with Russia invested in China (IC in Szechwan and raised territory value to 3) and getting the IPCs, pluss the turn order allowing to consolidate, made a KJF more viable. My friend tried it one game but made a couple mistakes with positioning
How to re-balance the -41 Scenario (team effort!)
-
Another idea would be to work out a 12 VC victory condition for the Axis, along with a change of NOs to counterbalance the game. In this case, ignoring Japan would be fatal since just Karelia would do if Japan got all their VCs in the Pacific. NO-changes for this possible variant, “Axis tactical victory”, could be:
*Remove German starting terr. bonus
*Remove Japanese starting terr. bonus
*Boost Soviet Arkhangelsk bonus to 10 IPCs
*Boost US homeland bonus to 10 IPCs -
Nice tweaks to NO’s. Also, would be interesting to see what people think about bid levels.
-
Nice tweaks to NO’s. Also, would be interesting to see what people think about bid levels.
I’ll start….50 ipc bid for the allies. All in Pacific region…Siberia(Russian units), India (start with IC, more troops, maybe a cruiser), WUSA(Japan should not be able to hit this first round, a cruiser and destroyer here)
Maybe 65 ipcs
-
65 is insane. I’d say 12-18: all to Yunnan. That would make China a non-sparring power and the fighter would survive
-
Just give China 1 Infantry per territory in 41 and keep it 1 for 2 in 42
Burma road ( allied control of Yunnan or Burma) allows the UK player to lend 1 IPC per controlled territory up to a maximum of 4 IPC per turn, so they can buy non-infantry units.
lastly, make the flying tigers replaceable as long as the fighter is paid for by US IPC fund.
-
How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…
@Flying:
Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO.What’s the point of giving them to both? Now it’s only better for Japan to attack Russia! Who needs those 5 IPC’s most - Japan or Russia? No, only give Russia a bonus if Japanese units are on its territories, thàt’s the way to make Japan think twice. (edit the Russian 10 IPC one to 5 IPC’s then)
Edit:
As for the bidding: 1 IPC to the Axis 8) -
How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…
@Flying:
Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO.What’s the point of giving them to both? Now it’s only better for Japan to attack Russia! Who needs those 5 IPC’s most - Japan or Russia? No, only give Russia a bonus if Japanese units are on its territories, thàt’s the way to make Japan think twice. (edit the Russian 10 IPC one to 5 IPC’s then)
Edit:
As for the bidding: 1 IPC to the Axis 8)It doesn’t make much sense to get a bonus if all of the eastern territories are occupied by the Japanese. These bonuses are geared toward the morale of a nation. Imagine you are a russian citizen and the japanese are a couple hundred miles outside of moscow and your troops to the east have been routed. Will your morale and spirits be up or down? This bonus would not last long, we agree on that. One country will at some point figure that it is the best interest to attack the other. Russia doesnt have the firepower to attack in the east like japan does. I would love to see a starting armor unit in the east to russia to give them options.
-
American NO……
-Gain 15 ipcs if at the end of your turn the value of all American units in Pacific theatre are more than 90 ipcs, not including ICs or AA guns.(Pacific theatre includes…Alaska, all pacific islands, WUSA and Pacific ocean)
With the setup as is I cannot see anything other than a KGF strategy. Perhaps something like this would create a global war. If you really think about it the American people would have been furious if we had not fought Japan after PH. If we are not engaging them then morale should be low and no bonus should be given. This would also get America to its ideal ipc level. Maybe other American NOs should be modified or deleted since this is a big one.
The more I think of this the more I like it. If you use this NO you are required to call this game Axis&Allies&Flying Tiger from now on. :-D
-
@Flying:
USSR
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Japanese forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Japan, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Japan will have the same NO.
I like that because it will also lure the players into a more historical game-play…
… having say that:
The Allies (specially Russia) are the ones who don’t want Japan to attack the USSR*
So giving both sides 5 ipc for doing something that USSR won’t do anyway is just a gift for Russia
And giving 5 ipc to Japan will simply make it stronger (and many players are saying that Japan is strong enough already)Why not using one of the alternative rules of Revised to represent the Soviet-Japanese non-aggression pact? Just give the USSR 5 infantry for free to be automatically placed at any Soviet territory where Japan crosses the line? (just the first time Japan attacks of course).
- In real life the Germans were also against a Japanese invasion of the USSR. Germany played as a mediator for the non-agression teatrise between the USSR and Japan. Japanese have had their “lower-butt” kicked on many small (and not so small) engagements against Soviet troops at Manchurian borders as to know that attacking the Red Army was a bad idea.
-
OK, it does seem like the Axis are having a quite big advantage
Am i the only one thinking the axis are at the disadvantage here?
Just played a game (admitidley with 6 players) but the ais was crushed beyond belief…
-
Am I the only one here who believes that BOTH sides can win without a bid :?
This is not Revised ppl, it’s a new game, it’s more complex than AAR, and the best strats are not discovered yet.
-
i’ve played the game twice now (once with NO and once w/out) and I do believe Allies has an advantage. Before Japan can get to Moscow, the Allies will be breathing down the necks of Germany and Italy.
-
@Nix:
OK, it does seem like the Axis are having a quite big advantage
Am i the only one thinking the axis are at the disadvantage here?
Just played a game (admitidley with 6 players) but the ais was crushed beyond belief…
KGIF?
-
i’ve played the game twice now (once with NO and once w/out) and I do believe Allies has an advantage. Before Japan can get to Moscow, the Allies will be breathing down the necks of Germany and Italy.
KGIF, how predictable. I thought this game was created to get action in Pacific?
When are we gonna stop dicking around and admit this game is the same ole broken record and come up with ideas that make this a global conflict? I tried but no one is listening.
-
/Flying tiger
Once we’ve played the game for a few months I’m sure we’ll be trying out some ideas if the Axis seem to be kicked in the butt by a KGF strat in a big majority of games. People right now I think are trying to play the game and optimizing strategies. In particular we should expect quick offensives by the Germans and Italians before American invasions take place, so that Russia can be made to collapse. On the other spectrum we could see Japan attacking Alaska from turn 2 and on so that USA can’t throw all at Europe.
I don’t think we need difficult changes though like changing major things, the simplest thing would be to just give the Axis a 12 VC victory condition which would mean the Pacific couldn’t be ignored. But again, we should try the game out more first!
-
KGIF?
No, UK, russia kicked down germany italy, US kicked japans navy in the nuts. We where playing with tecs thought.
-
How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…
If the USA is active in the Pacific then THAT IS a counter to KRF. Japan cannot ignore USA. Getting the USA active in Pacific should be the game designers main goal. They tried but they failed and this time it’s worse than ever.
-
I still think it is too early to tell.
It is going to come down to the play of Japan.
If Japan is routinely ignored by the US while Russia is almost always getting killed by a G/I/J 1-2-3 then that would tell me that the US can’t ignore Japan and thus you are forced to have at least some Pacific action. But if the US can ignore Japan while Germany still falls way before Moscow then we could have the same old same old.I do think, in this case (US ignore Japan), that Capital trades may become a possibility, G and I for Russia, it which case if there was no US Pac presence I think Japan (with Cauc and Mos) may be able to either take Wus or Liberate either Rome or Berlin meaning Capital trade is good for the Axis (if Japan is left alone). Again, this would all eventually lead to the Allied players realizing you just can’t afford to leave Japan alone b/c even if Europe falls they can continue to fight on quite well earning 75-95 ipcs. But we simply need more games to be played to determine how big of a threat Japan can be when left alone.
The problem, and IMO there is no way around this, is the game is a land based game. You need land units to take Capitals, period. Germany and Russia are essentially the only countries where you don’t have to every worry about buying a ship. So a country earning 30 (all land units) equals a country earning say 40-45 (where you need to buy not only trns but ships to protect the trns).
Thus Germany and Russia are going to dictate the game pace. If they both come out guns blazing it really leaves their Allies no choice but to come to their aid, this requires UK/US to shuck to Europe and Japan to press Moscow from the East.Now in AA50, due to the increased distance form Japan to Moscow, it may turn out that to better aid Germany you don’t need to spend the 6-7 turns to get to Moscow, you can spend the 2-3 turns and trade Ala/Hi and directly threaten the US. In turn this could force the US to come up with some type of Pac strat, but we just need more time to see how games really play out.
-
My 2 cents worth on re-balancing.
I’ve played AA50 several times and agree with many comments that the Axis (Japanese) are way over powered. Godzilla rules. (As a background, I have been playing AA since the 1981 Nova Edition). The main problem I see is that the Japanese navy starts way oversized in relation to the USN, which at the start of the war was larger than the IJN (except in fleet carriers, where the Japanese had 6 and the US 5, plus the training of pilots and the zero for the first year in the war). Remember that Japanese naval ascendancy during the war lasted less than 6 months.
Also, the US should be the Arsenal of Democracy and be the industrial giant of the war, not the Japanese.
Minor issue with the weakness of the British RN versus the Italian/ German fleets. What’s missing is the RN fleet based in Alexandria. The automatic capture of Egypt by the Germans and Italians in the summer of 1941 shouldn’t be. It should be possible but not easy.
Suggested changes:
1. US Sea Zone 44 Add 1 cruiser and 1 fighter
Sea Zone 56 Add 1 cruiser
Start with improved shipyards (even if not using technology)
Start with War Bonds (even if not using technology)consider adding 1-3 Chinese infantry to the empty Chinese territories
The IJN will still have a strong initial advantage, especially where they had it in the naval air arm. The USN will at least have the opportunity to build a force to challenge the IJN. As it stands now, why bother. Hopefully this will allow a “global” war and encourage a strong US presence int he Pacific.
2. UK Sea Zone 15 Add 1 Battleship and 1 DD.
This will prevent the pretty much automatic capture of Egypt on turn 1. The idea that the Germans could amphibiously assault Egypt in the summer of 41 is absurd. The Italians will have to fight for it and won’t have shore bombardment on the first turn.
3. USSR Russia add 1 Fighter. The Red Airforce was significantly larger than the German Luftwaffe and even after losing much of their planes in the initial assault, they were numerically significant.
4. Germany. Start with Increased Factory Production (even if not using technology).
That’s it.
Personnally I don’t see any issue with NO’s as they all seem pretty realistic to what those countries had as war time objectives. I think they are a very nice touch to the game.
-
I think with those changes the Allies win easily. The US would dominate the Pacific and the Japanese probably wouldn’t really start getting active in Asia until trn 5, and thats if they can even get active in Asia.
Suggested Topics
