Does the game need more types of units?

[OLver]

too complicated!!

invent a new game similar to A&A r ….

[theduke]

i’m with you olver. as you probably know, advanced axis and allies is currently in the process of being designed. unfortunately however, imho larry harris is going the wrong way with it (d12 dice and many more units). perhaps you might want new units as well but you think imps are over the top. i think the game can be cleaned up a lot without increasing the complexity substantially.

i have already come up with a version that should appeal to those who want much greater realism, accuracy and strategy without the clutter and complexity of new units, etc…. i just have to get around making it presentable and uploading it. i’m posing questions like this one in order to get a feel for what people like and what they want to see in the next version. as of now it seems that the only people posting (including other topics than just this) are those people who prefer more units and more complexity. does this mean there would be little to no interest for my type of version if i got around to finally posting it?

[Imperious Leader]

Using a D12 is an upgrade for the game because its more realistic to have values that are different than 1,2,3,4 for every unit. Its totally silly to force every unit value into one of these four catagories. Second , every wargame ever made has ALL the unit types that it covers and this is a strategic level wargame so it should have the types of corps sized units that you would assume participated in the war. We are expecting Larry to produce this game in a few years after his Gaudalcanal game which is due next year. The Advanced project will feature 3 new units (mechanized infantry, Cruisers, and another plane which probably would be a dive- bomber or air transport). The nations will have different values for the units so a German tank is better than a British tank etc. The costs will go way down for the naval units. The map will be 50x30 and be much less “artistic” than previous incarnations. This game will be produced from another company (i will not say who) under a new brand name. Now please you people need to get with the program and accept the games evolution from beer and pretzels to something more substantial.

[theduke]

of course a d12 die is more ‘realistic’ than a d6 die. by the same logic a d100 die is more realistic than your d12 die. apparently you would like a d100 die? anybody can make tons of changes to the game to make the game more ‘realsitic’, but the whole point is to find a good balance between simplicity and realism. just saying d12 die is more realistic and therefore better is absurd. if you think that the game can stand to be much more complicated by changing the type of dice then that’s your opinion and not something that can be objectively debated.

i like my version of axis and allies to allow me to substitute dice from other games (like monopoly) if i ever happen to lose or misplace my dice. i like my version to allow me to roll 6 infantry at once by picking up 6 d6 die in one hand and rolling them all at the same time.

its more realistic to have values that are different than 1,2,3,4 for every unit. Its totally silly to force every unit value into one of these four catagories.

rolling for either a 1, 2, 3, 4 does not necessitate only 4 categories. a little creativity and a d6 die can do much more then a d 12 die can do. improving the game properly will need creativity to maintain simplicity. brute addition of excessive units and new dice will unarguably create greater realism but likely at the cost of simplicty.

This game will be produced from another company (i will not say who) under a new brand name. Now please you people need to get with the program and accept the games evolution from beer and pretzels to something more substantial.

i love how you threw in ‘i will not say who’ when it wasn’t really needed. if this company doesn’t want to be disclosed that is besides the point here. saying it makes you seem so special. subtle. i like it.

i for one will not ‘get with the program.’ larry harris made the best game ever so i value his opinion more so than those from other people (i will not say who- you like how i threw that in there?), but this does not mean that i will necessarily blindly follow him down this latest endeavor. axis and allies fans are a diverse breed. some say to hell with simplicty, just keep adding to the game until you get what you want. i’m afraid only this fraction of the axis and allies fans will take to this latest version. how large this fraction actually is will be seen in game sales.

[B.AnderssonGameMaster]

@theduke:

…anybody can make tons of changes to the game to make the game more ‘realsitic’, but the whole point is to find a good balance between simplicity and realism…

You and I speak the same language! This is the best post I ever red at any of the forums in A&A.org !!! :D :D :D

@theduke:

… like my version of axis and allies to allow me to substitute dice from other games (like monopoly) if i ever happen to lose or misplace my dice…

Remember that this also means that I also want to play a game that does not take a Masters degree to understand when it comes to the rules. Simplicity also means lesser units and optional rules that can be added to the game the more experienced the player get! The game is supposed to sell in bigger volumes not just to freaks like the gamyjunkies at A&A.org!

[Imperious Leader]

of course a d12 die is more ‘realistic’ than a d6 die. by the same logic a d100 die is more realistic than your d12 die. apparently you would like a d100 die? anybody can make tons of changes to the game to make the game more ‘realsitic’, but the whole point is to find a good balance between simplicity and realism. just saying d12 die is more realistic and therefore better is absurd. if you think that the game can stand to be much more complicated by changing the type of dice then that’s your opinion and not something that can be objectively debated.

Thats the reason why a D12 becomes the new dice because the d100 is too much and a D6 is too little. You arrive at the truth from a different path and it does not overly complicate the game. NO more stupid lamo infantry attack at 1 , Artillery attack at 2, armor attack at 3, bombers attack at 4 rediculousness! Their is no precidence in any game other than this one where this is this template mental restrictions where every thing is 1,2,3,4 crap and everybody is sheepishly following or brainwashed into this pattern of thinking like a “black avatar of doom” so nobody can go outside the box. Realism and play balance does not equate with the function of bottom line simplicity without regard or respect to History. The game has to simulate the war as it was and if that means a few changes are needed then we have to take that direction.
Secondly, converting the units in your minds will become easier because after all D12 is double the last simplification so we can “plug in” the necessary values w/o too much trouble. D10 was determined that it didnt afford enough of a value to add to the game.

rolling for either a 1, 2, 3, 4 does not necessitate only 4 categories. a little creativity and a d6 die can do much more then a d 12 die can do. improving the game properly will need creativity to maintain simplicity. brute addition of excessive units and new dice will unarguably create greater realism but likely at the cost of simplicty.

OMG you cant be serious about this?? oh wait your correct 6 choices are greater than 12 . We can make units attack at 5 and 6… sorry i left out those NM :o :o :roll:

Look here my good man installing a D12 is the best thing for the evolution of the game to the next level. higher numbers does not add complexity… its just another freaking number! So what if we got Bombers attacking at 8 and defending at 3 … what is complicated about that?

i love how you threw in ‘i will not say who’ when it wasn’t really needed. if this company doesn’t want to be disclosed that is besides the point here. saying it makes you seem so special. subtle. i like it.

In not sure im supposed to be exposing what we are doing with Larry on his site… but i AM telling you what was allready decided upon and posted on the site. Other information may not cleared with others. So i dont have permission here to tell you everything i know. Im sorry i hurt your feelings and you werent around for those discussions on that site. If you want to get petty we can easily end this discourse—

but this does not mean that i will necessarily blindly follow him down this latest endeavor

You can do what you please …this project will be appealing this time to people who play “WARGAMES”. The family game concept is not as relevant and people want something more. And that is why we both are debating this issue while others spend ungodly amounts of time coming up with NA’s and different ideas and games out of this need… Axis and Allies miniatures uses a D10 is i am not mistaken and its directed to people who dont drink beer and eat pretzels all day. I suggest we both go on a diet and expect a better tomorrow or the franchise will slowly die with redundancy–

P.S. 3 new units is not too many complex changes to a game that gave us destroyers and artillery from a/a europe… Did you cry then too that the game was too complicated?? :o :roll: :wink:

[theduke]

Quote:
rolling for either a 1, 2, 3, 4 does not necessitate only 4 categories. a little creativity and a d6 die can do much more then a d 12 die can do. improving the game properly will need creativity to maintain simplicity. brute addition of excessive units and new dice will unarguably create greater realism but likely at the cost of simplicty.

OMG you cant be serious about this?? oh wait your correct 6 choices are greater than 12 . We can make units attack at 5 and 6… sorry i left out those NM

opening fire subs are better than subs without opening fire, but they attack at the exact same number. this seems like an example of another choice other then the simple 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 to me. since you’re too smart to have skipped over this obvious example, i must be wrong. there has to be only 6 possible attack/defend categories. yep, only 6. impossible to have any others.

Look here my good man installing a D12 is the best thing for the evolution of the game to the next level. higher numbers does not add complexity… its just another freaking number! So what if we got Bombers attacking at 8 and defending at 3 … what is complicated about that?

repeat: i like my version of axis and allies to allow me to substitute dice from other games (like monopoly) if i ever happen to lose or misplace my dice. i like my version to allow me to roll 6 infantry at once by picking up 6 d6 die in one hand and rolling them all at the same time.

In not sure im supposed to be exposing what we are doing with Larry on his site… but i AM telling you what was allready decided upon and posted on the site. Other information may not cleared with others. So i dont have permission here to tell you everything i know. Im sorry i hurt your feelings and you werent around for those discussions on that site. If you want to get petty we can easily end this discourse—

i think my internet must be broken cause my internet lets me go to that highly-classified site as well. oh wait, it’s not broken, everyone’s internet can do that. by the way, for anyone interested in also participating in the ‘privledged’ discussions impy is talking about you can go to http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB2/ it’s a great site but like impy said, don’t go exposing what you are doing with larry on his site to those people whose internet doesn’t allow them to access that site. shhhh…

you can presume whatever you want as to my identity, level of involvement and knowledge of upcoming projects. it amuses me. please continue to do so.

[Imperious Leader]

opening fire subs are better than subs without opening fire, but they attack at the exact same number. this seems like an example of another choice other then the simple 1,2,3,4,5 and 6 to me. since you’re too smart to have skipped over this obvious example, i must be wrong. there has to be only 6 possible attack/defend categories. yep, only 6. impossible to have any others.

we are not talking about HOW the units interact … only the volume of choices given with a d6 are exactly 1/2 a d12 while any other configuration is too much or too little. Did you ignore that?

repeat: i like my version of axis and allies to allow me to substitute dice from other games (like monopoly) if i ever happen to lose or misplace my dice. i like my version to allow me to roll 6 infantry at once by picking up 6 d6 die in one hand and rolling them all at the same time.

I am truly sorry your hand is too small to carry 6 D12 dice … perhaps you can use two hands?? agains rolling them at the same time?? geez.

think my internet must be broken cause my internet lets me go to that highly-classified site as well. oh wait, it’s not broken, everyone’s internet can do that. by the way, for anyone interested in also participating in the ‘privledged’ discussions impy is talking about you can go to http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB2/ it’s a great site but like impy said, don’t go exposing what you are doing with larry on his site to those people whose internet doesn’t allow them to access that site. shhhh…

I was commenting on what is NOT printed on the site but from other channels. Please read before such rubbish flows. And please stay on topic we are talking about the advanced game concept and not your petty issues.

[theduke]

we are not talking about HOW the units interact … only the volume of choices given with a d6 are exactly 1/2 a d12 while any other configuration is too much or too little. Did you ignore that?

this will be my last post on this issue because impy just doesn’t get it and i don’t think he will from me. i will give 1 last shot at it however.

you are arguing that the total ‘volume of choices’ is 6. right? could you please list these choices from strongest attack/defend value to leakest? i think the answer should clearly be 6,5,4,3,2 then 1. a normal sub (no opening fire) attacks/defends at a 2 so it would fall into the ‘2’ category. this is between the 3 and the 1 on our list of the choices from strongest to weakest. now, since this is apparently the total volume of all attack/defend choices on a d6 die, where does the opening fire sub fall? opening fire sub is stronger than a 2 so it has to fall in a category listed before 2 in our list. if an opening fire 2 isn’t exactly as strong as rolling a 3 or 4, say, then there should be another category. this is only logical since a unit with an attack/defense value different from 1 of those 6 listed must be in a category different from 1 of those listed. you do the math and tell me if rolling a 3 is better or worse than rolling an initaial 2 and get back to me. i don’t know how to say it any clearer so i am done.

impy, next time just say “This game will be produced from another company under a new brand name.” or even as far as “This game will be produced from another company under a new brand name who wishes to remain anonymous.” when you say ‘(i will not say who)’ you are obvously going well out of your way to try to sound important. that, my friend is petty. you can go ahead and keep on trying to convince people how all-important you are if it makes you feel better about yourself but please allow me my right to humiliate you when you do. i wouldn’t want other viewers to be misguided by your such tactics. i’m sure you will write at least 1 more post attempting to get in the last word on this issue and when you do i hope that will be the end of this in this topic. it will be for me.

[B.AnderssonGameMaster]

@theduke:

impy just doesn’t get it …

…if an opening fire 2 isn’t exactly as strong as rolling a 3 or 4, say, then there should be another category. this is only logical since a unit with an attack/defense value different from 1 of those 6 listed must be in a category different from 1 of those listed. you do the math and tell me if rolling a 3 is better or worse than rolling an initaial 2 and get back to me. i don’t know how to say it any clearer so i am done…

… I hope that will be the end of this in this topic. it will be for me.

First of all an opening fire on a 2 could be even stronger than a normal hit on a 3, but not a 4. So you are basically right about thinking creative (extending the die) about using opening fire but wrong to! Well let me do the math for you once again budy:

The cheapest a sub can hit is a piece of unit worth 8 IPCs (lets not think of 2 hit BBs for the ease). The sub will destroy: 2/68 IPCs = 2,67 IPCs
If a transport is picked as a casualty it wont have a chance to return fire. If a sub attack or defend on a 3 it will destroy: 3/68 IPCs = 4 IPCs but the transport may return fire that riskadjusted will cost the player having the sub: 1/6*8 IPCs = 1,33 IPCs. This means that the opening fire attack on a 2 (for subs/naval combat) is at least as good as a sub attack and defend on a 3. That means that an opening fire sub that hit on a 2 is better then a sub hitting on a 3, as long as the enemy pick anything except a transport as a casualty. Ok! You dont need to answer but onle consider your math since I am right here and most of all the fact that you said you wont write anything more in this topic! :wink: However Impy and his pals from Larrys site are smart and some ideas are really nice, but I do agree with you about Impy. He is in a loop of histroric realism and that is just so destructive to this game. I have been there to for some years ago, but come along and finaly find out what you and I are talking about. And that is exactly what Larry have in mind too, according to what have been said from him on his site. Impy just wont get it, right now!

[Imperious Leader]

Anderson:

Let first say that i respect your ideas and what you bring to the game in terms of NA’s which is a welcome solution to fixing play balance issues in revised. I dont share your vision of what the Advanced Axis and Allies concept should be and its definatly not the ideas that Larry has conceptualized so far. He has decided on a D12 system and 3 new units and a whole new approach to submarine rules which resemble a clearly more complex but realistic repair of the “sub stall” issue. The unit values for each nation are different as i have stated to change this 1,2,3,4 stupid stagnation and open up the game to builds that dont focus on only infantry buys. He is also trying to fix piece density issues and try to end the “Infantry push mechanic” that bogs the game down with constant staging of forces with one big battle deciding the fate. He wants smaller more frequent battles. Also Italy is becoming the 6th player so the teams are 3 vs. 3= equal.
I dont know why you and (i will not say his name because im trying to be important) simply keep harping on stupid subs when the discussion is clearly about the need for additional units. The debate then turned into a diatribe about D6 VS. D12 which is a seperate issue. And my point which was never addressed and simply ignored is that d12 has more choices for the differences of the various new unit as we now have 3 more units and its really stagnant to have so many pieces sharing the same values as 1,2,3,4. ( WAIT: STOP! dont think about subs at this point think about tanks, infantry, artillery, fighters, bombers, destroyers, battleships, carriers, and transports as well)…

Breath… ok continue

Now thats better to accept that this is not a submarine game only… as the last math wiz was crying about

AS i have stated before these 3 new units (one land, sea,and air) compliment the family of pieces. This action is not without precedent: Axis and Allies Europe gave us two more pieces and nobody cried then did you? did duck? . No exactly! and you will accept 3 more units the very same way whether you like it or not.
We have to make progress which means improvements to the game which adds complexity. This is a fact you must accept because it is what is coming out whether you buy or not.

Other points about the game:
1)fixes for retreats
2)new naval and ground combat system including die modifiers for combinations of attacking units.
3) more Air Missions
4) Optional rules covering the terrain and /or weather
5) paratroopers
6) victory point system with alot more cities
7) return of something similiar to convoy boxes and a viable submarine economic attack rules
8) larger map realistic terrain features
9) Some changes on unit colors
10) no more AA guns-- deleated piece(IC will have a basic AA roll built in)
11) increased movement and strategic redeployment

again you can find this from larrys site. Sorry we have made the game too complex for you chaps. keep playing revised then and enjoy that… Just dont drink and play the Advanced game at the same time when it does come out because we need your mind to be fresh for new changes on the horizon–

question off topic :why does the number eight = 8) ? what is this? is their a flaw in the program?

[B.AnderssonGameMaster]

@Imperious:

… We have to make progress which means improvements to the game which adds complexity. This is a fact you must accept because it is what is coming out whether you buy or not.

Other points about the game:
1.)fixes for retreats
2.)new naval and ground combat system including die modifiers for combinations of attacking units.
3.) more Air Missions
4.) Optional rules covering the terrain and /or weather
5.) paratroopers
6.) victory point system with alot more cities
7.) return of something similiar to convoy boxes and a viable submarine economic attack rules
8.) larger map realistic terrain features
9.) Some changes on unit colors
10.) no more AA guns-- deleated piece(IC will have a basic AA roll built in)
11.) increased movement and strategic redeployment

I will love this game but I dont think it wil be a volume game like the original A&A or RISK. There is something you dont get and that is that I want to make this game as simple as possible without turning it into a new risk, just a bit more advanced. The reason is that the game would be easier for new players to lern and enjoy. The advanced variant might be too much for people to lern if not being extremly interested in WWII or advaced strategy games. That population is very small. Then we have those who are super freaks like you and me! We will love that game, but I wont have many pals to play it with. The big solution for such a game is a PC-variant, not a game board!!! Then I will go wild and crazy for it, since it will be easy to find players on the internet! Until then it is important for me to try to make the A&AR better and more simple, the complexity should just be optional rules. By the way I solved your problem with the 8.) :wink:

[Imperious Leader]

I will love this game but I dont think it wil be a volume game like the original A&A or RISK. There is something you dont get and that is that I want to make this game as simple as possible without turning it into a new risk, just a bit more advanced. The reason is that the game would be easier for new players to lern and enjoy. The advanced variant might be too much for people to lern if not being extremly interested in WWII or advaced strategy games. That population is very small. Then we have those who are super freaks like you and me! We will love that game, but I wont have many pals to play it with. The big solution for such a game is a PC-variant, not a game board!!! Then I will go wild and crazy for it, since it will be easy to find players on the internet! Until then it is important for me to try to make the A&AR better and more simple, the complexity should just be optional rules. By the way I solved your problem with the 8.)

1)which game are you refering too revised or Advanced axis and allies?
2)The game is to appeal to a new breed of “wargamers” who do buy every concievable game of this genre. The previous niche was catered to possible preteens who might trick their friends into playing a real wargame while they can just roll dice and drink beer…belch… latter to realize its just like risk with a few more pieces that look better. Latter in the lean years we saw this game removed from toys R us and wallmart stores because these “familys” of 4 dudes drinking beer started playing something more substantial, while the comic book game standard known as “eagle games” started putting out some games that pushed the envolope still further. Now since this game has no family voice left in it, we address the target buyers as more sophisticated wargamers who love the aesthetic appeal of a strategic game with miniatures. After all this game would have died long ago with those nova game counters (which i bought back in 1980).

Thus succinctly the game will evolve into something more creative and complex offering greater volume of choices and responsibilities for each player while enhancing the aesthetics with better quality production values and a commitment to Historical realism. That is why by commitee we are helping Larry with this game. Please join our site just leave your Mr. Duck back home.

[OLver]

There was a game named “Champs d’Honneur” produced some years ago in Québec (Canada). It was similar to A&A Europe but had almos all the types of units dercribed at the begiining. Plus you couldn’t make alliances with different countyries, invad neutral ones etc etc. Very very long to learn. very very few buyers… so it’s no produced anymore.

[Imperious Leader]

You mean bells of war?