From: emcglynn@moose.uvm.edu (Ted McGlynn, In the back row!)
Subject: Re: A&A Game Balance
Originator: emcglynn@moose.uvm.edu
Organization: University of Vermont -- Division of EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 00:50:45 GMT

From article <AfMrSj200WB44ZC1RT@andrew.cmu.edu>, by jmci+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jonathan T. Moore):
> emcglynn@moose.uvm.edu (Ted McGlynn, In the back row!) writes:
>> From article <1joo39INN31d@gap.caltech.edu>, by keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith A\
>> llan Schneider):
>> > rpc@moscom.com (Robert Colbey) writes:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > 
>> >>f12008ad@triton.unm.edu writes:
>> > 
>> >>A quick summary of my game-balancing rule modifications:
>> > 
>> >>NO new industrial centers. This favors the Axis because it keeps the Allies'
>> >>lines of supply longer than the Axis', at least until the Axis has expanded
>> >>it's territory.
>> > 
>> > I think this tends to favor the Allies, actually.  Most Japan players
>> > end up building a few ICs on the mainland.  The only allied IC that seems
>> > to be commonly built is perhaps an English IC in India.
>> > 
>> > keith
>> > 
>>    A few IC's?!!! Why? Perhaps one......many seems a little much tho.
>> 
>> Personally my fav strategy with the allies is to concentrate a small force in \
>> china and have USA build a IC there....becomes a bitch to the Axis in a few 
>> turns ;-)
>> 
>> Is there anyone out there that thinks the big ticket items are rather uneeded??
>> I mean they are nice.....but can be basically an expensive toy. Airpower can w\
>> reck any navy.....and bombers seem alittle too weak. And I've always found
>> Industrial bombing to be only done when my bomber is sitting with nothing else\
>>  to do. GIMME TANKS!!!! 8-)
>> 
>> Tedler
> 
> Well, I have a question about your American IC in China strategy. Are
> you playing first or second edition? If it's first edition I can see
> how it works (actually, Persia's a better location, but that's
> secondary). If, however, you are playing second edition, this is a
> futile effort. With only building 2 units a turn, you can't hope to
> hold out beyond Japan's second or third turn (if that). Then you give
> Japan a free IC closer to Russia. 
> 
> As for the big-ticket items: people usually tend not to buy the
> capital ships, true, but as Erik Lauer is so fond of pointing out, if
> you can clump a bunch of transports together, not even the whole
> Luftwaffe can take it out. Also, don't underestimate the power of
> infantry. Tanks are much more powerful, yes, but if you don't have an
> infantry escort to soak up hits, this tactic doesn't work too well. I
> think Erik once posted that the ideal mixture of tanks and infantry
> (theoretically) is sqrt(2) infantry per tank. Just in case you were
> wondering.

    I was using the first edition.......I just got hold of the rules for the
second. Kinda makes my idea, well moot.


Ted


> 
> -----------------------------------------------
> Jon Moore             (jmci@andrew.cmu.edu) 
>  "What have I got in my pocket?" --Bilbo     
>  "Let the truth of love be lighted,          
>   Let the love of truth shine clear." --RUSH 
> -----------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.board