Worst Alpha Modifications



  • Vote and have your say, one changeable vote per member.



  • I tend to have negative comments myself… but wouldn’t be more productive to have the question the other way around?

    Since OOB rules was a complete fail (as Axis don’t stand a single chance), I would rather answer a question about best Alpha modifications.

    I mean, we want to enhance the game, right? Not keeping pounding trials that didn’t worked for whatever reasons.

    Scrambling : I like Alphas’ (2 and 3 are same) better than OOB
    Convoy Disruptions : I like Alpha2, with German option better (the gambling of Alpha3 less interesting IMO)
    Strategic Bombing Raids : I like Alpha 2 better, more logical (and historical) to have interceptors firing first.
    National Objectives : Like better some of Alpha2 and some of Alpha3.
    The Setup : Didn’t see last Alpha3, hard to say.
    Political Situations : Rather Alpha2, but would force the 12 IPC to be place in Pacific board and allow just land units.
    Research & Development : I never play with them. Bad gamble IMO.
    Multiple AA Guns : Without hesitation Alpha 2.
    Kamikaze : Don’t recall OOB about this… but I like Alpha (2 and 3 same rule)
    The Turn Order : Certainly prefer Alpha (2 or 3, not much of a difference IMO)
    The Mongolian Rule : Kinna like the last version of it, but rather 12IPC spent in pacific board myself. So I would leave it as optionnal rule, to players to chose which (Mogolian rule or 12IPC)



  • I said research and development, not b/c it has changed for the worse, but b/c it still sucks, just like in its out of the box form. So really it’s the lack of a positive change.



  • @The:

    I said research and development, not b/c it has changed for the worse, but b/c it still sucks, just like in its out of the box form. So really it’s the lack of a positive change.

    The research and development charts can be easily repaired with a few well thought out house rules, without changing the rest of the game.


  • Customizer

    I voted for National Objectives mainly because I don’t like the new Russian NO where they get 3 IPCs for every territory they manage to grab in Europe – including Turkey.  For one thing, I just don’t think Turkey should be included in this at all.  As for other neutrals, I actually agree with Finland and Bulgaria, perhaps even Yugoslavia and Greece.  Finland and Bulgaria start out Pro-Axis anyway and should be treated like any of the other originally German territories.  As for Yugoslavia and Greece, well, they are sort of considered Eastern Europe and the Soviets did want to spread communism as much as possible, so those would be okay.  Sweeden and Switzerland should NOT be included.  Neither should any of the little islands in the Med NOR Ireland.  I would be fine with including any Italian territories as well (N Italy, S Italy, Albania) 
    One thing that really bothers me about this is the idea of Russia hitting strict neutrals and basically getting rewarded for it.  I think a good solution to this would be that Russia can get the NO for each of these territories, including Turkey, if it is FIRST taken by an Axis power.  Plus, I think 3 IPCs is too much, knock it down to 2.

    A close second choice would be the Mongolia Rule.  Mainly, I just think they have made it too complicated.  Not really sure if there really needs to be any kind of penalty if Japan attacks Russia OR if Russia attacks Japan.



  • I chose the Mongolian rule, not because it is so bad, but it is too complex and should be simplified. Rules should be simple and clear.

    edit: maybe the Russian NO could be tweaked to “double the value of the country”. You take a 1 IPC country, you get 1 extra. Country of 2, you get 2 extra. Country of 3, you get 3 extra. Just a thought.



  • I don’t understand why the Convoy disruption rule is getting such bad press. Right from the very first A&A edition, everything in this game had to be earned with dice rolls. I didn’t like the Alpha +2 rule because it gave you something for free, just for getting a unit there. The only thing that I would modify with the latest rule, is giving German U-boats a small advantage over all other units, perhaps allowing them to roll an extra dice or making their attempts @4 or less.



  • @Young:

    @The:

    I said research and development, not b/c it has changed for the worse, but b/c it still sucks, just like in its out of the box form. So really it’s the lack of a positive change.

    The research and development charts can be easily repaired with a few well thought out house rules, without changing the rest of the game.

    I am aware of that. However, that would not be alpha, would it now?



  • @The:

    @Young:

    @The:

    I said research and development, not b/c it has changed for the worse, but b/c it still sucks, just like in its out of the box form. So really it’s the lack of a positive change.

    The research and development charts can be easily repaired with a few well thought out house rules, without changing the rest of the game.

    I am aware of that. However, that would not be alpha, would it now?

    No…. I suppose you’re right.



  • @Young:

    I don’t understand why the Convoy disruption rule is getting such bad press. Right from the very first A&A edition, everything in this game had to be earned with dice rolls. I didn’t like the Alpha +2 rule because it gave you something for free, just for getting a unit there. The only thing that I would modify with the latest rule, is giving German U-boats a small advantage over all other units, perhaps allowing them to roll an extra dice or making their attempts @4 or less.

    I understand your point and I think it’s a good argument. Not saying Alpha 3 is not good, but if I have to choose between battle of a “chance” to cause convoy disruption, I’ll most likely go for battle. Same goes for “exposing” unit, I’ll play more conservative if I’m not sure to cause disruption.

    Bottom line, I think gamble of Alpha3 version will reduce motivation in a convoy strategy. Perhaps not, time will say.



  • i skipped the personal attacks part so i hope i’m not echoing soneone else too much here

    @Young:

    I don’t understand why the Convoy disruption rule is getting such bad press. Right from the very first A&A edition, everything in this game had to be earned with dice rolls. I didn’t like the Alpha +2 rule because it gave you something for free, just for getting a unit there. The only thing that I would modify with the latest rule, is giving German U-boats a small advantage over all other units, perhaps allowing them to roll an extra dice or making their attempts @4 or less.

    Personally, i feel that convoy-raid-dice-throwing is like if your IPC income would depend the dice instead of solely on the earned income from territories. Not everything needs to be decided by the dice.

    Look at it this way, if you don’t do any active battle (or tech), you shouldn’t have to throw anything in your turn.

    About “just getting the unit there”, moving a unit to do a convoy raid spot makes it unable to do another thing (not in all cases, i know), so it is not exactly ‘free’.

    Having said all this, i have to admit i haven’t actually played it this way (partly assuming it will change again anyway, and partly because i haven’t had the chance to play at all lately, grr)

    I hope the rule ends up to something like: subs doing 2 damage (and german subs 3), surface warships 1 and planes also 1 (or 2 if a carrier does nothing).



  • @special:

    i skipped the personal attacks part so i hope i’m not echoing soneone else too much here

    @Young:

    I don’t understand why the Convoy disruption rule is getting such bad press. Right from the very first A&A edition, everything in this game had to be earned with dice rolls. I didn’t like the Alpha +2 rule because it gave you something for free, just for getting a unit there. The only thing that I would modify with the latest rule, is giving German U-boats a small advantage over all other units, perhaps allowing them to roll an extra dice or making their attempts @4 or less.

    Personally, i feel that convoy-raid-dice-throwing is like if your IPC income would depend the dice instead of solely on the earned income from territories. Not everything needs to be decided by the dice.

    Look at it this way, if you don’t do any active battle (or tech), you shouldn’t have to throw anything in your turn.

    About “just getting the unit there”, moving a unit to do a convoy raid spot makes it unable to do another thing (not in all cases, i know), so it is not exactly ‘free’.

    Having said all this, i have to admit i haven’t actually played it this way (partly assuming it will change again anyway, and partly because i haven’t had the chance to play at all lately, grr)

    I hope the rule ends up to something like: subs doing 2 damage (and german subs 3), surface warships 1 and planes also 1 (or 2 if a carrier does nothing).

    I hope you get in a game soon, and I hope you try the new convoy disruption rule, it’s not that bad in my opinion (and I’m not trying to spoon with Larry on cold November evenings, it’s just my honest opinion).



  • Well, as soon as i get the chance i’ll give it a try.



  • Why can’t we all be friends guys?


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    The worst alpha thought was that whole debacle with the tank/mec combined arms scenario, where tanks were only going to attack at two or whatever, unless paired with infantry or mec.

    That should be on this list! The Mechanized Armor arms Fiasco!



  • @Gargantua:

    The worst alpha thought was that whole debacle with the tank/mec combined arms scenario, where tanks were only going to attack at two or whatever, unless paired with infantry or mec.

    That should be on this list! The Mechanized Armor arms Fiasco!

    I guess it’s a little late to add choices at this point, adding to that but a little off your topic, I always thought that a tank or truck should be able to pull an artillery 2 spaces.



  • @Young:

    @ghr2:

    Why can’t we all be friends guys?

    Look at his post history, I assure you that he is quite incapable of making friends.

    Well both of you seem to have issues.
    You take things too personally, and mantle is too aggresively insensitive.

    I have seen his post history, it’s full of people hating on him because he was skeptical on alot of game balancing issues.



  • No offense btw



  • @ghr2:

    No offense btw

    Nice perception, none taken.



  • @The:

    I said research and development, not b/c it has changed for the worse, but b/c it still sucks, just like in its out of the box form. So really it’s the lack of a positive change.

    Im with him on this one. Seriously it is the clunkiest and most unintutive thing about the game. It also has the worst cost to reward ratio and really of all the things makes the least sense.

    Think about it; You’re Japan and you want super subs so you buy the research tokens and make your rolls. This is the only part of this system that makes any sense. Now you roll and get improved mech infantry…?? wha!?! Not being able to gear towards certian tech makes this really useless. Im playing as the Soviet Union and all the tech research ive done gives me super subs and cheaper ships and wondering why I wasted the money! Before even getting to this point I have to roll a 6 anyway, which makes sense I guess, but having to roll a 6 everytime is ridiclious! Im pouring money into trying to get jet fighters as Germany and getting nothing! Whats going on here, is the German jet-engine research team spending all the money ive been investing in trying to make the Me262 out of fudge!?! I mean, orignal thinking team but whats the point(outside of trying make very dilicious lufwaffe pilots)!?!
      I think allowing players to go after certian techs and a system of incremental groth (the more money you spend, over several turns,the eaiser the roll becomes) for tech would be much better then the total garb bag system we have now.



  • @mantlefan:

    Before Germany could attack a sea zone, do the convoy damage on the opponent’s turn, and then move away on its next turn. Now, Germany needs to attack a sea zone, do no convoy damage, then wait till its second turn, then attack the convoy, and stay put.

    uh?
    i seem to have missed something in the new rules, why is there no convoy damage after the first turn of Germany?



  • I think he’s talking about how, on the UK’s turn, the convoy damage isnt automatic as I guess you can only roll for convoy disruption on your turn, not sure though as I havent read the new rule throughly lately


  • Customizer

    @special:

    @mantlefan:

    Before Germany could attack a sea zone, do the convoy damage on the opponent’s turn, and then move away on its next turn. Now, Germany needs to attack a sea zone, do no convoy damage, then wait till its second turn, then attack the convoy, and stay put.

    uh?
    i seem to have missed something in the new rules, why is there no convoy damage after the first turn of Germany?

    I know what it is.  Back on 9/22, Larry was proposing a new way of convoy raiding that happened on YOUR conduct combat phase.  Damage was applied as damage markers to the industrial complex closest to the convoy route in question (eg. convoy route in SZ 119, next to Scotland would be applied to UK complex.).  In that scenario, the sea zone had to be unoccupied before you moved your warships or subs into it for you to conduct the convoy damage.  If there were enemy warships, or destroyers in the case of subs, you could not fight the enemy warships and conduct convoy raiding at the same time (like a bomber can’t SBR and hit enemy units).
    However, I think this idea was scrapped with the finalization of Alpha+3 rules on Nov.2.  Now convoy raiding takes place in the collect income phase of your opponent.  So, if you move into a hostile sea zone and fight an enemy’s ships, and if you destroy those ships and have your own warships and/or subs remaining, on his turn you also do convoy damage.



  • @mantlefan:

    @special:

    @mantlefan:

    Before Germany could attack a sea zone, do the convoy damage on the opponent’s turn, and then move away on its next turn. Now, Germany needs to attack a sea zone, do no convoy damage, then wait till its second turn, then attack the convoy, and stay put.

    uh?
    i seem to have missed something in the new rules, why is there no convoy damage after the first turn of Germany?

    At least last i checked the rule (it may have been updated) Germany cannot do damage if enemy combat ships are there.

    Ok, let’s see

    the green text in Larry’s Alpha3 rules says:
    Three conditions that must exist for this kind of attack to occur:
    1. Sea zone must have “Convoy Symbol” image.
    2. Sea zone must be adjacent to one or more of your controlled islands or territories.
    3. At least one warship belonging to a power with which you are at war must be in the sea zone. Note: Air units on an aircraft carrier can conduct convoy disruptions, but the carrier itself does not roll any dice.

    Well, maybe you interpreted “you” as the one doing the raid. If so, you have interpreted it the
    wrong way, i think (like knp7765 pointed out at the bottom of page 2).
    “You” is the player who’s being raided, so yes, there must be at least an enemy warship there, giving raid damage.

    edit: makes me wonder, do submerged subs give convoy raid damage?



  • @special:

    edit: makes me wonder, do submerged subs give convoy raid damage?

    I believe so


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 15
  • 5
  • 125
  • 3
  • 12
  • 14
  • 7
  • 17
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

50
Online

13.7k
Users

34.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts