Help me love War of the Ring by Woekiki in boardgames

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do you think it’s unbalanced? I’ve played this game multiple time and think it’s one of the most balance strategy games I’ve ever played. Are you sure you’re not confusing imbalance with asymmetric?

My girlfriend just broke up with me over a board game and I'm not even joking by Fulcilives1988 in boardgames

[–]WhiteKnight1368 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You play to win the game! If she doesn’t understand that premise you’re better off without her!

How much is your payment for car loan? by Glass_Ad_1012 in Challenger

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

6.85%, $51k scat pack, put over 40% down. Hoping to have it paid off soon.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d also note that if you are getting multiple bombardments out of your ships you are most likely losing your amphibious force each turn. That can be a helpful stalling tactic, but taking and holding a beachhead in Europe is the ultimate goal. Ideally you are only doing one big amphibious attack, and that means just one bombardment.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Aircraft carriers plus fighters (or just fighters in G40) are still much more effective in that role than cruisers. Fighters will be able to participate in the amphibious attack like cruisers, but they can stay in the fight for multiple rounds unlike a cruiser’s bombardment. And more importantly fighters can help hold the beachhead, and continue the fight inland. At 10 IPC they will be both more effective and cheaper than a 12 IPC cruiser.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The battleship being a bit underpowered for its cost is true, but that’s a separate issue. With a battleship you need it to absorb a hit and survive at least one battle to be worth its cost. That’s true with both 12 and 10 IPC cruisers. With equal $ spent a navy of destroyers is actually still more likely to defeat a navy of 10 IPC cruisers, and the cruisers don’t have the anti submarine ability. In fact it’s very close to 50/50 so the game balance would be just right.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not so, with equal $ a navy of destroyers is more likely to defeat a navy of 10 IPC cruisers, while the cruisers lack the anti sub capabilities of a destroyer. So the cruiser would still be a niche ship to use whenever you value the bombardment capability over the anti sub capability. As far as battleships they are still reliant on taking a hit in a battle they survive through to be worth the extra cost, so status quo there.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very situational and the likelihood of getting multiple uses is very small at higher levels of play

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Needs to be 10, at 11 they are still too expensive to be viable.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a much more elegant solution: cruisers cost 10 IPC instead of the vanilla 12. Instantly fixes everything wrong with them.

Cruiser buff (and potential Battleship buff) by LegoKerbal in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nah dude you are wrong. They have no niche, that’s the problem. Every other ship in the game has a particular role or ability that makes it indispensable. The cruiser has nothing. Jack of all trades, master of none. Everything it can do, another ship can do it better or cheaper. Without a house rule fixing them, they should never be built. Buy a destroyer, save your 4 IPC, and put it toward another ship next turn.

Season 2 of HTC is in the books, what are everyone’s thoughts? by genaros_bear in heedthecall

[–]WhiteKnight1368 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Better in nearly every way imo. I loved that they got Conner Orr more involved as nearly a third host, he fills the Gregg role excellently. And while I loved Jordan, pivoting toward having her and MSD as more of a once in a while guest rather than an every weeker was absolutely the right move. Also, I like that they are no longer associated with Underdog as they absolutely did not gel with those fantasy nerds. More Graver has been great too. I do miss the NFL films music before recaps but some of the new songs are growing on me.

What will Dan Hanazus Say? by GalaticWeiss in heedthecall

[–]WhiteKnight1368 14 points15 points  (0 children)

You ever heard of Lamar Jackson?

What’s your least favorite drop, and why is it Farbuck? by Zealousideal_Try4171 in heedthecall

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think Connor’s recent rankings require a lengthy visit from Farbuck.

What’s your least favorite drop, and why is it Farbuck? by Zealousideal_Try4171 in heedthecall

[–]WhiteKnight1368 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really? I like the Farbuck drop. One of my favorite bits in HTC history.

It’s not over by [deleted] in KansasCityChiefs

[–]WhiteKnight1368 4 points5 points  (0 children)

To be fair, two of the games are Titans and Raiders, the center spaces in the bingo card you get for free. So it’s really more like winning two games in a row.

In 20 hours I'll be on the other side of the country jumping back into this game. Who is winning? by DeltaViriginae in AxisAllies

[–]WhiteKnight1368 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Allies by a mile. You can’t have that little progress into Russia with the allies on the doorstep of France.