By the way… I think “Playtest report and conclusions” is not representative.
Of course it is not representative. The games we played are first time games with new setup, new pieces and new rules. Strategies were not optimal either. This whole game has to evolve first.
Having said that. The players involved in our test games have a lot of expecience with the games so I still think you can draw (some) conclusions from such an early game.
For example the conclusion that an Indian Factory by UK can never be sustained. Japan is in a postition to take it at J2 if it really wants. When you think otherwise our conclusions are probably more reliable than yours.
But before we know anything for sure we need the real setup and lot of testgames by lots of people with that setup.
To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.
Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial. :wink:
p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.
Not to forget than any play testing, even if we know that the gencon setup is not the real one, we cannot judge balance if we use tech, and this fact will also apply when we know the real setup. What’s most interesting, and quantitative, is to play several games both with Nos, and without NOs, but leave tech games out of the discussion of balance. I have played 2 games with the gencon setup without NOs, in both games allies seemed to have a bigger advantage than AAR. We can estimate game balance with the gencon setup, I would like to try a AA50 game using NOs, and the gencon setup just out of curiosity. If someone can host TripleA, I’ll be up for it. I can’t host atm, but I think I can fix it after the weekend.
Why NOs yes and tech no? Both are optional, true? I guess radar and repair ICs techs both have some relation with bombers costing 12 and aa guns 6. I’d say you cannot test balance without tech. Please, don’t kill a great tech system only because of old strat bombing fear.
For example the conclusion that an Indian Factory by UK can never be sustained. Japan is in a postition to take it at J2 if it really wants.
If this is true, it’s a setback from Revised. There a India IC was fully viable unless Japan bid z37 trannie (man, I hate naval bids, and now they will be possible with 6 ipcs)
I look forward to play TEH REAL AA50 both with and without NOs. I’m not using tech since Classic, but for those who fancy tech, of course you play with whatever setting makes the game fun. I don’t play with house rules either, as I don’t play F2F, only online games for me.
As for what we know about the AA50, the official play testers said that game balance cannot be judged if AA50 is played with tech. And we cannot say for sure if the balance if pro axis or pro allies, yet. But nonetheless, we could play lots of games using the gencon setup to atleast get a picture of the game balance when using that setup. And when we get to know the real setup, we will know about balance and strats and such, after we have played the real AA50.
For me, I’m just as eager to try AA50 using NOs as not using them, just to know what will be most fun, and to learn if there will be any difference in game balance with NOs, as opposed to OOB rules. I’m pretty sure that either axis will get some more units, or higher ipc values than we estimate from the gencon pictures. I don’t played enough games to say for sure, but I’m almost willing to bet money on my statement that either the axis powers will be better off in the real AA50 than the gencon setup, or else axis will need bids to balance the game OOB. And this I say because I haven’t tried playing the gencon setup with NOs yet.
And to Funcioneta, I would be playing with tech if 99% of all AAR/AA50 players used tech… :wink:
I think the NOs help balance the game. Italy is honestly about hopeless without the bonuses.
By the way… I think “Playtest report and conclusions” is not representative.
Of course it is not representative. The games we played are first time games with new setup, new pieces and new rules. Strategies were not optimal either. This whole game has to evolve first.
Having said that. The players involved in our test games have a lot of expecience with the games so I still think you can draw (some) conclusions from such an early game.
For example the conclusion that an Indian Factory by UK can never be sustained. Japan is in a postition to take it at J2 if it really wants. When you think otherwise our conclusions are probably more reliable than yours.But before we know anything for sure we need the real setup and lot of testgames by lots of people with that setup.
One thing about india:
The Japs goes first. UK is second.
If the UK player recognizes the jap fleet is sailing direction India. He will build the factory in Australia secured by 2 - 3 US figther planes in turn 1.
Or the UK player fortifies India with the figther and units from Egypt. Under this conditions the Jap will lost a bunch of figthers wich are the insurance for survive in the pacific area.
PS: Don’t care about this representative thing. - I am a little bit angry about this release date.
To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.
Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial. :wink:
p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.
Did you play it with this DD in SZ 15? When did you take egypt?
I am not shure to sacrify the german bomber for a landing operation in turn 1…
To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.
Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial. :wink:
p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.
Did you play it with this DD in SZ 15? When did you take egypt?
I am not shure to sacrify the german bomber for a landing operation in turn 1…
No we did not. We used the R9 version of the map Bluestroke made. We believe that is the only setup that has some basis, the pictures from GenCon. Any changes to that setup (although we got confirmed there are some) are pure speculation.
And unless you are unlucky, Germany should not push the Egypt attack until the bomber dies too.
