LoneRunner -> RE: SCWAW Strategic Bombers (10/21/2021 8:30:21 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater Hi Harry, Thanks for the report and as Bill is on holiday, I'll try and quickly fix the issues that have arisen since the patch release. For this one, everyone happy if just the US is reduced to 1 chit for Strategic Bombers, or should this be across the board? Hubert Hi Hubert, Thought I would add my two cents against changing research chits. WaW is a fun game because each player is faced with a multitude of options. For example, as the USA, I might go heavy into researching bombers or tanks. Or, instead, invest in infantry tech and amphib tech and build lots of infantry for an early second front. Or slam navy tech and try to crush Japan. Or try to do everything (you can't). So many decisions and each decision has a huge impact on strategy for winning the game. Fun! Harry's opponent who built tech 5 bombers must have invested a significant amount of his MPPs into bomber tech, long-range air tech, advanced fighter tech. In addition he built expensive bombers and support fighters. A huge investment. I doubt he had much MPPs left to build infantry, tanks, and amphib transports. So as a result he might have a big bomber fleet but a delayed second front. Could Russia survive while his bombers hammered Germany into submission? Germany might respond by double-chitting anti-air. Or just ignore the bombing and crush Russia. So cool to see players attempt to out guess the other. Lots of options is the most fun part of WaW. But we are talking about taking away some of those options. Why? Will it make the game better? Take away enough options and we could be left with a vanilla game where only one viable strategy is available.
|
|
|
|