I’m currently gauging interest in an Anniversary 1941 tournament. If you’d like to participate, let me know in this thread.
Ozy.
A Serious Discussion of Technologies in 1941
-
@Cmdr:
Advanced Artillery: At first glance I was all over this technology! 1 Artillery would increase the offensive punch of two infantry by +1 each. On a purely cost evaluation basis, this means that for 10 IPC you can have 6 Defensive Punch and 6 Offensive Punch in 3 units vs having the same in 2 units (2 armor.)
However, after getting quite a few games under my belt, I’m not really hungry for this tech. It’s still good, mind you, but it’s limited in use for everyone.
My guess would be, this is best for Russia and maybe for Germany, it’s very limited in power for England and America and almost useless for Japan and Italy. (Still useful, just almost useless.)
Hmm, you have to compare after upgrade / before upgrade: 10 IPC’s after = 6/6 and 3 hits. 10 IPC’s before = 5/6 and 3 hits. Now tell me, is this a good technology? Equal to war bonds, even for Russia?
No, it is not. It is bad. I’d prefer every tech above this one. All it does, is giving you 2 attack extra every Russian turn (assuming you’re buying only land units). War bonds gives you 1 attack, 2 defense, 1 hit every turn (3,5 IPC’s ~ 1 inf), excluding flexibility of what units to purchase (war bonds let’s you choose, adv art is only good when buying art).About super subs: some day I’m gonna write a paper about the use of subs in AA50, they’re difficult to play correctly, but they’re VERY strong, especially in the pacific. Whenever it comes to a Pacific war, subs decide the outcome. Or super subs ;) But ofcourse, don’t use them to defend in small numbers, that’s simply using them wrong. Use VAST numbers (they’re butt cheap!), like 6 subs every turn with USA or Japan or Germany, and don’t be bothered by DD’s: one DD can only kill one sub when you spread your subs out, and a counter sub strike is sure to follow (with the great attack value of subs :) ).
-
I didn’t say it was a great Technology. I said at first I thought this would be an awesome technology for Germany and Russia since you could have 1 Artillery for every 2 Infantry and Artillery/Infantry were a main staple in AAR.
It’s not a bad technology.
War Bonds arn’t bad either, really. They are like an ANTI-Rocket technology, which is a neat concept.
-
Hmm, owkey, we both agree it’s not great, but I still think it is the absolute worst tech by far. War bonds are pretty good, simply needed a decent tech to compare adv art to to show its worthlessness. Ow, I just saw your thread on fixing subs, not gonna argue with you about those for now 8-)
@Cmdr:
War Bonds arn’t bad either, really. They are like an ANTI-Rocket technology, which is a neat concept.
=> Isn’t that advanced factories? (War bonds is the 1d6 of extra income)
-
War Bonds +1d6
Rockets -1d6Pretty much anti Rockets, eh?
Improved Factories are like Anti-SBR.
Though, to be honest, SBR/Rockets, whatever. War Bonds and factory techs fix them both…
-
Thanks for your feedback
I really like the current tech structure as it is in AA50. I don’t really like the guaranteed tech from enhanced
….
And as far as being random, none of it truly is. With real dice I can warm them up to where I get good rolls pretty consistently and the dice server here at AA, well it aint random at all.Funny, you said you don’t like guarenteed tech
because your premise is that you can the techs you are supposed to get cause the dice aren’t really random at all.Hmmm.
when those dice start missing more than hitting, you may change your mind.
-
Axis-Roll the dice server here hates me with a purple passion. I can go find more than 1 dice roll I have made this week with a less than 1% outcome.
Again I think the tech system is fine. I think people are just so used to re-writing the rules of A&A games that it has become an ingrained habit.
I don’t like your directed purchased tech either for the reason that Japan will “buy” shipyards the US will “buy” Heavy Bombers, and Germany will “buy” Improved Industry. Baring the standard luck that is imposed on all the countries now. Italy, the UK, and Russia will be left without.
-
It’s all random though, Axis.
The only difference is, is your strategy strong enough to survive a surprise strategy move or a surprise technology or is your strategy so mired in tradition that any deviation completely throws you off your game?
I fail to see how getting War Bonds is any worse than the defender scoring 3 hits out of 3 chances against your attacking bombers in a major battle, or how getting Radar is any worse than two defending submarines hitting your attacking battleship and your battleship missing.
Since that’s no worse, and since you’ve already said you are fine with the dice outcomes in battle, then you must be fine with technology too.
-
I don’t like your directed purchased tech either for the reason that Japan will “buy” shipyards the US will “buy” Heavy Bombers, and Germany will “buy” Improved Industry. Baring the standard luck that is imposed on all the countries now. Italy, the UK, and Russia will be left without.
You can only buy off up to two sides.
Then you have a one in 4 chance of getting those coveted weapons that you mentioned.You also pay another penalty for targetting the ‘good techs’ (eliminating two outcomes): They are not instantly effective like if you were to randomly roll for a tech.
Additional cost of the $3 per side eliminated is also incurred.
Targetting is not guarenteed and a bit costly.
You always have the option of rolling for a tech (1 in 6 chance) and getting it active immediately.
More options (less subject to rolls) equates to more strategy.
At least that’s the theory. :mrgreen: -
@Cmdr:
It’s all random though, Axis.
It doesn’t have to be. You can reduce some of the randomness.
That’s the whole point.@Cmdr:
The only difference is, is your strategy strong enough to survive a surprise strategy move or a surprise technology or is your strategy so mired in tradition that any deviation completely throws you off your game?
Where did you come up with this idea?
OOB Revised Tech was deemed so broken due to the chance of a G1 sea lion, they changed the tech to be delayed until the end of a players turn (LHTR rules, the defacto standard)
By making techs instantenous, you are indeed ‘rebreaking’ AA50 along the above line of thinking.
FWIW, I think AA50 is not quite as broken in this regard as Revised was, so I am ok with the instant tech.
-
I love the randomness that technology offers. Then again, I’m Irish and I believe strongly in luck and like to take chances. Besides, Karl von Clausewitz, the great German military theorist himself recognized that “War is the Realm of Chance.” I think it accurately protrays the war as well, since the U.S. took a gamble on the Manhatten Project, and though it could have been a huge waste of money, it paid off and it changed the whole situation of the War in the Pacific. I agree totally with Jenn, if your strategy is so flimsy as to fall apart if someone rolled “Shipyards” or “Long Range Aircraft” then it probably wouldn’t hold up without techs.
That being said, I do recognize that techs can decisively alter the situation of the board. If Japan gets shipyards, then it will be in a position to fight the U.S. much more effectively and for alot longer. Likewise if Russia gets Improved Artillery, then they can hold back Germany much easier, I would not underestimate this techs value. They can also be decisive in another way, much more favourable to those who hate techs. They can be a huge waste of money, and while your opponent spends money hoping to get Paratroops or Heavy Bombers, you can be pumping out more units to overwhelm them. Everything has consequences in this game.
-
@Ó:
I agree totally with Jenn, if your strategy is so flimsy as to fall apart if someone rolled “Shipyards” or “Long Range Aircraft” then it probably wouldn’t hold up without techs.
The problem is there are a few techs that when achieved and used in that round, CAN be game breakers: Long range is the biggest one, Heavy Bombers as well. Paratroopers too if you have a few bombers, hell, even mechanized inf could swing a huge battle.
Getting shipyards will take a few rounds to affect a game.
So not every tech can have immediate game changing outcomes the round they are attained.
Someone else said this earlier, and I agree, that you can not defend against every potentially killer weapon (like the 4 I listed above). You would become paralyzed with paranoia and never leave your capital with your units. The game is about managing risks, and the odds are against your opponent getting these “Yahtzee” game winning tech dice.
-
I’ve enjoyed reading this thread. I would like to discuss something that doesn’t seem to have been addressed regarding technology: how much should be spent each turn on tech rolls? I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently in regards to Russia and here are my ideas:
Turn 1: Spend 10 IPCs on tech rolls
Turn 2: If not successful on turn 1, spend 10 more IPCs.In most games, this will yield Russia a technology by turn 2 for the cost of only 20 IPCs. The drawback is that Russia now has 20 IPCs less of units on the board. So the question becomes, will the technology that Russia gains be worth the fewer units on the board? Let’s look at Chart 1:
Advanced Artillery: Russia starts out with a lot of infantry and a 1 artillery build now gives Russia an attack of 4 instead of 3. That’s like buying a bomber for the cost of only 4 IPCs (although admittedly, these “bombers” can only attack land and are limited to one space). Such a tech would make it much more difficult for Germany to secure any territory of Russia’s that is next to an industrial complex. In my opinion, the benefits for Russia are huge if they snag this tech. Definitely worth the 20 IPC cost.
Rockets: Not as useful as advanced artillery, especially if Germany takes and secures Karelia but quite useful nevertheless. The Caucasus AA can attack Italy each turn. As long as Russia owns Karelia then Germany can be attacked each turn. Russia can retreat the AA in Karelia to Archangel if they think Germany is going to take and hold onto Karelia, and make its way to Russia, freeing up the Russian AA to go east and attack any Japanese AA built on the mainland. Worth the 20 IPC cost.
Paratroopers: If Russia can afford to build bombers, then it is probably over for the Axis anyway. In MOST games, I think this is the only tech in Chart 1 that is totally useless for Russia. Not worth the 20 IPC cost, IMHO.
Increased Industrial Production: If Russia gets this by turn 2 AND still owns Karelia, then it’s going to be much more difficult for Germany to capture and hold onto Karelia, especially if UK built some fighters on turn 1 and move them all to Karelia for added protection. Plus, this tech makes SBRs half as effective, so the German player might very well use any bombers they have on something else instead of SBRs. The more money Russia has to spend, the better. The problem is, Russia might not own Karelia, especially after G2, so this tech may not be quite as useful as advanced artillery. Worth the 20 IPC cost.
War Bonds: Limited in value, but hey, free money is free money. Definitely not useless, but on average, Russia will gain 3.5 IPCs per turn from this tech. So Russia will not begin to profit from it until turn 6. IMHO, those 20 IPCs would be better spent on units since the game will probably be decided before turn 6 anyway. Usually not worth the 20 IPC cost, unless you get lucky and recover the cost quickly (by getting the tech on roll 1 and rolling a six on both turn 1 and 2).
Mechanized Infantry: This tech is only useful for Russia if they have tanks AND if they are in a position to attack two spaces away from where they built the tanks. It seems to me that this tech would be useful mainly on turn 2, assuming that Russia built six tanks on turn 1. Make sure you position six infantry (two from Caucasus, two from Novo, and two from Kazakh) into Russia and you now have six additional units that can attack Karelia and be used as fodder if Germany moved into Karelia strongly. If Germany took Karelia on G1 and has most of their air force in Karelia after G2, then this tech just might give Russia the chance to destroy the entire German air force on G2. A game changer right there. Of course, this tech could still be useful once Japan gets within two spaces of Russia but if Russia is at that point in the game then it might be better just to buy all infantry at that point. Worth the 20 IPC cost IF conditions are right to utilize the tech; otherwise, limited usefulness and NOT worth the cost.
If Russia gets a very good tech, then I think it would probably be best not to spend much more money on future tech rolls. However, buy at least one more tech roll. You never know when that one research marker, being rolled turn after turn until you get another tech, will come in handy and make things even easier for you. Instead, just maximize the advantage that you have while you have it.
Well, those are my thoughts on tech rolls regarding Russia. I would appreciate someone doing the same for another country. Thanks.
-
@Cmdr:
It’s all random though, Axis.
The only difference is, is your strategy strong enough to survive a surprise strategy move or a surprise technology or is your strategy so mired in tradition that any deviation completely throws you off your game?
I fail to see how getting War Bonds is any worse than the defender scoring 3 hits out of 3 chances against your attacking bombers in a major battle, or how getting Radar is any worse than two defending submarines hitting your attacking battleship and your battleship missing.
Hmm, interesting thought… I think you’re right tech isn’t higher on the luck-scale than the average A&A sea + air battle or bombing raid. So it does make sense to include it if playing ADS.
Aah well, LL still rulz 8-)
Advanced Artillery: Russia starts out with a lot of infantry and a 1 artillery build now gives Russia an attack of 4 instead of 3. That’s like buying a bomber for the cost of only 4 IPCs (although admittedly, these “bombers” can only attack land and are limited to one space). Such a tech would make it much more difficult for Germany to secure any territory of Russia’s that is next to an industrial complex. In my opinion, the benefits for Russia are huge if they snag this tech. Definitely worth the 20 IPC cost.
Err, your numbers are wrong: adv art gives you 6 attack instead of 5 when buying 2 inf 1 rtl. Now, let’s calculate how much attack you can buy for 20 IPC’s: 4 inf and 2 rtl = 10 attack 12 defense 6 hits >= 30 extra “power”. To match this with adv art, you would need to buy at least 30 x 2 inf 1 rtl = 60 inf 30 rtl = 400 IPC’s >= 15 Russian turns. Not mentioning the benefit of the immediate extra army over the prolonged time Russia would need before really benefitting from this tech. So I think you got something wrong here, adv art is definitely not worth the cost of 20 IPC’s…
-
Advanced Artillery: Russia starts out with a lot of infantry and a 1 artillery build now gives Russia an attack of 4 instead of 3. That’s like buying a bomber for the cost of only 4 IPCs (although admittedly, these “bombers” can only attack land and are limited to one space). Such a tech would make it much more difficult for Germany to secure any territory of Russia’s that is next to an industrial complex. In my opinion, the benefits for Russia are huge if they snag this tech. Definitely worth the 20 IPC cost.
Err, your numbers are wrong: adv art gives you 6 attack instead of 5 when buying 2 inf 1 rtl. Now, let’s calculate how much attack you can buy for 20 IPC’s: 4 inf and 2 rtl = 10 attack 12 defense 6 hits >= 30 extra “power”. To match this with adv art, you would need to buy at least 30 x 2 inf 1 rtl = 60 inf 30 rtl = 400 IPC’s >= 15 Russian turns. Not mentioning the benefit of the immediate extra army over the prolonged time Russia would need before really benefitting from this tech. So I think you got something wrong here, adv art is definitely not worth the cost of 20 IPC’s…
One artillery attacks at a 2. It also raises an infantry from a 1 to a 2. So that’s an additional 3 attack if one artillery is bought. With advanced artillery, an additional infantry is raised from 1 to 2. So this gives the player a total of 4 extra attack if you have advanced artillery and buy one artillery. That is how I came up with the “4 instead of 3” statement from my last post.
I did make a mistake in my last post regarding Mechanized Infantry. If you spend 10 IPCs on R1, then obviously you are limited to 4 tanks built on R1 instead of 6.
-
Another thing I’ve thought of, it might be actually better to spend 15 IPCs on turn 1 for Russia. That way, the Russian player could not spend any money on tech on turn 2 and still get 3 rolls if they did not get tech on turn 1. They would still get 6 rolls but save 5 IPCs in the process. Of course, this would result in 5 IPCs less of units for Russia on turn 1, so it’s debatable whether or not it’s worth it or not.
-
I think Russia should only spend 5 on Tech in Rd 1. I don’t think they can afford 15 or even 10. Germany can be pretty aggressive in rd 1 and regardless of the Tech Russia got if successful the lack of 5 infantry is going to hurt. Plus there are only a few Techs that will help Russia and other than War bonds, the offensive techs would either require you to build boms, rt, or arm and are mainly good for attack where you are likely to be on the defensive early.
I would invest 5 because you never lose the roll and can always add one more roll on rd 2 if you did well in round 1.
-
I’ve played around with Russian tech and so far I’ve never been overly pleased.
Once I got Advanced Artillery, although, at the time i got it, Russia was already reduced to trading Caucasus and Arkhangelsk, so it really did not come in handy.
The second time I got Paratroopers, it was 1942 so at least I did have a bomber, but still, very limited utility.
I guess if you got anything on Chart 1 in the first round or two (with the possible exception of paratroopers for Russia) it would pay off.
Thinking best for Russia:
Mechanized Infantry
Advanced Artillery
War Bonds
Rockets
Improved FactoriesIn that order
(Rockets for Russia are wicked, anyone notice you have THREE frakking ack-ack cannons? 1 from Arkhangelsk to Germany (assuming you retreated the gun from Karelia), 1 from Caucasus to Italy and if Japan puts a complex in India, 1 from Russia to India!
Nasty, oh so nasty!
Best tech for Germany, IMHO: Paratroopers followed by either Advanced Art OR Mechanized Inf (depending on how you build your army!)
best tech for Italy? Either Improved Factories or Improved Shipyards, both of which are nasty for the allies.
-
I would think Jet ftrs would be pretty killer for Germany as well. A 10 ipc unit that attacks and defends at 4. Yikes!
I’d probably take my chances rolling on that chart, either HB or Jets would be awesome, LRA/Radar are certainly serviceable, while subs (unless rd 1) and shipyards require a strategy shift or are useless.
If you got Jets and LRA early enough, game over. The Allies wouldn’t be able to keep a ship in the water.
-
I thinking about the Heavy Bomber Tech. Is it optimal in the way it looks today?
I think there is two options:
- Keep it the way it looks today: 2D6 SBR dmg, 2D6 @4 on attack
- Use the LHTR variant: SBR-damage = D6+2, Attack value = 5, Defense value = 1
Any thoughts?
-
It’s fine as is Perry. If we make any changes at all to the box rules, they should be absolute MINIMUM changes. For one, I would like to change Super Submarines (useless) to Super Destroyers (useful and what was probably originally intended given the new role of destroyers in this game. Destroyers in AA50 = Submarines in AAR/Classic)
Chart 1 has 6 things Germany can use right away, albeit, one is of limited use (Rockets).
Chart 2 has 4 things Germany can use right away.I’d stick with Chart 1 with Germany, DM. Less risk involved. Just how I see it though.
Suggested Topics
