Pacific: Optional Way of Playing (posted by Sinister)

Apparently The Axis & Allies site over at Avalon Hill is going to be phased out soon. A new one will replace it. If you have something over there that you don’t want to be evaporated into thin air then cut and paste it, and bring it over here so that it is not lost forever.
User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:44 pm

Posted by Scott_WAR:

Oh yeah, I agree, with the out of the box rules, I can see where there is no real choice. However, by reducing USA's income to 55/turn instead of 75/turn, allowing anyone to buy an IC, and by making the victory conditions that Japan has to take both India and Australia to win, its a different game, and sub stalling isnt necessary......... I think. Of course more testing is needed,,, revised is taking up a lot of my playing time lately though.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:45 pm

Posted by Tordenskjold:

It seems to me that a US at 55 and no VP win and two-capital win only, would be unfair to Japan. What would prevent UK from playing optimum "Crush-defense", and the US from building bombers fot 10 turns with no time rush? It is impossible for Japan to win, IMO.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:46 pm

Posted by Scott_WAR:

There will always be players who play like that. It doesnt matter what game you are playing. Like the lamers in classic who roll all tech with UK or USA till they get heavy bombers, then strat bomb you to death. Its a lame way to play, but sadly, very effective. Same with US building all bombers here. They cant take ground because of the lack of naval units, but they can prevent japan rom doing the same by bombing all their navy. Lame. My suggestion would be to NOT play against lamers. The idea here is to make the rules so that crush india isnt the most effective way for Japan to win. The idea is to actually have Japan and USA fighting in the pacific, you know, what most of us probably envisioned when we bought A&A Pacific.
As for India playing optimum crush defence, then Japan has to react accordingly. Take island, convoys etc. Take UK and AU IPC's. Then take australia if India stays on the max defense path.
Anyhow Tord, thats the idea, to try it and see where the holes are at, and fix them. This game really has started to suck since all anyone ever does is defend india as allies and rush india as japan.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:46 pm

Posted by Series:

I have a question... please answer nicely... but...


what problem are you exactly trying to solve by lowering US income and giving a lend lease? I haven't played Pacific much but I would like to know what this accomplishes.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:47 pm

Posted by Scott_WAR:

You will find as you play pacific more and more, that japan usually either wins before the US can arrive in time to save India, or loses because USA arrives in full force and basically overpowers them with an income that is several times that of Japan. This results in a "rush India" strategy by Japan, in which the pacific islands are completely ignored by Japan. Some of us would like to see a more historically true game, where Japan and the USA actually fight in the Pacific. I dont like the lend lease idea, but thats just me. We arent coming up with official rules here, just throwing out things we have tried to get a game with more variety than "rush India". As for why the decrease in US IPC, that simple. With Japan not getting VP, or a win by taking India, it comes down to the defense of australia. Once India falls, Japan and Hawaii are fairly equal in distance from australia, so for a fair fight over australia, both Japans and USA IPC income at that point, needs to be fairly even. Reducing W USA from 55 to 35 IPC in value brings USA income to 55 and that evens up the income difference somewhat.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:50 pm

Posted by Sinister:
Originally posted by Series
I have a question... please answer nicely... but...


what problem are you exactly trying to solve by lowering US income and giving a lend lease? I haven't played Pacific much but I would like to know what this accomplishes.
My rule makes does away with VP and instead introduces the revised idea of Victory cities. The reduced production of the US brings it in line with most other games and allows for japan to last longer.

As written the rules of Pacific are set up to end the game in 3 hours no matter what. Either Japan wins (most likely ot happen) before the US can mobilize effectively OR the US does moblize and easily takes down Japan with a massive IPC advatanage.

I'm not a big lover of Lend Lease but I included it because I felt it was necessary to protect allied victory cities since it takes a long time for the US to mobilize.
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

User avatar
Krieghund
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:18 am
Location: Virginia, USA

Post by Krieghund » Wed Mar 12, 2008 6:51 pm

Posted by Holywolfman:

Yeah.."Be nice" Sinister (lol) :D
A&A Developer and Playtester

"War is much more fun when you're winning!" - General Martok

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest