LHTR: Larry Harris Tournament Rules

[ncscswitch]

I have a doubt on the USA National advantage number 6.
War Economy
Your cost of buying sea and air units is reduced by 1 IPC.
In my group we are playing that the naval and air units cost as follow:

SUB 7 IPC
TRN 7 IPC
DD 11 IPC
CV 15 IPC
BB 23 IPC
FIG 9 IPC
BMB 14 IPC

are we using the rule correctly?

Yes.

It is the equivalent of "Industrial Technology" tech from Classic.

[Romulus]

Thanks a lot!
I had used in a couple of match as USA that we played with NA and they are very effective.

[ncscswitch]

Well it is NOT QUITE Industrial Tech, which in Classic also included INF, ARM, AA, and IC's (and of course excluded DSTs since they did not exist!)

[Cmdr Jennifer]

Dunno, so far in 3 games Ver 2.0 seems to have reskewed the NAs to massively favor the Allies (America and Russia in particular, America in the NA itself, Russia in the nerfing of Axis NAs.)

Maybe it's just my fondness for the old NAs where Fortress Europe + Atlantik Wall = Very light garrisons in W. Europe and S. Europe and massive focus on Moscow?

[Romulus]

Indeed I think that also Axis NA are good.
Germany has Atlantic wall that is good (infantry defends on 3 in the first cycle of amphibious assault) and Dive-Bombers, which I consider a strong NA: fighters hit on 5 in the first cycle of combat if there are not defensive fighter presents.

To have a fun and interesting game with NA, I think that they should be chosen by the player one at time at the start of their turn. In this way we found, in our games with NA, that the relative value of the NA is variable, depending also from what the other have chosen, and also that their interaction is a fundamental thing to consider in the initial planning.
I think, however, that USA have two very powerful NA: War Economy and Mechanized Infantry.

However, NA do not change so much in the game Strategy. Axis is always focused on conquering Moscow, as Jennifer said.

[Cmdr Jennifer]

But if you chose them all the time, most NAs will never get used, while Enigma Decoded and Colonial Garrison will be used almost 100% of the time. (It is, after all, the best complimentary set of NAs in the game, especially in a KJF scenario!)

[ncscswitch]

If you are going to use NA's, AND try to balance the game...

Give each Allied power one CHOSEN NA and one RANDOM NA.

Give the Axis each TWO chosen NA's and one RANDOM NA.



Another option would be the same for the Allies, but give the Axis:
1 Hand Selected NA
1 Random NA
1 Random Tech

Either should negate the need for a bid AND change the strats up a bit...

[Cmdr Jennifer]

That would do it, Switch, but most players are used to two random NAs per nation, one choice for Germany, Japan and one for the allies.

In the "standard" version of 2.0's NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

[Romulus]

We do not use NAs to balance games, we use NA to have variation in the games. Frankly I like the NA from LHTR 2.0 as I like the NA from LHTR 1.3.

To have balanced game we play without NA, and we have started to use the bid.

[Emperor Mollari]

In the "standard" version of 2.0's NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

Voice of experience?  Seems you thought the NA's in the previous version were way to much in favor of the Axis, and the new ones were even more so. 

I had this view too...but now I'm thinking that they may be a little more balanced than it appears, it boils down to "how you use them".

[Cmdr Jennifer]

No, in the original the NAs were stronger for the Axis.  In the new LHTR the NAs are back to being stronger for the allies.

Why can't we just have NAs that are balanced for Axis and Allies?


Anyway, I'll give 2.0 3 more games, if after 5 games, there's no demonstrable way for the Axis to win without lucky dice, I'll write off LHTR as allied propaganda and go back to 1.3.

[Emperor Mollari]

No, in the original the NAs were stronger for the Axis.  In the new LHTR the NAs are back to being stronger for the allies.

Why can't we just have NAs that are balanced for Axis and Allies?


Anyway, I'll give 2.0 3 more games, if after 5 games, there's no demonstrable way for the Axis to win without lucky dice, I'll write off LHTR as allied propaganda and go back to 1.3.

When we're done with our current game, I'll take the Axis, no bid. Roll for NA's.

[Cmdr Jennifer]

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

[Romulus]

In the "standard" version of 2.0's NAs, the axis barely have a chance to get started before Germany gets royally spanked.

Voice of experience?  Seems you thought the NA's in the previous version were way to much in favor of the Axis, and the new ones were even more so. 

I had this view too...but now I'm thinking that they may be a little more balanced than it appears, it boils down to "how you use them".

I agree, NAs usefulness is connected to their utilization.
For this reason we allow the chosing of NA. For example, if someone would try the submarine warfare with Germany, may choose the NAs related to the UBoote, etc.
They are not to balance the game, but to differentiate strategy and planning.

[Emperor Mollari]

Will you remember in 3 years when this game is over???

hehe...shouldn't take that long...I see storm clouds gathering.