I hope it is… it really looks like, with global victory cities, that you must focus on every theater instead of just one. Honestly, if the Allies can win by spending every IPC on Europe and ignoring the Pacific, I wont buy this game :-D
Are the victory conditions a bit different? In Revised, you could more or less ignore victory cities… hopefully this has changed…
All the Axis nerfs might be okay if America has to actually fight a 2 front war.
I am afraid that there will be a strategy more viable than any other: Kill Italy First.
My first impression is that USA can not ignore paciofic and will spend some money there to engage Japanese units. Japanese on his hand will have an hard time in China and against the great number of low IPC territories. Having three territories worthy 1 IPC each is much bad than having 1 that is worth 3 IPC (Lapalisse sentence here… :) ). Weakness of Italy would allow Allied to threathen Med and Rome, forcing German to support her weak allies. This is much like history but … it may enforce a more “scripted” game.
I hope this will not happen!
Well, if you check out the map and what’s written on BGG and Smorey Swamp forum you find that Italy gets 5 IPCs in bonus for every turn that the Med is free from Allied ships. In addition, there’s probably a similar bonus for control of all the land territories around the Med. An Italy at 20 IPCs is quite dangerous, so containing Italy with some naval concentration in the Med and land forces in Africa is probably necessary. Same goes for Japan I would think, since an unchecked Japan would probably gobble up India, Australia and Hawaii in no-time.
I agree that ignoring any Axis power is probably not doable. At least I hope the VC conditions are set to make an all-out attack on Germany very dangerous for the Allies. E.g: now Japan won’t have the time to assault Moscow before Germany would fall, but the game should be lost to the Allies if Japan grabs those 3 Pacific VCs and Germany manages to hold on to theirs (total 11 VCs). But containing Italy and Japan and then going for Germany as a kind of modified KGF might still be a good strategy albeit much more complex to carry out…
Japan is going to control alot of this too. By tying up enough US forces, Uk and USSR must do the bulk of kiling Germany.
But that leaves Italy alone, since USSR does not have much of a fleet.
All this really means new strategies. But more importantly, I do think it finally resolves the “KGF”. Ignoring 2 enemies to focus on just 1 should cost you the game.
I think the amount of victory cities needed to win is important… if Japan can conquer all the Pacific cities, and all of Europe remains under Axis control, and the Axis don’t win, victory cities will be useless IMO…
The problem with a war for capitals is that Japan is nowhere near a capital, hence why it could be ignored in other games.
When I play as japan in revised, I always WANT the US player to send some ships to the Pacific so that we can have a Naval battle… 9 times out of 10, they all go to Germany :-(
Japan is not near a capital, but its alot closer to obtaining her bonus than the American player is able to take it away. And that vital factor will grow Japanese IPC at an alarming rate if not stopped. The Japanese player who maintains her hold on the bonus will win by the IPC flowing to her economy and US player will fail and run out of gas.
The K[G/J/I]F strategies are not over. In fact, Russia should be motivated to pull a KIF strategy, and here’s why:
1. The Russians can divert German forces into southern europe, and open a two front war with the Germans (Eastern and Southern)
2. They get ANOTHER IC and 8 more IPC’s (Potential game-breaker)
3. It allows a more potentially successful D-Day invasion, since Germany will try to free its ally and prevent invasion at two fronts.
This could backfire on the Russians, if Germany pushes aggressively into Russia and captures one of Russia’s victory cities.
Any thoughts on this?
I don’t think KIF is that great. Germany has Italys back. The USA is far away and will be exposed if it sends it’s navy into the Med. The UK also has to get into the Med to threaten Italy. Germany’s planes will be a huge deterent. Like you say Russia is the only real threat to Italy and germany is right there. I say the game should be very balanced.
The only thing that concerns me is the fact that Germany must defend 2 coastal territories (France, Northwestern Europe) against the DDay invasion. In Revised you could stockpile enough units in WEurope to deter the DDAY invasion for at least 3-4 turns(which was perfectly historical). Now you will be dividing your units in half to deter DDay between the 2 territories. You could probably invade 1 territory with England on turn 2 if England buys correctly on Turn 1. Thoughts?
@Flying:
I don’t think KIF is that great. Germany has Italys back. The USA is far away and will be exposed if it sends it’s navy into the Med. The UK also has to get into the Med to threaten Italy. Germany’s planes will be a huge deterent. Like you say Russia is the only real threat to Italy and germany is right there. I say the game should be very balanced.
The only thing that concerns me is the fact that Germany must defend 2 coastal territories (France, Northwestern Europe) against the DDay invasion. In Revised you could stockpile enough units in WEurope to deter the DDAY invasion for at least 3-4 turns(which was perfectly historical). Now you will be dividing your units in half to deter DDay between the 2 territories. You could probably invade 1 territory with England on turn 2 if England buys correctly on Turn 1. Thoughts?
Agreed about D-Day invasion, which makes my point about Russia pulling a potential KIF even more deadly to the Germans. They would have too many places to fight and not enough time to do it in.
Id on’t think that DDay is a greater threat than it was before…
Best strategy was (and is) to kill off any transports built by UK each turn.
More dangerous is an attack on Norway - each time Uk got an foothold in northern Europe Germany was crushed soon after - despite German sucesses in Africa…
Also IGNORING Japan is the downfall for the Allies - If Japan does not have to worry about the US island hopping they have free reign in the Pacific and are able to sweep through Asia
More often than not Axis troops linked up in Persia then whittling away Russia - if Japan has enough units to attack russia (Moscow) in force Germany can build enough planes to constantly harass shipping in the Atlantic…
I got used to split forces to cover each theatre, because ignoring one speels doom (no matter what side I play…)
but that are only my experiences ;)
BTW - Sometimes we play Russo-Japanese peach treaty (Russia can only attack Japan if Germany is gone/japan can only attack russia if UKor US capital is gone - though then the game is quite over ;)) - Any hint that Triple A also has a similar rule? (Historical gamer speaking here ;))
BTW - Sometimes we play Russo-Japanese peach treaty (Russia can only attack Japan if Germany is gone/japan can only attack russia if UKor US capital is gone - though then the game is quite over ;)) - Any hint that Triple A also has a similar rule? (Historical gamer speaking here ;))
Likely not, but it may be in the national advantages section of the rules (similar to the Non-Aggression Pact for the Russians in Revised).
Best strategy was (and is) to kill off any transports built by UK each turn.
That was kinda impossible if the UK player was worth anything…and I assume it still will be. Sure, you will be able to take out some transports, but taking out all transports every turn can’t be the best strategy because it simply isn’t feasible unless UK is terrible.
Agreed. That wouldn’t really accomplish anything at all. That would make Sealion completely certain (unless the German player was a dummy as well).
Best strategy was (and is) to kill off any transports built by UK each turn.
That was kinda impossible if the UK player was worth anything…and I assume it still will be. Sure, you will be able to take out some transports, but taking out all transports every turn can’t be the best strategy because it simply isn’t feasible unless UK is terrible.
It depends how many TTs UK builds each turn at 2-3 it should be possible - if UK builds more it will likely have to neglect other parts of the Empire…
IIRC the new rules say something that unprotected TTs are killed by even crossing the territory they are in, so Germany should be able to contain the advancing fleet ;)
Assuming that UK/US can land in one territory, Germany still holds the other and Germany itself - it should be possible to throw the Aliies back ito the sea - unless you completely stripped Germany of units…
But I will be happy to try it when the game arrives :D
IIRC the new rules say something that unprotected TTs are killed by even crossing the territory they are in, so Germany should be able to contain the advancing fleet ;)
Nope. Wiping out defenseless transports requires a dedicated combat move and attack. Just “passing through” won’t do it.
Unless you’re a submarine…
Hmm, as far as I can tell, this will be how the game will more or less go:
Ger vs. Rus ofcourse
Ita vs. Brit in Africa and Med
Usa vs. Jap in Pacific
Apart from some India or a few American trannies in the Atlantic, the game seems designed to give every nation a direct opponent. Might get very interesting indeed…
Hmm, as far as I can tell, this will be how the game will more or less go:
Ger vs. Rus ofcourse
Ita vs. Brit in Africa and Med
Usa vs. Jap in PacificApart from some India or a few American trannies in the Atlantic, the game seems designed to give every nation a direct opponent. Might get very interesting indeed…
What about Germany vs. Russia (obviously) and UK in Africa (Let Italy pick up territories to increase low income.) and maybe US for Atlantic Ocean
Italy vs. UK in Africa and Russia (would need some transports to get to Caucusus)
Japan vs. US for naval supremacy in the Pacific and UK in India (assuming there is an IC in India).
