ATTACK AND DEFENSE NUMBERS: Sea Based

Thanks for your input todate. Here is a collection of my thinking at this point. Please feel free to participate in this on going discussion. Your contributions are appreciated. Tell your A&A friends about this so they have a chance to voice what they want in A-A&A. I'll update the the original posting as changes and new ideas are adopted or contemplated.
User avatar
adlertag
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:28 pm
Location: norway

Post by adlertag » Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:21 pm

This is unbelivable, just a few weeks ago people accused me for complicating the game.

"A german soldier is not better than a french soldier"
Kaizer Wilhelm II

Men with guns fight the same way, coming from UK, Germany or Spain.
The difference is in the tactic and doctrines made by their leaders. French commando principes or German Aufstrag-taktik. AirLand Battle doctrine from USA, or Blitz-krieg from Germany.

All units must have same combat value and cost for all nations.

The difference lay in the way they are used.
Combined Arms:

Classic Assault
Infantry working in conjunction with matching artillery gives extra combat value.

Blitz-krieg.
Tanks working in conjunction with matching bombers gives extra combat value.

Hunter-killer groups.
Destroyers working in conjunction with matching aircrafts gives extra combat value.

Many of the ideas for concepts was made by Liddle-Heart and Fueller, and it was very random which nations picked which ideas.

In 1940 the scwarm and rotte taktik used by Luftwaffe was far superior to the british vic-formations. But for playability the UK fighters got a higher combat value ?

The combat system from Revised is not bad, it just need some revising.
Different combat value and cost between nations will complicate play so much, that the average gamer will stay with Risk.

Lobo
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:10 am
Location: Texas

Post by Lobo » Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:03 pm

I don't mind either system but I think from a game design perspective that either keeping national units the same price or varying the cost is preferable to varying the A/D values or both. As noted you would have to think about it all the time. Even so I'm sure we would all have it memorized after a couple of games.

While I think it would add to the game and advanced players can certainly handle it I'm not sure if the payoff is worth the trouble.



NOTE: Experienced players DO use the battle boards, just not all the time. It comes in handy for larger battles.

Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Tue Dec 21, 2004 11:00 pm

Comments noted
I'm hearing you. (Keep it simple stupid) I'm leaning towards keeping it simple stupid. this would negate the need for D10 or D12 dice.
What say you?

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Post by Flashman » Wed Dec 22, 2004 8:40 am

I must say I'm against having different combat values and costs for each nation.
Take Soviet infantry, for example.
Early on in the war, the Germans had every reason to believe Nazi propaganda about Russians being sub-human as they rolled over Soviet defences.
They had to change their tune later on as improved leadership and motivation seemed to make Russian infantry invincible.

I think there is enough scope for variations with tech and national advantages to mess around with the basic units.

Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:07 am

comments noted
and history lesson taken

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Dec 22, 2004 9:49 am

Larry wrote:Comments noted
I'm hearing you. (Keep it simple stupid) I'm leaning towards keeping it simple stupid. this would negate the need for D10 or D12 dice.
What say you?
I am not sure this really does negate this need. It may still be desirable to have combat adjustments for fortifications, amphibious assaults, techs, etc. that are on a finer scale than 1/6.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

Larry
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:05 am

Comments noted
Would they justifiy the need for special dice? I think not.

Lobo
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:10 am
Location: Texas

Post by Lobo » Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:06 am

Krieghund beat me to it. I like the wider spreads allowed by the d10 even with standardized values.

As far as different combat values and costs by nation, I don't think this is a critical factor in the game one way or the other. Therefore, KISS. More attention needs to be paid to other factors like railroads, commerce raiding, SBR, victory conditions, etc.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests