thanks for the info Chris. Wasp and I play FTF, but if I want a PBEM game its nice to know there is a server. I'm trying out a game by forum on A&A.org and it works but is messy. Wasp is trying to get me to go to GenCon but I always have a big meathead softball tournament that weekend. If those guys knew of my double life......
We're about to test a modified game as follows w/reasons noted:
4 More inf in UK
Remove 1 ITA tran from SZ 97
FRA turn goes AFTER ANZAC from game beginning to minimize turn transition times
SZ 98 goes to SZ 71
USA NO upgrades----Make it +25 if USA owns all of EUSA/CUSA/WUSA **I am very worried about very long games in rated play....**
The above should strengthen ITA overall and UK vs Sea Lion
The French fleet would likely move to SZ 87 to meet up with SAF fleet if UK player chose to swing things West instead of East helping vs a GER navy which has been made overly powerful with the addition of airbases covering SZ 112 wich tactically is the best SZ on the map along with GIB and the CAR Islands...
Axis gains in power from above changes because of possible middle east NO's opening and ITA in better position to be more aggressive
Allies gain in power when USA enters the war, as it should be, forcing the issue on things...
Anyways, just noting as I REALLY want global to take off and will do whatever possible to fundraise and get the DB off the ground at AAMC, but I need to know it will withstand the test of time ruleset wise; and the above are current concerns based from results of testing. Chris C
Just a note from testing. If interested in other findings with an altered start set-up thread is here: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/ ... =40&t=4452I should note, as it will make Larry happy, that the GER Bombed the naval base in EGY as it looks like the axis won;t be able to get there. I see a BIG problem with the system though***
Airbases and Naval bases SHOULD NOT be functional when damaged. Otherwise the only reawrd is a possible 4 IPC's as things cap at 6, and you only need to pay to get back to 2 damage for it to be useful. This is a BIG deterrant to the system, which could otherwise come into play more IMO.
I'm torn about not being able to stop the +1 movement effectively (they can fix and use right away). Maybe any damage to a base should shut it down for +1 movement. They have to pay to get it fully operational to get +1 movement (still get benefit, but it could cost more). Keep the 3 damage just for scramble (call it partially operational) Yeah I know more exception etc...
How about that if a base is damaged when your turn starts, it can only support +1 movement for 3 units in combat no restrictions in NCM. (that might be kinda lame too on second thought)
I would also love to see a max of 3 ships can be repaired at any given NB too. In some games I'm seeing we get some huge naval build ups next to NB, because you know as the def that when your turn rolls around you can auto repair your 3BB & 4 CV's at that one port if they survive. As the attacker you know that if your ships survive and you (or your ally) capture that NB you might be ok (on your next turn). I think that would keep NB more on par w/AB too with some kind of limit, they both provide an extra service.
There arent very many other times to bomb a facility, Egypt has been bombed once or twice just as an economy sink for UK. As well as everything is India. A solid SBR campaign against India, combined with a sub or tow, can shut that economy down utterly.
I rarely see the allies bomb ports and airbases though. Actualy, almost never. And I think the reason is they want to get their hands on them intact so they can use them, another reason is there is really no tactical reason to.
The allies simply use these bases more, to more of an effect. So at least the axis doing it has some negligable use.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests