Strategic Movements Mechanic

Breaking away from the Second World War and paying a visit and tribute to the First World War. Coming this March, 2013
tomcat1964

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by tomcat1964 » Thu May 02, 2013 12:07 pm

I've played 3 games so far, and have been following the Strategic Movement discusstion with great interest.

I did not like the 5 movement for naval units...I think it's a good idea to use the +1 from a naval base idea.

I have not tried the 2-territory move rule yet, but will try that out in our next game.

Regarding British production in India, I agree with other people on the board that think it should be limited. Heavy British production in India dooms the Ottoman Empire, and I think it will be even worse with expanded movement whereby the British will be able to move up their land units from India twice as fast.

I looked up some numbers. The British Empire deployed at total of 8.7 million troops during the war. British Empire forces that saw service againt the Ottomans at some point during the war totaled 2.5 million troops. So roughly 30% of British Empire troops were deployed against the Ottoman Empire throughout the war. Since Great Britain begins the game at 30IPC's, a 30% expenditure against the Ottomans would equal 10IPC's to build with in India. I realize IPC's and troop recruitments are not exactly the same thing, but I hope you see the point I am trying to make. I think it would be historically sound (even a little bit overly generous), to limit British builds in India to 4 units per turn--4 units equals the IPC value of India as a good reminder. I think this proposed rule has a solid historical basis, and would help game balance as well.

Thanks for these comments Tomcat...

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

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by Krieghund » Thu May 02, 2013 12:40 pm

Larry wrote:However, all ships beginning their movement from a sea zone with a friendly naval base gain 1 additional point of movement range.
Before anyone asks, a "friendly" naval base is one that is in a territory that is either controlled by you or a friendly power or is contested and was originally controlled by you or a friendly power.
Larry wrote:After at least one round of combat the moving player can withdraw back into a sea zone from which at least one of the withdrawing ships came.
I assume the standard rules for retreats from other A&A games apply: all units must retreat together and the sea zone to which they retreat must have been friendly at the beginning of the turn?

Thanks Krieghund. May 4... I updated these comments to the page 12 posted 1914 TEST GAME rules
LH
A&A Developer and Playtester

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

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

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by Flashman » Thu May 02, 2013 4:03 pm

The justification presumably being that a SZ containing "friendly" mines slows up enemy activity to the extent that it speeds up your own ships?


One possible catch with the naval retreat is that it might allow a ship to "jump" through a SZ and in effect make an extra long move.

For example the main German fleet attacks SZ 9 from its home port at the same time as a sub from SZ 8. Even if the sub is destroyed, the main fleet could "retreat" to SZ8 (should it have to roll for the mines there?).

Perhaps an attacking fleet can only retreat into a friendly port, in effect using the extra "port" move to get home? Pursuing ships would have to run the gauntlet of enemy mines before getting the chance to finish of the wounded fleet (but might still be worth the risk if it means finishing it off before it can reinforce or repair damage).

In the case of adjacent hostile NB SZs, the battle could see-saw between them until one side decides to stay in port.

In either case, the cruiser pursuit seem like a reasonable deterrent to strafing attacks and bogus zone jumping.
I certainly dislike "bogus zone jumping." The rules for where sea units can retreat to have been around since the creation of the Axis & Allies universe. I'm going to let it stand nonetheless.

If you look at the situation with a certain frame of mind you quickly can see how an attack fleet could sail into a hostile sea zone, exchange a round or two of fire and then withdraw/retreat to the proven safe waters from which one of its makeup came, but did the retreating fleet end up gaining an extra movement in the process? I know that your sea zone 8 sub example is not about gaining an extra move, its about retreating to an enemy mined sea zone, but I wanted to touch on this extra sea zone movement nonetheless. I'll come back to retreating to an enemy mined sea zone in a moment.

I can see how a rule that prohibits a fleet that has used its maximum movements to get to the battle has lost its ability to retreat. This would require a new rule but maybe such a rule is worthy of introducing. The idea of course is to prevent a player from gaming the rules and gaining an extra sea movement.

Ok back to retreating into an enemy mined sea zone. I agree that pursuing ships would have to run the gauntlet of enemy mines before getting the chance to finish off the wounded fleet. That then brings up the idea of pursuing ships... Is such a rule, and all the additional paragraphs and extra steps that would be required to explain it, worth it? As much as I like the idea of assigning a new and special ability to cruisers I'm very hesitant to go there. To allow this cruiser pursuit extends the battle... a battle that the attacker wanted ended. I'm not comfortable with a new pursuit rule. At least not at this time.

As for having to roll the mine dice or not... Roll the dice!
LH

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

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by Krieghund » Thu May 02, 2013 4:44 pm

I'm not sure that you should be allowed to retreat into a sea zone that's mined by the enemy. If so, you should definitely have to roll for mines.

Yes I agree.
LH
A&A Developer and Playtester

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

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

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by Flashman » Thu May 02, 2013 6:30 pm

OK, but my idea is that while allowing the German fleet (using my example) to retreat back to home port gives it an incentive to attack without risking everything, there should be some risk, and the pursuit represents this. If the attacking force can retreat back to the safety of a home port it can be joined by newly built ships AND repair BB damage. Pursuing ships have to take a big risk, since they have to roll for mines now. I rather like the cat-and-mouse nature of this, though it could be argued that all fleets sitting in port for the duration is more historical.

Since naval battles can continue indefinitely anyway, this merely allows later rounds of combat to be at the behest of the defender; considering that in naval combat the difference between "attacker" and "defender" is not as crucial as in land battles once the fleets have engaged.

Kreig; what about the sub that attacks through an enemy mined sea zone? I would say it should be allowed to retreat there, but of course it would have to undergo a (third!) mine roll.

KimRYoung
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 1:42 pm

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by KimRYoung » Fri May 03, 2013 8:02 pm

OK, but my idea is that while allowing the German fleet (using my example) to retreat back to home port gives it an incentive to attack without risking everything,
You mean like what happened at the Battle of Jutland? the battlecruisers on both side were severely damaged, and the light cruisers played no significant part in the battle. In the First World War battlecruisers, heavy cruisers, armored cruisers and light cruisers tactics did not include pursuit of withdrawing large squadrons of Dreadnaught Battleships. Screening and reconnaissances is their primary role.

Kim

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

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by Flashman » Sat May 04, 2013 2:33 pm

Reconnaissances in this case includes keeping in touch with where the enemy fleet is, and where it's heading. Therefore, cruisers give a fleet the option of pursuing, but the entire fleet can pursue, not just the cruisers.

But perhaps I've been looking at it the wrong way round; maybe if an attacking fleet retreats to a friendly mined area the defender doesn't get the chance to pursue, making the initial attack less risky.

WILD BILL
Posts: 1487
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 2:24 pm

Re: Strategic Movements Mechanic

Post by WILD BILL » Sat May 04, 2013 2:58 pm

Larry wrote:
About to start a new test game.
During the movement phase all land units can be moved into a maximum of 2 territories. However, movement into a hostile or contested territory can only be made during the unit's 1st movement. and such a move ends a unit's movements.

Fighter movement rules remain the same. They can move up to two spaces. When moving two spaces , it doesn't matter what the status of the first space is. It can be a sea zone, a friendly or contested territory, or even a hostile territory. However, a fighter must end its move in a territory containing land units belonging to your power.

Moving out of a contested territory
When moving out of a contested territory units can only be moved to an adjacent territory and that territory must have had at least one of the moving player's units in it or the territory is controlled by moving player at the beginning of the turn.

Ships...
All ship movement, with the exception of cruisers, which can move 3 sea zones, is limited to 2 sea zones. However, all ships beginning their movement from a sea zone with a friendly naval base gain 1 additional point of movement range. Moving into a hostile sea zone will require at lest one round of combat. After at least one round of combat the moving player can withdraw back into a sea zone from which at least one of the withdrawing ships came.


Unrestricted Submarine Warfare
I want to try this out... On the US and then again during the British turn, the Germany player will roll 1 die for each German submarines in sea zones 2, 7, and/or 8. Each die roll of 4 or higher are ignored and all others are totaled. The attacked power (US or Britain) will deduct this totaled amount from the income it collects during the Collect Income phase.

Just wanted to say I like the above proposals for both land and sea much better then their previous counterparts (and I am looking foreword to trying them out).


Larry, just FYI we are playing a game right now and are experimenting with only your capital giving +1 to your ground units in movement. We didn't put any restrictions on this, and allowed you to move 2 spaces into friendly, contested, or enemy controlled territories from your capital (allowing this to lead into attacks might be over the top, I like how you have not allowed the 2nd move to be used for attacks). We took this approach because it keeps the flow of units coming from a central production center that the game established. At this time we didn't allow you to get +1 from a friendly or captured capital, but that could be explored as well (like for US/UK getting +1 out of Paris).

I will say that allowing ground units to move two spaces from your capital, and perform an attack has been a game changer. All 3 CP's can really put a lot of pressure on the Russians because they can attack into Russian soil (or Romania) from their capitals. It has also allowed the CP to keep their supply lines flowing much better, so that part we really liked. Surprisingly enough one of the biggest change of events in this experiment was in the Mideast because the extra movement the Turks got from their capital (ending in attack in this experiment) allows the Turks to counter pretty much any of the UK first round movement/attacks (like TJ and Mesopotamia). In this experimental game the UK India is in quite a bit of trouble, even though they built 8 units (4 inf, 3 art, 1 ftr) there the first turn, an 5 more on turn two. Because of the CP moving much faster on the Russians, the UK is heading north to try to help out, leaving India itself in trouble (Turks coming full tilt being able to move 2 from their capital).

I like how you (Larry) have done your new ground proposal so the extra movement doesn't allow for an attack. It is really like a non combat phase rolled into the single movement phase this game has established (nice job). I would agree with an earlier poster that you might consider allowing the 2nd move into a contested territory as long as you don't perform an attack (of course following the established rules for contested territories movement).



I like the +1 from NB rule much better then the other sea proposals, and am looking forward to see if the CP can find a way to use the retreat option to their advantage. Thinking maybe the Austrians (or Turks) build a sub, slide it past the Italian navy, then attack from two directions to retreat their surviving fleet somewhere unexpected (sneaky CP LOL).


I do need a couple clarifications though.

1) So a cruiser leaving a NB could move 4 spaces now (I know it would have to stop in the first hostel sz) Cruisers leaving a NB can move 4 spaces. This represents a +1 move added to the cruiser's normal movement of 3 sea zones.

2) Just wanted to clarify that with ships you can still move into a hostel sz and elect not to attack right? The going one round of battle would only apply if you do the retreat option. It is not required that you conduct combat when moving into a hostile sea zone but if you do you must do at least one round of combat. After at least one round of combat the moving player can withdraw back into a sea zone from which at least one of the withdrawing ships came. The retreating units must retreat together and the sea zone to which they retreat must have been friendly at the beginning of the turn.




BTW Larry, there has been a lot of talk about a couple other things over at AA.org that should be brought to your attention. With the above options you have put out, some could be remedied (or compounded), but thought I'd run it by you any way. These above proposals are as you said for optional play, and probably won't make it into the base game (or maybe they will?).


I have started a new thread for this topic, hope you will join in (see link below).
WB

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/ ... 44&t=18292


Items of concern:
1) The allied fleets, should they be reduced some. The French in particular, maybe the Russians Black Sea too.

2) UK India having no build limits. Some are seeing the UK using all income in India for 2-3 turns to overwhelm the Turks, or to rescue the Russians.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests