Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Link up A&A Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940, and you've got Axis & Allies Global 1940.
Caractacus
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:18 am
Location: Turku, Finland

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by Caractacus » Thu Jan 27, 2011 1:47 pm

mantlefan wrote:
turner wrote:Finally, it would make Hawaii to Japan a two move journey, which it should have been from the beginning.
Truth.

I wonder if the map was designed without the knowledge that there would be a rule that would allow one-turn combat movement between Hawaii and Japan

Yes, this is a serious blow to my enjoyment of the game. There really isn't much incentive for America to wage an island-hopping campaign at all - just stack at Hawaii.

And before the recent changes, it was even worse as an island-hopping campaign would also trigger the kamikazes...
Caractacus.

turner
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 12:29 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by turner » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:14 pm

I do not fear the Kamikaze!!! :o

goldenboysf
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by goldenboysf » Thu Jan 27, 2011 2:40 pm

mantlefan wrote:
turner wrote:Finally, it would make Hawaii to Japan a two move journey, which it should have been from the beginning.
Truth.

I wonder if the map was designed without the knowledge that there would be a rule that would allow one-turn combat movement between Hawaii and Japan
I would hope so, since its usually the most built up part of the map and that would be a huge oversight. Both of the full board games I played had Japan and US stacking massive Navy's in Japan and Hawaii. Neither made a move until the game was basically over in Europe. Is actually a good strategy for the Axis, since it forces US to commit production to the Pacific map, while Germany and Italy began pushing into Russia.

Only have played Alpha +2 once, but was really encouraged because the Axis have a real shot at winning with the chances (and they did, thanks to UL not guarding against SeaLion).

mantlefan
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by mantlefan » Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:47 pm

turner wrote:I do not fear the Kamikaze!!! :o
D'oh!

Why didn't I think of this before?

"If Japan uses all 6 of its kamikaze attacks in one battle on one turn, transports may not unload from that Sea Zone on that turn."
“A lie never lives to be old.” — Sophocles

Darby
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by Darby » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:23 pm

Think out loud: Island Hopping

I agree a single move between Japan and Hawaii - Probably hurts the game

I think I like the notion of Island Hopping -
Good
a) It really happened
b) it's kind of cool
c) makes us use more of the board
Not Good
a) Might make things tale even longer
b) How to shape/force the behavior ? (two 5/7 NOs, and 3 Solomon NOs prob not enough)

I Tried this thought -- "Amphibious Assaults must come from an Adjacent Square with at least some land in it. " Theme/Justification: Logistic staging area

Problems:
WUS can only be attacked from Canada/Mexico
Gibraltar, Morocoo, England, Normandy Can't really be attacked from US
Gibralter, Morocoo , Can't be attacked even from England

So My "Solution"

All Amphibious Assaults
a) Are at -1 for land amphibious launched land units for the first two rounds.
b) Defenders fire at +1 for the first round.

Amphibious Assaults staged from an adj. tt with some land in it - negate one round of Offensive minuses, and negate the Defensive pluses.

(I also play with marines which negate a round of defensive minuses in amphib assaults an stack these benifits)

Far from perfect, but paired with the NOs -- I see Japan and or the US approaching Tokyo, Honolulu, Sydney via Island chains

A build up in England before Normandy , and a little tougher fight to get into N. Africa.

thoughts ?

mantlefan
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by mantlefan » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 pm

Darby wrote: All Amphibious Assaults
a) Are at -1 for land amphibious launched land units for the first two rounds.
b) Defenders fire at +1 for the first round.

Amphibious Assaults staged from an adj. tt with some land in it - negate one round of Offensive minuses, and negate the Defensive pluses.
I REALLY like that it still allows people to do the 3 move assaults, but makes it more difficult.

Here's a few changes I suggest:

On all amphibious assaults, all attacking units in the land battle have their attack value reduced by 1 for the first round of combat and all defending units in the land battle have their defense value increased by 1 for the first round of combat (These include Shore Bombardments and Anti-Aircraft Guns). If all transports unloading units on the amphibious assault have moved one or less spaces this turn before unloading, all units attack and defend without these modifiers.
“A lie never lives to be old.” — Sophocles

Darby
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 1:30 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by Darby » Fri Jan 28, 2011 4:44 pm

The Changes do well to clarify ... but I'm still wondering if we want to reward coming from a bit of land that serves as a logistic staging base.
The way you have it worded -- A fleet can wait in a sea zone for a turn before attacking -- No benifit as compared to attacking Honolulu from The Marshalls or Japan from Imo Jima
(besides the bennifit of course of being able to put you land units safely on the islands while waiting to attack rather then at risk on transports)

Do we want to reward Island hopping as well as just slow assault speed ?

Also I don't think all attacking units should be minus just ones from transports
a) planes should not really get a minus
b) units from adj. flanking land tts should not get minuses (eg. Landing in Normandy - support from Holland)
c) Shore Bombard should be at full if applicable
etc.

mantlefan
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Post by mantlefan » Fri Jan 28, 2011 5:29 pm

Darby wrote:The Changes do well to clarify ... but I'm still wondering if we want to reward coming from a bit of land that serves as a logistic staging base.
The way you have it worded -- A fleet can wait in a sea zone for a turn before attacking -- No benifit as compared to attacking Honolulu from The Marshalls or Japan from Imo Jima
(besides the bennifit of course of being able to put you land units safely on the islands while waiting to attack rather then at risk on transports)

Do we want to reward Island hopping as well as just slow assault speed ?

Also I don't think all attacking units should be minus just ones from transports
a) planes should not really get a minus
b) units from adj. flanking land tts should not get minuses (eg. Landing in Normandy - support from Holland)
c) Shore Bombard should be at full if applicable
etc.

The issue is that it can't be too complex. I don't see a problem with waiting in a seazone; the goal is to discourage those 3 move amphibs. They are still prepping themselves only for the invasion. If the player wants to risk his units going down with their transports I think that's OK. I suppose it could be restricted to land units firing +1, but to differentiate between unloaded and overland is a little tedious.
“A lie never lives to be old.” — Sophocles

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 18 guests