Back online. Like I was missed!
Back in the day, when Dr. Jim Goff (SPI's Winter War) was trying to get us to think spatially, as well as logistically, with time constraints, and assorted other things, it was always a challenge to balance the idea of a conflict simulation with the game idea.
That's probably why SPI "bellied up" and A&A "blossomed." SPI's games were almost too much simulation and detail to the point of absolute frustration with many gamers. A&A's games have much more "playability," at the cost, of course of simulating a lot of historical detail. TS4EnA is, I think, a good blend of both simulation and game playability. Yea, yea, there are a few "gliches" here and there, but on the whole, it's really done well. (I am so jealous
that I didn't think of it first.)
That being said, I still think there's room for a few added extras, like the extended range for fleet submarines. I completely understand and agree regarding the thoughts shared about giving cruisers extra range, especially as used in this game, with these rules, and with this setup. To get players using their "units" in a more historical way is great. I guess that's what I don't like about A&A, the original one, anyway. It was a little too abstract. I enjoy a little more detail. Other posted variants, tried to change that. Some succeeded, others not. The one that had death rays and satellites for a WW2 game, well that was a little too much for me. I really had a hard time with that one. Yes, we/I want a historical simulation as much as possible. And what we are simulating is/was anything but fun, only death, destruction, and considerable loss and waste. The "fun" is trying to use a number of the elements in place then, but using them in a different way to achieve/experience an different outcome.
There's no reason, in my mind, not to experiment with an idea or two (or maybe three or four, but not too many, I know.). To give you another instance, I've got some Xeno Games factories, and with the fact that GB/CW have no production centers in the Pacific, (other than Canada, eh?) I'm thinking that they can be set up in British areas, like Australia, which have a minimum of 2 production points, costing 5p.p.'s for 3 turns to build, and after placement on the board, they provide 3 extra p.p.'s/turn, and allow the owner to produce either 1 non-infantry land unit or 1 fighter unit there. Again, there is more complexity, but also more historical simulation. Australia did have factories which produced tanks and planes. Whether or not the balance can be struck is not certain. And my group hasn't agreed to try this yet, so I don't know if it will fly or not. (Maybe they won't! Then they'll have to get their own game! -----Just, kidding! -----Seriously!
)
With that, we are back where this issue began, I believe. Comments?
