but I guess it will take, probably, a few months until we have a playable version of AA40 for TripleA.

One idea could be to get rid of paras, mech inf, HBs, and LRA. Then if one side gets a tech, the opponent can decide to by the same tech directly for twice the price, and get the tech immediately, or wait one rnd and buy the same tech at the same price. Then the tech system would not be as flawed as it is now.

Even a “fair” system where you could buy a tech achieved by the opponent at once at the same price, but with the powertechs, all tech games would always be influenced by techs and not the standard abilities for the units in A&A.

Some TripleA mods have elite units which costs more (i.e. heavy tanks attack/defend @4), although I don’t play the custom mods, this is a much better system for changing the unit abilities than any tech system.

@Funcioneta:

And many cannot understand how Whashington fallen before than Moscow.

I have not seen that in 20 years. I cannot imagine this happening if both players are close to semi-decent.

The single biggest problem with tech, is the 3-4 extremely powerful gamebreaker techs, much more than the tech system itself.

It is practically the same as, if you’re a boxer or wrestler etc, and participate in a tournament, but instead of the way it is now, you could meet any opponent from any weight class…! Decided by a dice roll.
So even if you’re the world champion in boxing, weighting 65 kg, you will lose big time against an average boxer weighting 95 kg.
That is the effect of the 3-4 power techs in AA50, for the 5 biggest powers, UK, US, Russia, Germany and Japan.

Even with the current system, sometimes, a boxer is K.O’ed in the first rnd, and then we might ask if he was ready to face a relative strong opponent, but there is a reason we got weight classes, and that’s b/c we don’t want to have built-in asymmetric fighting and competitive abilities.
The power techs in AA50 is exactly that, a built in mismatch if any side gets one or more power techs than the opponent.

Neither Midway nor Guadalcanal had any great impact on the war on a strategic scale.
If Japan went all in against Hawaii, and killed off every US ship and all the other US ships that was heading for Hawaii, then they might had a snowballs chance in hell to keep anything, and/or to avoid the US demand of total surrender.

The biggest error the Japanese did was that they did not understand the American mentality after they attacked Pearl Harbor.

After the initial attack on Moscow failed miserably, the Germans had to win extremely decisive victories both in Leningrad and Stalingrad to have any chance of winning against the Russians.

Either subs or more surface warships, the Royal Navy had to be taken out, or greatly reduced, then if the Generals led the war, the Brits would lose.

You could try to be faster with Japan, but generally, even if AA42 seems well balanced, I suggest players use a bid for the side that can’t seem to win, until you have figured out more effective strats with axis. I have only played a few AA42 games, most games w/o bids, and have both lost and won with axis.

AA42 is not very different from Revised, but there are enough differences so that we can’t use the exact same strats and hope for the same results.

Other than that, players will learn a lot if they play against a “worldwide” community of A&A players, like the TripleA lobbies, but AA42 is not as popular in the unstable lobby as AA50.