That’s one of the problems with games is everybody banks there planes. My own game at least has it where u can lose planes in naval and ground when u don’t want to. If there’s a bonus plane kill u have to take one as a casualty
Changing Dice
-
If you change the game from a d6 system to a d12 system, what improvements could be made? I am asking this because I have a bunch of twelve sided dice sitting around, and I thought it could make the game more interesting, but I can’t come up with any specific rules. What do you guys think?
-
Most importantly you could tinker with the attack/defense values of units (and their cost)
German Infantry were much better trained and supplied than their Russian counterparts.
Attack/Defense/Cost
So German Infantry might become 4/5/4 while Soviet infantry might be only 1/3/2
American tanks might be average, at 6/6/6, while Japanese tanks would be poorer, at 5/4/5 -
-
Wow great work Imperious Leader, I think I will try that out in my next game.
-
The boardgamegeek game 1939 uses a 12 sided dice system and different costs for each unit. If your interested in this, you should check out their rulebook. http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/113337/global-war-1939
-
Hey IL,
I just took a look at your list of unit values using a D-12 system. Very interesting stuff. Makes me tempted to try out a game using D-12 dice even though I really don’t care for them (mostly because I am in love with FMG’s combat dice which are only D-6).
I do have a question about the unit costs. I see the different attack/defense values and understand that (EG: Japanese tanks are weaker than American tanks, which are weaker than German tanks, etc). At first I thought the different costs were a way to sort of balance out the difference in unit performance. Then I noticed in a lot of cases, particularly Italy and Russia, the poorer performing units actually cost more than some other countries that had better performing units.
Why is this? I don’t understand, for example, why an Italian fighter (12) would cost more than a German fighter (11) yet still be weaker in performance.
Also, wouldn’t this really imbalance the game? If one nation with stronger units that are also cheaper so they can buy more of them goes up against a nation that has weaker units and less of them because they are more expensive, it doesn’t take a genious to figure out what’s going to happen.
It just seems to me that if a unit’s performance is somewhat weak, it should probably cost a little less to produce it. -
The cost probably represents their ease of production by said nation. Like in 1939 japanese tanks cost 9 but attack at a lesser value than all others because they were fairly hard for Japan to produce. Same with the Italian fighters I would assume.
-
Then I noticed in a lot of cases, particularly Italy and Russia, the poorer performing units actually cost more than some other countries that had better performing units.
The cost of production in these cases is largely unique to that nations economy. Germany made alot of tanks ( compared to Italy/Japan) and spent more money retrofitting factories. The cost of production was lower. Italy and Japan didn’t make alot of tanks, and their production costs are higher as they viewed the navy shipbuilding programs more important ( their naval costs are lower)
Lastly, remember this list was made in 2004. Use it as a guideline.
-
If you just want to change from D6 do D12, then just double all attack and defenses values, unless you want to edit costs and powers to satisfy historical details, such as better german tanks, etc. But then you have to mess around with initial deployment too (if russians are gonna have weaker infantry, then they need to start with more of them, right?).
I have a 30 sided die i got as a gift. So i’ll just multiply everything by 5 :D
Infantry at 5/10/3
tanks at 15/15/6 :D
Suggested Topics
