Each unit may be paired with only one other unit in the same turn phase, but it may be paired with a different unit in another turn phase. In Miker49’s example, the tank may be paired with the mechanized infantry in the Combat Move phase, then be paired with the tactical bomber in the Conduct Combat phase. In Jeffdestroyer’s example, the tank may be paired with the mechanized infantry in the Combat Move phase, then be paired with either the mechanized infantry or tactical bomber in the Conduct Combat phase, but not both. See the Combined Arms sidebar on page 16 of the Rulebook.
Game Balance question
Black Bishop last edited by
I’ve seen there are some alpha-deployment rules or something to fix biases. So, what side is the game biased towards with the out-of-the-box rules?
calvinhobbesliker last edited by
Allies, since the US has too much money
OOB: Axis should be able to seize London, Paris and Calcutta before the US can make a difference.
Alpha: pretty balanced, maybe Japan a tad bit too weak (marginally)
Funcioneta last edited by
The people jumped too early to conclussions in my opinion. Only 3-4 months after Europe 40 was released, many people start to cry for Allies too powerful, and I cannot see so huge advantage at first sight (AA50 in the other hand had a very obvious unbalance in Asia, not difficult to see even without playing -> just 5 units for China? come on!). Larry started messing with modifications too early, and the worst is that he cannot decide… I think that we should give a chance to OOB to decide about this stuff. I miss the good old times when setups meant something
If you ask me, USA needs every dolar it colects, because it’s forced to fight a two front war (I mean, if Japan does that should and makes an agressive approach against USA instead of going JTDTM and playing as this were Classic). And Taranto raid is not so powerful as thought (it leaves UK very slim)
I don’t understand why larry changed it? I think all the other games where unblaanced so maybe a bid could be played rather than using the alpha setup which will probably be changed forever because of everyone playing and not liking it. I think people should suck it up and play OOB and if they feel it is unbalanced put a bid in.
note: I play alpha only because I can’t find people to play OOB with. If you want to play OOB pm me but at the moment I am playing AA50 and so may not be able to play many games
A big HOORAH for Functioneta and Dessert Fox!
You exactly worded my frustration in a clear matter, which I could not express myself due to my lacky english.
Dessert Fox: I’m planning/hoping to only play OOB. How do you play online? Because I only use TripleA, and I believe Global40 still isnt available.
I agree with the thinking here that we should stick to OOB rules for at least a little longer. I don’t mind a few official changes here and there. I always use the errata and FAQ’s that are released after a game comes out due to misprints in the manual or an obvious balance problem (AAP). However, these sweeping changes are too much too fast. Its almost like a few influencial people screamed too early and no one else was able to say, “lets slow down and take a more methodical approach to the changes.”
It seems like we are being caught up in a rushing river and can’t get out. Alpha is evidence that the squeaky wheel gets greased.
I will stick to OOB rules until something official comes out and then evaluate it. If there are a few reasonable changes I will use them, but if it is anything like these Alpha changes, I most likely won’t. I never used LHTR for the same reason.