Thank you for taking the time to explain.
Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]
-
@axis_roll Yes, that sounds good to me – but I’m flattered, @vodot, and I’ll be happy to post a screenshot and summary every couple of full rounds to the forum so you can follow along.
-
Oh, and @axis_roll? Start when you like! It’s Germany’s turn; you have my email. :-)
-
@Argothair said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
Oh, and @axis_roll? Start when you like! It’s Germany’s turn; you have my email. :-)
Wanted to run these by another member of our playing group first, just to ensure there is nothing too glaring (besides the Axis opportunities I see :dark_sunglasses: )
Then the Blitzkrieg will begin!
-
I forgot one more question. The black sea is open, correct?
The Dardenelles is not closed. True? -
Oh, that’s interesting. I’m used to closing them, but I think leaving them open adds more options in an interesting way, and so far in our two playtests the Allies have had an advantage, so let’s leave them open! The Caucasus are such an important NO center; it’s important that the Axis have a realistic path to strike at them.
But in that case let’s add SZ 17 (the Black Sea) to the NOs that have to be free of enemy warships in order to collect the NOs for Mare Nostrum (Italy) and Mediterranean Shipping Routes (UK).
-
-
Yo hows this going ? There is a fellow AA member looking at more NOs in game.
-
Izz a need a saved
-
@SS-GEN update posted in the play board games section
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32757/axis_roll-vs-argothair-aa50-balanced-mod-playtest -
If anyone doesn’t want to read the entire game update thread, or if you want to skip my gaming buddy’s blatant pro-Allied propaganda, here’s the summary:
We played the first game out for five rounds, with axis_roll putting heavy Axis reinforcements into the Med via an early factory in France. As Britain, I built a factory in South Africa that didn’t quite pull its weight, and a US Pacific fleet that held the Japanese at bay but was not able to actually push them off of the core of their economy. axis_roll did a good job of shutting down Britain and Russia’s NOs, and Russia was so poor that even though German initially went south, Russia didn’t have the units to hold off the eventual German thrust, so we called the game when Russia’s position started to collapse. Germany also benefited from re-directing surplus African troops to Stalingrad via the open Dardanelles. The USA was earning slightly more than usual from the new NOs, but not nearly enough to compensate for Russia falling apart.
For the second game, to give Russia a bit more cash, we adjusted the Russian NOs to kick in on turn 2, and we switched sides. We are in the middle of round 6, and in my opinion, the game is still very much alive and kicking – fighting is hot in the Pacific, around India, and in eastern Europe. The Allies hold Scandinavia and are rapidly hoovering up Africa, but the Germans have western Europe locked down with big infantry garrisons – so the question is whether Moscow, Cairo, or the US Pacific fleet crack before the Germans and Italians run out of income after inevitably losing Africa.
We’re still struggling a bit to find ways to properly incentivize Pacific play – just giving the Allies money for holding territory in the Pacific doesn’t help much if holding the Pacific is impossible, so we’re not really seeing factories in India or China or Siberia or anything wild like that. There are too many d*** 1-IPC territories in the Allied Pacific sphere of influence, and too many starting Japanese transports and fighters to crush any initial pockets of resistance. It may be that just editing the NOs, by itself, isn’t enough to enable a truly competitive Kill-Japan-First strategy. Still, this game has seen a fairly convincing two-front war – the Pacific theater may be secondary, but it’s been a real front with meaningful losses and gains on both sides.
-
Yes the Pacific always seems to be the problem.:busts_in_silhouette:
Have you thought about making the islands in the Pacific more of a 3 Island Group No ?
Does Australia have any ships ?
Try giving UK Pacific more ships ?
Does UK make enough money to buy ships in Australia or India ? -
@SS-GEN There are many ways to try and balance the game, as you have suggested. Argothair was trying to do so with his minimalist approach of only altering the National Objectives.
The new NOs are close, but not enough to help in India/South Pacific theater. India’s vulnerability in AA50 is way overstated, as well as Japans ability to help fight in Africa (even the med too!). I don’t know if just National Objective changes can ‘fix’ these issues.
-
@axis_roll said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
@SS-GEN There are many ways to try and balance the game, as you have suggested. Argothair was trying to do so with his minimalist approach of only altering the National Objectives.
The new NOs are close, but not enough to help in India/South Pacific theater. India’s vulnerability in AA50 is way overstated, as well as Japans ability to help fight in Africa (even the med too!). I don’t know if just National Objective changes can ‘fix’ these issues.
If the NOs aren’t enough then ya setup change maybe ? But wasn’t Arg plan to change setup. I’m just saying for me its always comes down to Japan and slowing them down.
-
Then its take away some pieces from japan and maybe add that allies Factory that was discussed. Later
Looking forward to what you guys come up with. Good LuckG40 SS OUT!
-
@axis_roll said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
@SS-GEN There are many ways to try and balance the game, as you have suggested. Argothair was trying to do so with his minimalist approach of only altering the National Objectives.
The new NOs are close, but not enough to help in India/South Pacific theater. India’s vulnerability in AA50 is way overstated, as well as Japans ability to help fight in Africa (even the med too!). I don’t know if just National Objective changes can ‘fix’ these issues.
@axis_roll, usually ‘overstated’ would mean “it’s not as bad as people say it is”- but in your case it seems like you mean more like “It’s worse than it should be”. India is too vulnerable; Japan is too able to fight in Africa/Med, etc… You guys are playing with just the NO adjustments and no bid, right?
-
@vodot
overstate
verb (used with object), o·ver·stat·ed, o·ver·stat·ing.
to state too strongly; exaggerate:India was never as near as susceptible to Japanese conquest in the real war as it is in AA50. So when I say that AA50 “overstates India’s vulnerability”, I mean that the game makes India far too easy to take by the Japanese.
-
@vodot You guys are playing with just the NO adjustments and no bid, right?
Correct, No tech, dice average, and Argothairs latest National Objectives (which contains a small chinese mod)
-
@axis_roll said in Balanced Mod [Anniversary 41]:
@vodot
overstate
verb (used with object), o·ver·stat·ed, o·ver·stat·ing.
to state too strongly; exaggerate:India was never as near as susceptible to Japanese conquest in the real war as it is in AA50. So when I say that AA50 “overstates India’s vulnerability”, I mean that the game makes India far too easy to take by the Japanese.
Right, makes sense- I knew what you meant, especially given all of the preceding discussion; I think when I first read that sentence I mentally inserted the words “Reports of” in front of the words “India’s vulnerability…” which really would invert the meaning. I think. Apologies for any unintentional grammatical fascism :)
Related to legitimizing the PTO, and this is a very old thought, but what about splitting the US economy ala G40 UK?
When I used to have 7 people over to play revised we would add Italy for the 6th player (using pact of steel rules + setup from triplea), but for the 7th player we would split the US economy at CUS (which counted for both sides), then add +10IPCs to each half. Players could still go all in on KGF or KJF, if they wanted, but naval forces and/or ground units would then have to be produced in their respective IC centers and moved manually to the other side of the board. This is a little bit arbitrary, but it almost always resulted in a real PTO for the US and led to some fun times and climactic fights over the islands.
I can’t speak to precise balance (except to say that I could win as either side without a bid, but that is hardly an accomplishment when you are teaching a game) and the whole thing is going to be shaded by the relative strengths and weaknesses of the POS setup, one of which was (IIRC) a stronger UK in Europe and in the PTO in particular.
-
@vodot Very interesting; that could be a useful part of the toolkit. It’s somewhat trivial to build fighters in Eastern US and fly them into the Western US sea zone, or vice versa, or to build tanks in Western US and drive them into East Canada – so it would be very rare that you’d actually choose to build boats in one sea zone and then sail them through the Panama Canal.
I think +20 IPCs per turn for the US would be disruptive; that sounds like way too large of a bid. My friends usually play with a one-time bid of less than 20 IPCs, so if that money came in every single turn, it would be a problem.
From my point of view, the problem is less that the USA wants to build 100% in the Atlantic, and more that there are no Allied “rally points” west of San Francisco. You can stack up in Hawaii, Alaska, or Australia if you really want to, but it’s honestly not that big of a problem if Japan takes them, and you don’t want to put a factory in any of those places as the Allies. It feels like the natural front lines for the Japanese empire are near Persia, Australia, Yakut, Chinghai, Alaska, and Hawaii – which means that the forward staging ground for a Kill-Japan-First campaign is either Cairo, South Africa, or San Francisco, none of which are particularly thematic. I’d like to see the Allies staging in Guadalcanal, or Midway, or the Soviet Far East, or Burma. That rarely happens in an OOB game. I think the new NOs have gotten us part of the way toward that goal – it’s more reasonable to go to Guadalcanal or New Guinea now. The tournament Victory City rules we used in Marin County (21 Victory Cities, win immediately if you hold 13 VCs, win after round 8 if you hold 10+ VCs) also help out with those staging grounds – if you’re counting victory cities, that gives you much more reason to hold onto Sydney and Honolulu. I still feel like we’re not quite there yet, though. I would personally like to see even more use of forward staging grounds in Kill Japan First campaigns.
-
What if you added National Advantages without changing setup ? But do as you said by putting a minor factory in Persia.
I have in my game NA Island Bases for US and Japan. IF either side gets it you place an Airbase at every island that side controls at start of game. If enemy captures island they get the Airbase to use. Now I don’t know if there’s airbases in this game. I guess I should look at rules before I reply any more. Been so long since I have.
As I mentioned before I also have NO 3 Island Groups worth 5 icps. Setup right and they work. This makes Japan have to come out with naval fleets to protect there NO island group or counter US NO Island groups. Otherwise US can get More money in pacific. Other wise back to the setup thought and add more US navy to Pacific.
Just my 2 cents.
Suggested Topics
