Archive for Axis & Allies ForuMINI Specialised in the World War II Axis & Allies Miniatures and War At Sea Games
|
Jaws
|
What Year???What year is the battle fought can have a serious effect on ship availability.
Example: CA 68 Baltimore. Available 1943, 14 in Class. Some, who have alot of money, might try to bring 6 or 7 into a game if Battleships are not allowed. The Baltimore was completed in June 1943. After a shakedown cruise it became operational in September 1943 and did not see combat until November 1943. So this ship should not be used in any game that is dated prior to October 1943.
Out of the 14 ships in the class: 6 were commissioned on June 1945 or after and never saw combat, 3 more were commissioned between October 1944 and Febuary 1945. Only Baltimore, Canberra, Boston, and Quincy were completed in 1943.
Of the four Iowa Class Battleships, 2 were not completed until 1944.
If you are playing with Historical availability it would be a good idea to take the date on commissioning, add 3 months for shakedown and training, and then use that month for setting up Scenarios.
This will also balance most games because most every nation, except the United States, can field almost every vessel & Aircraft that have been produced in 1942 Games where the United States will lose the Iowa, Baltimore, and several more ships.
|
SJG Gamer
|
For my freinds and I, this is a game of fun, not merely a "Lets redo history" game. 
I like the idea of using all ships for some interesting "What Ifs"  Reguardless of when a ship came out, it should be accurately pointed to be playable. When my friends and I play, we don't worry about which ship came out when, we just have a good time... Given the many specially abilities of so many of the ships, this game does not seem to be the best for strict historical recreations...
|
NeuralDream
|
I'm sure you already know that the forumini navies project started just for this. To provide the exact units that existed at the exact periods. In fact, they provide also the date of sinking or decommissioning, so that you can use the optional rule "use only units that had already been commisioned and not yet sunk on mm/dd/yy".
|
jfkziegler
|
| SJG Gamer wrote: | For my freinds and I, this is a game of fun, not merely a "Lets redo history" game.
I like the idea of using all ships for some interesting "What Ifs" Reguardless of when a ship came out, it should be accurately pointed to be playable. When my friends and I play, we don't worry about which ship came out when, we just have a good time... Given the many specially abilities of so many of the ships, this game does not seem to be the best for strict historical recreations... |
Well said. I couldn't agree more.
|
swarbs
|
| jfkziegler wrote: | | SJG Gamer wrote: | For my freinds and I, this is a game of fun, not merely a "Lets redo history" game.
I like the idea of using all ships for some interesting "What Ifs" Reguardless of when a ship came out, it should be accurately pointed to be playable. When my friends and I play, we don't worry about which ship came out when, we just have a good time... Given the many specially abilities of so many of the ships, this game does not seem to be the best for strict historical recreations... |
Well said. I couldn't agree more. |
But you gents can surely see that some people would want to have all this information. Also, I agree with you about points, but WotC already made the decision and it went the other way, and so the game is already balanced against early war units. I can even understand why they did it, it's to encourage the use of year restrictions to make sure all the units have a place in the game, even though it looks like it makes late-war units rediculous at first glance.
Anyway, I think the specific starting dates is one of the nicest things about ND's cards, because you can use it, or you can make a more realistic 'what-if', like what if they rushed this ship through commissioning so she was ready a month or two earlier? Since WotC already made the decision that late-war ships cost less, year restrictions become really important, and they will grow in importance as more and more official ships come out.
|
Schlachtschiff Bismarck
|
| swarbs wrote: | | Also, I agree with you about points, but WotC already made the decision and it went the other way, and so the game is already balanced against early war units. I can even understand why they did it, it's to encourage the use of year restrictions to make sure all the units have a place in the game, even though it looks like it makes late-war units rediculous at first glance. |
Has this actually been stated or is this just a generalised interpritation of the unit costs based on Hood and the entire Italian navy(in set 1)?
because with those exceptions the prices seem fairly in line to me and some early war stuff seem pretty stinkin cheep for the kind of bias you describe such as Tennessee, Rodney, Richilieu(actually underpriced and overpowered), Bismarck(priced just about right) Graf Spee(a bit cheep but I am not complaining) and in a shocking turn the Vittorio Veneto.
I will agree there are some aberant units but i don't see the intent you mention.
|
|