cousin_joe
05-12-2004, 08:52 AM
The developers had a really good idea with National Advantages: Nation-specific techs and abilities, with some grounding in WWII History, that could enhance strategies and vary gameplay. The National Advantages(NA), in their current state, work fine for Casual Play, but for Competitive Play, where Balance is paramount, the National Advantages are very imbalanced, both between nations, and within nations.
From reading over at the AAMC Boards, it would seem Balanced National Advantages might be accepted for Competitive Play. It would be nice, as at higher levels of competition/experience, both sides know what the optimal moves are, and there is a tendency for moves and counter-moves to be automatic. These games eventually just come down to dice. Having NAs in the game, in varying combinations, really changes things up, and the game becomes far from automatic. Players will need to constantly think on their feet, adjusting and re-adjusting their strategies to the different rulesets.
This is how I would envision incorporating National Advantages into Competitive Play:
1. Currently some NAs are very overpowered, and others very underpowered. For Competitive Play, we first need to Balance these NAs, both between nations and within nations. They should also have a specific strategic purpose (ie. augment a certain strategy). To make things easier, we should come up with only 3 NAs per nation.
2. As far as choosing NAs, there are many ways of implementing this. After some thought, I think the best way would be to allow each nation to select one NA each, which they would reveal on Game Turn 1 (eg. Russia reveals their NA on R1, then Germany on G1, etc.). The Axis should also be able to select a 2nd NA for either Germany or Japan (To be revealed on Turn 2) so that both sides have 3 NAs apiece.
If you want to debate whether Balanced NA's should (or shouldn't) be in Competitive Play, or how they should be implemented, then please post in this thread.
If you're fine with the idea of Balanced NAs, and want to make some suggestions re: which ones to use, please post to the individual country threads.
From reading over at the AAMC Boards, it would seem Balanced National Advantages might be accepted for Competitive Play. It would be nice, as at higher levels of competition/experience, both sides know what the optimal moves are, and there is a tendency for moves and counter-moves to be automatic. These games eventually just come down to dice. Having NAs in the game, in varying combinations, really changes things up, and the game becomes far from automatic. Players will need to constantly think on their feet, adjusting and re-adjusting their strategies to the different rulesets.
This is how I would envision incorporating National Advantages into Competitive Play:
1. Currently some NAs are very overpowered, and others very underpowered. For Competitive Play, we first need to Balance these NAs, both between nations and within nations. They should also have a specific strategic purpose (ie. augment a certain strategy). To make things easier, we should come up with only 3 NAs per nation.
2. As far as choosing NAs, there are many ways of implementing this. After some thought, I think the best way would be to allow each nation to select one NA each, which they would reveal on Game Turn 1 (eg. Russia reveals their NA on R1, then Germany on G1, etc.). The Axis should also be able to select a 2nd NA for either Germany or Japan (To be revealed on Turn 2) so that both sides have 3 NAs apiece.
If you want to debate whether Balanced NA's should (or shouldn't) be in Competitive Play, or how they should be implemented, then please post in this thread.
If you're fine with the idea of Balanced NAs, and want to make some suggestions re: which ones to use, please post to the individual country threads.