Must Have's

What do you want to see in an advanced A&A game?
Share your thoughts... Contribute to the ultimate A&A game design.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Must Have's

Post by Larry » Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:18 pm

What are some MUST HAVE'S you like to see in an advanced game? For example. The game must have "Fighter Escourts."

User avatar
Posts: 1559
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:20 am
Location: "western boogerland"

Post by elbowmaster » Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:30 pm

id suggest using europe and pacific goodies, like caps, convoys...

perhaps having strategic locations have value ie truk / island groups, as well as production values that can combine what "value" your able to spend...


User avatar
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2004 9:48 am
Location: Wichita Falls, TX

Post by thoes426 » Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:22 pm

must have new units, unique to the deluxe edition only!
A complete remake of the Technology tree, larger sea zones (more distance between USA and Europe/Japan).
More spaces between Berlin and Moscow.
...........more to come.

Thoes426 :twisted:
Strength lies not in defense but in attack.
Adolf Hitler

User avatar
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Mon Oct 18, 2004 11:27 pm

Read to this point

Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 1:10 am
Location: Texas

Post by Lobo » Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:22 am

Revisions to the IPC/economic system. I like your idea of only allowing new builds in the home territories. The IC increasing IPC production is a good idea as well.

Must have: Give submarines the ability to target enemy IPCs, not just warships. The ability to wage economic warfare against an opponent's merchant shipping should be represented in some form. It's always been frustrating that the UK gets all its IPCs from its far flung empire when the Atlantic is full of U-boats.

Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 2:45 am

A-AA must have's

Post by WanderingHead » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:21 am

OK, as I write this I just keep going and going. Should have registered as EnergizerBunny.

I think that multiple tiers of rules are going to be a must. Some will want a simple and quick game, some will want a more sophisticated game.

Must have Combat Air Patrol and fighter intercept for SBR.

Must have a viable strangulation of England strategy - i.e. convoys.

There are different ways to incorporate that, but I think that convoys as they exist in AAE and AAP are no longer appropriate on the world scale. I think it makes more sense to have to move the money from point A to point B, but with as simple of a mechanism as possible. The simplest (but probably inadequate) would be convoy zones as follows: if clear then for example so many IPCs can move from Africa to England, otherwise they are stuck in Africa and lost.

I'd like somewhat more sophisticated (not too much!) combat, where you have an order of combat determined by unit types. Some kind of limited targeting firing would be cool (I suggested elsewhere a -1 penalty for selecting targeted firing, with a rolled '1' allowing firer to select casualty and any hit above '1' [remembering the -1 penalty] remaining the opponent's choice).

For example (for land, admittedly not 100% thought out):
- air fires
- armor + defending art fires
- inf + attacking art fires
- air/art that didn't opt to fire before does targeted firing, -1 penalty , '1' select casualty
- remove casualties

At each stage, appropriate casualties from prior stages fire back at -1 penalty (prior to removal). Casualties firing in the same stage they are hit have no penalty. Cumulative -2 penalty for targeted firing by earlier stage casualties (art can't fire targeted as a casualty).

I prefer that all countries have the same rules, applying to units (same kinds of units) and income and everything else. E.g. Germany also has to have a supply line to get income from Africa. If they have initial differences of quality of units, this should be just an initial state that can be overcome by research. Going the 2d6 route would help this, by providing more granularity in the unit capabilities. But it also slows things down (roll one unit at a time). What about 1d12 or some such!?

I suggested elsewhere more zones ... 6 zone move from E-US to England. I think faster movement in non-combat would be cool. +1 movement in non-combat for land/sea units, +2 movement in non-combat for air. With 5 sea zones between E-US and England, fighters flying 4 in combat would have a 1-zone gap uncovered, and yet flying 6 in non-combat could make the trans-atlantic shuttle.

The faster movement may speed play time, especially given more spaces on the board. But it would need play test ... it may make it very hard to make progress and exploit a gap in the front lines. Improved blitz rules could let armor move through an enemy held zone to attack behind the lines, provided the armor is committed first and if the battle in the immediate (moved-through) zone is lost, the armor must fight there (not in their intended destination). After the blitz, infantry moving 2 in non-combat could move up to hold this new line.

That's something of a wish list.

The General
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:35 pm

Post by The General » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:19 am

I would like to see a new form of IPC instead of the same old Monopoly Money that keeps getting reissued in each game. do it with plastic chips that represent 1, 5, 10, and 20 IPCs (for the US and Germany who often have a lot laying around).

This would be a very popular "must have" for the game because you wouldn't have all those wrinkled and torn IPC's laying around. Plastic chips (sort-of like the poker chip idea i suppose) would be virtually indestructable.

also, obviously make them different colors so you can tell how much $ someone has from across the room.


User avatar
Posts: 3090
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:44 am

Post by Larry » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:34 am

Read to this point... Chips instead of paper money - I like it. Lots of other good stuff here as well.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest