Page 9 of 10

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:24 pm
by Gargantua
have planes on islands with an airbase be able to block movement

I like this concept.

But it might have some SERIOUS implications in Europe...

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 5:28 pm
by Gargantua
Hmm... thinking about it,

The only way to do this - would be to bring back the old CAP rules, so you make it clear your aircraft are going to stop anything going into that zone - otherwise, everyone's navy is going to get chop blocked by units that aren't there, because most people aren't going to scramble if their planes are just going to die.

Better, if this is what you want, make a "minefield" installation piece like any airbase or naval base piece - that blocks and interdicts movement through that zone. Could apply on the land too, and perhaps acts like an AAG would against ships or infantry units, when defending the territory.

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:28 pm
by conroy
If you stick to the original oob def for island (a territory completely surrounded by one seazone) it wouldn't really have many implications in Europe except Malta, which would be fantastic in my opinion. (and maybe iceland???)

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 11:37 am
by mantlefan
conroy wrote:If you stick to the original oob def for island (a territory completely surrounded by one seazone) it wouldn't really have many implications in Europe except Malta, which would be fantastic in my opinion. (and maybe iceland???)
I think that is still the rules for islands, so you've got a good point. It really doesn't help the one-turn-move-to-Japan issue at all though.

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 1:01 pm
by conroy
Well it makes midway one of the most important zero ips territories in the pacific. It makes island hopping even more strategically important aside from the NO. If japan takes it and puts planes on it would block a one turn move to japan.

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2011 5:55 pm
by mantlefan
conroy wrote:Well it makes midway one of the most important zero ips territories in the pacific. It makes island hopping even more strategically important aside from the NO. If japan takes it and puts planes on it would block a one turn move to japan.
Unless Japan moves their whole navy to Midway there's really no point in taking it. If they send 1 transport it's an easy US counter, and if they send a bunch they are wasting transports. Unless USA is really terrible they would be able to counter a Japanese move to Midway, and what's more if Japan can actually move safely to Midway, USA would have had 0 chance to move to Japan anyways.

The location of Midway helps the US a lot more than it helps Japan.

Modified Set-Up

Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:34 pm
by Carico67
Well having tested a game where we added 4 Inf to UK, removed a ITA Tran (mistake), upped USA NO for WUSA/CUSA/EUSA by 10 and moved UK Fleet from SZ 98 to 71 we found it looks like it will play better for rated play.

Testing it with 3rd tran back on and 1 ITA inf in TOB.... Sea Lion % were dropped to just below 40 with this step, and at great counter-cost. This likely deviates the game some from continual UK Inf/Inf/Inf builds. JAP really has to have initiatiave reasons to hit the allies with USA powered up and drooling to get to either EUR or the PAC. Games won;t go on forever with USA ramped up some; a needed component for online tournament play. More results fromn the 2nd run as we find it....

Fleet being in SAF gives UK some choices directionally....

Re: Theory Crafting For Alpha.+3

Posted: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:36 pm
by Carico67
BTW;
LOVE some of the ideas to promote more island hopping and the value of such. Well thought out guys... wonder if anything will come of it.