Author Topic: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion  (Read 24509 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2011, 05:18:05 PM »
So, after some playtesting - we like most of these rules ideas except the movement into enemy territories during the non-combat phase.  It really created just too much mobility in Russia and made things a bit too crazy.  So that one we are taking off the table.  Have not tested the Radar ideas yet.

cheers,
Mark

Darkman

  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #16 on: November 29, 2011, 04:54:27 AM »
What do you think about the SS panzergrenadiere rule?

John D.

  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2011, 05:02:32 PM »
We playtested with starting with one SS Pzgr - we all like it!

Darkman

  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #18 on: November 30, 2011, 04:32:29 AM »
you playtestet it with starting with one SS only or also buildable until 1942, then you can build 2?

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #19 on: November 30, 2011, 05:35:11 AM »
This page inspired me for the two shot for kill a unit.
A division survive lot of combat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Panzer_Division_(Germany)

Another personal change, the 6 frontlines unit is for me a little small number
I test with 8 frontlines unit and +1 for the high iniciative.
And a battle max 6 round, 4 is for me to short.
For the naval battle i dont like the new one to complicated for nothing (is just my opinion).
I use your older version.

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2011, 06:10:16 AM »

Another text for the two shot is not true the german amy is death in 1945. The army is weakened yes but not death
The german army in 1945 have a big majority of them divisions in a bad state but not all death. The 50% of the unit
represent this fact in 1945 the german army effort for resupply is divisions at full strength, but historyc result is known.

http://www.feldgrau.com/stats.html

Herr stat:
1939= 3 737 000
1940= 4 550 000
1941= 5 000 000
1942= 5 800 000
1943= 6 550 000
1944= 6 510 000
1945= 5 3000 000

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2011, 06:11:16 AM »
Oups 1945 is 5 300 000 sorry

Mark

  • Administrator
  • General
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #22 on: December 03, 2011, 02:05:45 PM »
I think under the current system the German army is still pretty big late in the game.  In my mind the elimination of a unt is not does not mean the destruction of all the troops, just the reduction of the force as a cohesive fighting force.  New builds do not exclusively represent new formations, but also replacements that reconstitute existing formations back to fighting strength.

I'd like to hear how the play testing goes though through a few full games to understand what kind of a difference it makes - maybe it will be a good change once we see what the effects are over the course of the game.

cheers - and keep the ideas coming!
Mark

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2011, 10:05:20 AM »
The fisrt game test with this new system is for the first reason speed the game the surviving unit on the frontline have a chance to recovert them total strength on the frontline. I decongestion the rail mouvement only fres news troops need the rail monvement. I help a far attack for resupply, i need a supply for reinforce a domage unit.
I continu the game test and report results.

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2011, 06:05:39 AM »
For The rules of two shot, reparation cost every unit have a 2 turn and + of production pay one turn for reparation.
Every unit have a built time of one turn pay the half of this cost artillery 6pp = 3pp only infantry at 3pp pay 2pp.
The same limit of production for a unit. example if a nation have a production of 8 infantry a turn so 8 infantry to restore to.
The reparation is the same phase of build new unit.

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #25 on: December 14, 2011, 01:38:36 PM »
Another one i am creative Lol costal battery. Every fortification in costal side territory have costal battery. If a amphibious assaults is attempt in a territory have a fortification, every fortifiaction give a one shot on the support fire fleet. Before i support the attack. If a naval support unit is touched this unit retreat of the combat. Fortifiacation give a touch on 4 or less, on 12 sided dice. The defender chosen the unit is touch. Rules not tested...

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #26 on: December 18, 2011, 05:46:16 AM »
A little new one i test in this game, continius frontline. A player most dispatch minimum one frontline unit on every adjacant terrirory with a player frontline if at war. After every turn both players at war move on your non combat move a unit on every territory did have no unit on the frontline, with rail mouvement, or if at normal range 1 territory. Is simple and is more realistic.

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2011, 06:06:23 AM »
In the two shot kill you have the option of merge two same domaged unit for create one fresh unit. German have take this method at multiple time in the war.
This action is on the build time at the start of the turn before the attack. The two same unit has to be on the same territory.

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #28 on: December 22, 2011, 05:40:18 AM »
Ok one last for Christmas Rail Gun, cost 4pp, 4pp. Movement only on territory have rail...  Att 8 Def 8. If the territory attacket have fortification the rail gun target fortifiaction before the rest of units. I have the same power of fortification for an amphibious assault (target naval fire support unit).

Godleader

  • Major
  • ***
  • Posts: 147
    • View Profile
Re: Suggested rule changes / updates for playtest and discussion
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2011, 07:53:49 AM »
For the Rail gun i need rail for movement but you dont count the rail gun in you limitation of movement for rail. This new unit is not tested.