RayKinStL
Posts: 130
Joined: 7/4/2008 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bresh Gosh, how hard headed can you guys be ? Its like talking to kids. Your aguments are so flawed. Because GB dont get naval +1 Bonus for heavies superioty we need to adjust the system ? The game(EIA/EIANW) does not need new modifers. My arguments are inlogic ? actually there are quite logic, following the combat system of EIA. . Modifers range from -1 to +1. The "old" EIA's And 2 new modifers has been added nothing else has changed +1 Heavy Superority, -1 Solely Light fleets. The table is the same for EIA and EIANW Battledice range 0-7, both in Land and Naval. not -1-8. Do we hear people whine they dont get +2 in land combat ? No, we are used to this. Nor do we apply a -1 to forces who do not have a cav factor. GB has his bonus in combat along side Au-PR so NO, he is not forgotten, does he use it alot no, but GB CAN USE IT the Heavy Superity modifer! . Im not alone on this, but apperently im the only one who cares enough, that you dont destroy the game. Your theory are so flawed that GB NEEDS this to win ? He has +1(+2) wind gauge. He has +1 for battle rolls. Ray Weak faulty logics ? Why dont you stick it ? Can you please list whats so faulty ? Your arguments are not strong Ray, there are several land combat special rules who apply to single nations. I can list them, if you find it to hard to read the manual. Regards Bresh Bresh, Arguing with you is like banging my head against a wall. I will simply point out two statements that show why your logic is so faulty... "Your arguments are not strong Ray, there are several land combat special rules who apply to single nations. I can list them, if you find it to hard to read the manual." This is not land comabt. Naval combat is so different. Because of it's simplistic nature, the increase of "chance" is far more significant. Because everything is decided by ONE and ONLY ONE die roll, forces should be properly compensated for how they enter the battle. This is much more important in naval comabt because with one die roll, there is less chance for the law of averages to help you out. So you really are comparing apples and oranges when you say this. Further... "Your aguments are so flawed. Because GB dont get naval +1 Bonus for heavies superioty we need to adjust the system ? " YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! JESUS CHRIST. EITHER 1.5x's heavies means you have such an advantage that the side with said advantage deserves an additonal modifier to their roll or it doesnt. Christ, how can you not see the inconsistency in this??? I know you are not that stupid. You can honeslty say that if France attakcs Austria navally with 10 heavies agaisnt 3 Austrian heavies, he deserves a +1 for heavy superiority, but if Britain attacks France with 30 heavies against the same French 10 heavies, that advantage does not warrant a bonus??? What the hell sense does that make? This is not a two way street. Either heavy superiority warrants a modifier or it doesnt. Heavy superiority is a BLANKET RULE. It covers EVERY country. It even covers Britain as you can see by the screenshot showing I have it. But to say there is no way for Britain to ever take advantage of it, except for some cockamamey scenario you made up, is absolutely ridiculous. Unfortuantely, I am with NeverMan. This battle simply is not worth it. I provide logic and numbers, and you debate with opinions and speculation. Marshall obviously has no interest in changing things so whats the point? Leave the game inconsistent. Who gives a f***? So much other stuff is wrong with it anyway, we might as well leave this inconsistency in it too. So congrats Bresh, you win, because I simply can not debate you anymore. You choose to consistently ignore all my points of logic. You have never addressed once the logic of the rule and why it should not apply to GB except to try to use some "game balance" arguement that simply does not apply. So I give up. I am done posting in this thread. I have repeated myself far too many times, I simply do not want to spend time retyping the same sh*t I have said over and over that all the detractors choose to ignore rather than address.
< Message edited by RayKinStL -- 8/29/2008 7:19:54 PM >
|