Larry's NEW ALPHA+1 SETUP

[Bigtiti]

it sucks
italy will never conquer egypt, and germany will never conquer UK
(italy egypt, perhaps, but not before US is ready to hurt Italy quite severe)

[Hellmet]

I tried to post the following on LH’s website but got a message that it had to be reviewed before it could be posted.  I do have an account there but, obviously, I must not be a member of the privileged posting elite  :-D.  Consequently, maybe someone from ‘over there’ will look at this ‘over here’ and be able to provide an answer.

–--------------------------------->

Greetings!

I have been following this discussion for quite sometime now and just wish to congratulate all involved for arriving at what appears to now be a well balanced game.  I particularly like the fact that there are major decisions to be made by all players and those decisions carry some serious consequences.  Also, the major battles are not cake walks for either participant.  Our Battle Group will be playing Europe 1940 this Saturday and will be using 99% of Alpha Plus .1.

I do have one question on SBRs:

9. Strategic Bombing Raids procedure:
• Escorts fire @1, and interceptor casualties are immediately removed.
• Bombers fire @ 1 and interceptors fire @ 2. Remove bomber and interceptor casualties
• Surviving bombers are assigned a target
• The target fires its AA guns at the attacking aircraft - @1
• Surviving bombers attack their target, looking for the highest number possible.

It appears that the escorts get to fire one round and then leave unharmed.  Is that the case or can they remain on the battle board and be taken as casualties in lieu of the bombers?

Thanks for any assistance you can offer.

[Redjac]

Frontovik,

It may be more difficult for Italy to take Cairo. But I always thought it was too easy compared to history anyway. I think this is what Larry Harris is trying to achieve. I know this is not a true simulation but a game, but achieving historical accuracy provides Global A&A more flavor and makes for a better game.

On the plus side, Italy does not need to capture Egypt quite as fast. It can satisfy one of its’ national objectives by capturing Gibraltar, Southern France and Greece. It also gets a new objective by capturing Morocco and the northern territories of Africa. Thus it makes more money sooner.

[Krieghund]

@Hellmutt:

It appears that the escorts get to fire one round and then leave unharmed.  Is that the case or can they remain on the battle board and be taken as casualties in lieu of the bombers?

They cannot be taken as casualties instead of bombers.  Interceptors are looking to shoot down bombers, not escorts.  Of course, if there are more hits than there are bombers, escorts will be hit with the remainder.

[shohoku201]

with the numerous changes proposed by Alpha + for 1940 Global, is there a similar Alpha + setup, NO, political situation, rules for 1940 Pacific and 1940 Europe stand alone games?

[Krieghund]

Not yet.

[Hellmet]

@Krieghund:

@Hellmutt:

It appears that the escorts get to fire one round and then leave unharmed.  Is that the case or can they remain on the battle board and be taken as casualties in lieu of the bombers?

They cannot be taken as casualties instead of bombers.  Interceptors are looking to shoot down bombers, not escorts.  Of course, if there are more hits than there are bombers, escorts will be hit with the remainder.

Thanks……that makes sense!

[McMan]

Hey everyone
I haven’t been very active here since the summer (4 AP’s + soccer + swimming + band) so I haven’t been able to follow all this very closely. Do we think this is the final version, as Q suggested? Has anyone tried it extensively? Better than OOB and whatever other versions exist? Thanks in advance!

[Fishmoto37]

@questioneer:

This is very close, if not the final draft I believe.

Here’s the link explaining the Rule Changes/New NOs/Setup and such:
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4060

The map is attached below if you wanna playtest it (***remember some of the NOs you will have to do by hand as they have changed or included as brand new)

I see a U.K. BB and a fully loaded CV in sea zone 98. Can this be correct?

[calvinhobbesliker]

@Fishmoto37:

@questioneer:

This is very close, if not the final draft I believe.

Here’s the link explaining the Rule Changes/New NOs/Setup and such:
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4060

The map is attached below if you wanna playtest it (***remember some of the NOs you will have to do by hand as they have changed or included as brand new)

I see a U.K. BB and a fully loaded CV in sea zone 98. Can this be correct?

Yes.

[Gargantua]

Played this through today.

Not too bad, UK a bit weak in defending london still, may or may not be an issue.

The American player felt that the japanese victory conditions were way to easy to achieve, so America went 100% pacific.  This almost worked in his favour, but after the fall of london, and the failure of his big attack on Japan, it was game.

Africa was back and forth,  Anzac was bad-a-s-s.

NEW SCRAMBLE RULES PWN ALL OTHER VERSIONS.

[calvinhobbesliker]

@Gargantua:

Played this through today.

Not too bad, UK a bit weak in defending london still, may or may not be an issue.

The American player felt that the japanese victory conditions were way to easy to achieve, so America went 100% pacific.  This almost worked in his favour, but after the fall of london, and the failure of his big attack on Japan, it was game.

Africa was back and forth,  Anzac was bad-a-s-s.

NEW SCRAMBLE RULES PWN ALL OTHER VERSIONS.

Exactly. Now, a Sealion will lead to a Russian advantage in the East.

[docfav7]

Agree with the scramble rules.  They are much better than previous.

This version doesn’t allow the US to just concentrate on one side or the other.  You HAVE to play both sides.  It makes the game much more true to life and more fun to play.

ANZAC does rule!!  Skip first turn build with ANZAC.  Turn 2 Cruiser and Destroyer.  Turn 3 Carrier.  Becomes a VERY formidable Navy if you keep them together for specific missions (Caroline Islands is my top priority with ANZAC).

[ZehKaiser]

can the australian fighter that now starts in UK scramble to adjacent SZ’s if only UK ships are being attacked and there are (obviously) no ANZAC ships present? Can it scramble in response to a German Amphibious assult? Can the ANZAC Fighter act as a fighter intercepter against a Strategic bombing raid by Germany against London? Or can it only act in defense of the territory in land combat?

[calvinhobbesliker]

@ZehKaiser:

can the australian fighter that now starts in UK scramble to adjacent SZ’s if only UK ships are being attacked and there are (obviously) no ANZAC ships present? Can it scramble in response to a German Amphibious assult? Can the ANZAC Fighter act as a fighter intercepter against a Strategic bombing raid by Germany against London? Or can it only act in defense of the territory in land combat?

It can do all of that.

[RedHunter]

I am tired of rules changes every time I log on here. Until something becomes offical I am going to play with the standard rules.

[questioneer]

I can’t blame you- I’m fumbling through rules changes each time an ALPHA come out.  Larry said the next one should be final though.  ALPHA+1 is pretty darn close I think.

[JamesG]

@RedHunter:

I am tired of rules changes every time I log on here. Until something becomes offical I am going to play with the standard rules.

That attitude is fair enough.  But I for one am glad Larry is taking the approach he is.  Allowing players at large into the process and making rapid adjustments based on their feedback should lead to a better playtested and balanced version faster than any method I can think of.

[Stickman]

I enjoy this new setup the best. This should now be the official set-up.

[Funcioneta]

@JamesG:

@RedHunter:

I am tired of rules changes every time I log on here. Until something becomes offical I am going to play with the standard rules.

That attitude is fair enough.  But I for one am glad Larry is taking the approach he is.  Allowing players at large into the process and making rapid adjustments based on their feedback should lead to a better playtested and balanced version faster than any method I can think of.

The problem is that such process should be done before the game were released, and it’s duty of the seller’s playtesters, not duty of the gamers. If they want sell us a uncomplete game, they should sell it at, say, half of the price, or even not selling it in first place or at least noticing us that is not a complete game  :-P . Probably Larry is doing this update just for fun (not paid), go figure (he could even release a AABattlemap module/new ruleset totally free if he wanted I guess, as he did in the past with Revised and AAP), and WOTC doesn’t care any about their costumers. WOTC are doing the same as videogame sellers (Paradox anyone?), and that’s a very bad thing (I’ll probably not buy the next A&A game unless is perfectly balanced and complete from start (in this case, a reprint), as I do now with Paradox games). At least they should stop complaining about TripleA, etc. Larry is doing right, but we should not forgive this WOTC marketing politics

Also, I’m not sure if such flux of semi-official rule changes almost daily is better for the very gameplay. I have yet serious doubts about OOB being needed of such drastic changes, specially in Europe’s board, and more important, with such unstable game enviroment, gamer’s mods cannot be released. Also, sometimes one is not sure about what game is really playing