Nuke Tech

@triforce:

Remeber that the reason that no Jap military units were distroyed in history was that we hit civilian targets.  Gotta love american terrorism.

Then you like my variant! ;-)

Once you get Heavy Bombers one can develop that tech to e second level. I think that this would be nice for all techs. This would represent a better system for minor and major techs!

1st level Heavy Bombers: Your bombers get one extra die per attack
2nd level Atomic Bomb: Your bombers reduce the income value (IPC level) of the territory containing the IC to 1 IPC permanently In a SBR.

1st Jet Power Your FTRs defend on a 5 and are immune to AAGun fire.
2nd Rockets

1st Heavy Bombers
2nd Atomic Bomb

1st Heavy Artillery
2nd Mechanized Infantry Your ARM give one matching INF one additional movement allowance and an increased attack capability of 2 or less. Even if supported by RTL, their attack remains 2. The ARM and the INF unit must leave from the same territory.

1st Long Range Aircraft
2nd ???

1st Radar Technology Your AAGun defends on a 2 and your FTRs gain the ability to “intercept” incoming BMBRs on SBR missions.
2nd ???

1st Super Submarines
2nd Super Dreadnoughts Your BBs rolls 2 dice in attack and defense.

historically rockets weren’t that good. too many of them missed their target  for one reason or another. this is why rockets should be just a minor advantage and therefore a ‘cheap’ tech. IMO it should be 1) rockets 2) nuclear missile (not actually made during wwii, but possible)

remember that playtesting for revised came back with the conclusion that heavy rtl was ‘too good’ (meaning too powerful). why have a powerful tech as a ‘cheap’ stage 1 tech? mech inf might be weak enough to just switch them.

super dreads are too weak to be a stage 2 tech. rolling 2 dice is real good, but no one will ever have more than 3 of them on the board at 1 time, let alone using all 3 in battle every time.

IMO these techs need some work. :-D

@theduke:

historically rockets weren’t that good. too many of them missed their target  for one reason or another. this is why rockets should be just a minor advantage and therefore a ‘cheap’ tech. IMO it should be 1) rockets 2) nuclear missile (not actually made during wwii, but possible)

remember that playtesting for revised came back with the conclusion that heavy rtl was ‘too good’ (meaning too powerful). why have a powerful tech as a ‘cheap’ stage 1 tech? mech inf might be weak enough to just switch them.

super dreads are too weak to be a stage 2 tech. rolling 2 dice is real good, but no one will ever have more than 3 of them on the board at 1 time, let alone using all 3 in battle every time.

IMO these techs need some work. :-D

They surely do need some work! What about the tech system? By the way the reasons for not having the Heavy RTL are so bad that they stinks!

The main reason is that one can not have a piece that give a better attack ratio than a INFs defense ratio - a Heavy RTL attack on 3 (+1 per matching INF) and cost 4IPCs were as an INF defends on a 2 and cost 3 IPCs!

Attack ratio for Heavy RTL is 3/4 IPCs > defense ratio INF is 2/3 IPCs

However one need to spend some 30 IPCs to get it! consider that and the ratio looks much different! In how many games do one buy more than 10 RTL? Noone! So If we consider one to buy 10 RTL and then develop Heavy RTL to the “risky” cost of 30 IPCs, then these RTL cost 5 IPCs each! The game designers missed these basics! An attack ratio of 3/5 is not as good as the defense ratio for an INF of 2/3. So it is a brilliant tech that all the playtesters to A&A:R did like, but got spoiled for wrong reasons. And the best of all it is a balanced tech, much more than many other of the techs in A&A:R!

Ok  I am back from my exile at elba… It will take me some time to sort thru these posts… but i have one prelininary question to Andersson… how are those NA’s coming? are you finished yet?

BTW … master… why all those exclamation points?  !!!

@Imperious:

Ok  I am back from my exile at elba… It will take me some time to sort thru these posts… but i have one prelininary question to Andersson… how are those NA’s coming? are you finished yet?

NAs!? Yes and No, for Itally I have no time for the moment, need to do some research first! Your Nas for Itally sucs and definitely need a make-up! Go for the ones posted at www.axisandallies.org and stick to them. I mean if one go for all of the NAs I have been playing with to fish out the best, you most likely will end up with the same list. Its better to use the newest list and look for any NAs that need to be replaced or revised!

OK then if we go with those you have to add your tank destroyer NA and NA’s for Japan, China, Italy… plus we need about 10 each… no hurry take your time… but we need the finished product yesterday!

@Imperious:

OK then if we go with those you have to add your tank destroyer NA and NA’s for Japan, China, Italy… plus we need about 10 each… no hurry take your time… but we need the finished product yesterday!

Why 10 per nation?

Because we need variety… each nation gets to choose about 4-5 and we need a good inventory of choices.