Posts made by opengeno

Hey IL,

Always glad to lend you a hand with your games.

-how about including the possibility of misfires or duds on all shelling attacks. 
-I think the wooden rectangled pieces are excellent for the “fog of war” in this game.  They should work very well in representing the poor visibility that was created as a result of the bad weather and night fighting.
-game turns to indicate day or night fighting.  With a decrease to all attack values during night fighting.
-Higher German night attack values (over the British) due to their superior searchlights and better night fighting tactics.
-Higher German battle-cruiser defense values due to better armour especially on turrents and deck plating.
-Even though thier faster speed was not well utilized by the British;  a higher British battle-crusier movement range due to thier lighter armour.

What do you think?

I’m sure you have this already, but here’s the losses from each side:
British
Battlecruisers Indefatigable, Queen Mary, Invincible
Armoured cruisers Black Prince, Warrior, Defence
Flotilla Leaders Tipperary
Destroyers Shark, Sparrowhawk, Turbulent, Ardent, Fortune, Nomad, Nestor

German
Battlecruiser Lützow
Pre-Dreadnought Pommern
Light cruisers Frauenlob, Elbing, Rostock, Wiesbaden
(Heavy Torpedo Boats) Destroyers V48, S35, V27, V4, V29

It was real good talking with you again today.  I’ll be sure to keep in touch.  With what little time I’ve had lately, I’ve been working on some opptional/variations rules with Axis and Allies.  Looking forward to seeing The Battle of the Bulge finished map.

I would rather have music on than the TV.Â

The TV can sometimes be too distracting. ( However IL, I couldn’t argue about having Hogans Heros playing in the background)

For music I suggest the World at War soundtrack.  The speeches on it can add a good effect to the game.

@Imperious:

hey you like my new French Icon?? I am showing solidarity with my rebel Muslim brothers. Its the new flag of Muslim “Vichy” France.  :roll:

Careful Imperious.  Remember what mom said.  If you keep making that French Icon, your face will get stuck like that  :lol:

I always considered air supremacy in the game to be when your oppenent has no aircraft at all in the battle.  Not when the attacker or defender has more than the other.Â

I also do not include AA guns as a factor in having or maintaing air supremacy.

“History of War” 
Has anyone played this new game yet.?  It’s a German made card game.  Currently has four card sets printed in English.  I haven’t played any strictly card based WWII games that I thought were very good.  But this looks like it is really well done.  Great  photos on the cards!  Take a look.  Here’s a link to the English version of their site.

http://home.historyofwar.de/index.php?module=ContentExpress&file=index&func=display&ceid=8&meid=15

IPC for IPC the best unit is infantry

@Imperious:

Hell NO! You have to develop your own weaponry. It does not become yours if you take out his capital or if your even his ally.

I agree with Imperious if you are using rules similiar to the box rules for weapons development.

However, it should aid your nation some what if you are playing with any house rules that use stages or tracks progress for the development of weapons technology.  I use a four stage development for weapons technology.  (World at War expansion uses something similiar)

for example:
After capturing an enemy nations capitol, each of your weapons development stages advances by two for every technology that the captured nation had fully developed.  The theory behind this is basically that that your nation is able to utilize information taken from:
-weapons found in tact from within the captured territory
-discovered notes and plans from the enemies developmental stages of the technology
-captured scientists, pow’s, etc

Your nation should not receive a weapons tech just for capturing an enemies capitol.  But it is realistic that your nation would benefit some what from information that could be gathered or taken.

I also use a spy rule that allows a nation to steal weapon tech information allowing for an advancement/progress of one to any weapon development.

Is this game system related in any way to the Triple A game version?

http://triplea.sourceforge.net/

Using the Infantry Push Mechanic because of the advantage it gives in battle against more expensive units is only part of the problem.

Buying only infantry means that there are fewer of the other types of units on the map. This not only makes the game unrealistic, but it greatly reduces the number of battles. Which in turn takes away the play balance by creating a pushing sand back and forth type of battlefield. As a result, the overall strategy of the entire game is lowered.

Got the pictures this morning. But I’m having trouble opening the folder. It’s downloading but I can’t view them. I’ll try again when I get home.

Have you read Aarons email about the new pieces to be made. I listened to the conversation that he taped. It seems that finally the voice of the piece junkie has been heard! I made a list. I’ll email it to now.

Oh no. Do I hear an argument for ENR’s coming? :wink:

In Europe everything has either a rail line, clear and planned roads to move about, While in afrika is like “turn left just after the Elephant just pass the oasis with the vulture”.

I like your directions IL :lol:

I agree with Imperious Leader. Thier should definately be a cap placed on the amount of infantry that can be purchased by each nation–per turn/per territory.

This is a simple rule that should be very easy to incorporate into the original game rules. Although simple, it can have a huge impact. As IL stated this rule can help prevent the “infantry push mechanic”. Constant battles of infantry vs infantry turns the game into battles of just pushing sand back and forth. With less infantry being purchased, more money can be spent on the higher priced units.

I also base the limit amounts of infantry on nation specific historical abilities. If this is to complex, an easy rule of thumb is to base the total amount on either:
-total IPC’s earned that turn
-double the value of the territory units are to be placed in
-a set max amount per turn for every nation.

The “manpower” limitations rule can also be used with all the other units. This can help prevent nations from only buying one type of unit each turn. Ex. Japan shouldn’t be able to buy only infantry and tanks each turn in order to help Germany with Russia.
Limits on the amount of each type of unit purchased per turn/per territory can also be used to bring some life back to the navy. The sea units seem to take too much of a backseat to the land and air units without some modifications to the rules.

@Rommel:

I like it.:D If I were you,I’d use the Cap (Combat Air Patrol) rules from A&A:Pacific for your house rule.

Could someone post the Cap rule from A&A Pacific.
Really appreciate it, thanks.