Thanks gents. I’m currently editing my video for upload to YouTube and my argument sounds nearly exactly identical to @Cernel .
I appreciate all the feedback.
How to achieve balance
-
Thing that is nice about bids though is they can be used as a handicap as well against players with an uneven skill level. That is why i prefer them.
-
you can still bid even if you accept a change to NOs.
personally, I think the NOs are fun but WAY WAY WAY unbalanced. By turn 3, the Axis are outproducing the allies AND have more units on the board AND those units are close to the fight. I would argue that ALL axis NOs should be 2-3 IPCs instead of 5. -
I kinda miss the “we dont need anything to achieve balance”-option, if I am allowed to say that here.
As others have stated before me…the game could also just be perfectly balanced, but we just havent figured it out completely yet. -
I mean, in Revised, the General consensus was that Allies had the advantages.
Right now, do we have a general consensus? No. Some claim that Axis are at advantages. Others believe not. Some even believe Allies are at advantage. Give it more time before claiming for fixes.
I personally like the bid rules in tournaments or other play. The bid system is not used to “balance” but rather to determine who plays what .Say I don’t want to play them unless you give me that much IPC. Someone can then bid lower to play with them, etc.
Robert
-
AA50 balance discussions have gone through different stages. First, after a few games then we assumed axis are favored, now it’s more balanced.
It’s also worth mentioning that w/o NOs allies are favored in both setups. And the 42 (+NO) scenario hasn’t been played extensively enough to determine any bias yet. In LL, 41, NOs, allies need a bid, probably 2 units.
So why are most of us still inclined to continue to use unit bids, why not cash only bids? I think both AA50 and the upcoming AA42 could be more fun playing w/o changing the setup units, a strict cash only bid could affect game play even less, and for me it would be a new experience, as I have never tried cash only bids yet, only unit bids.
Someone else who think we should try playing with cash only instead of unit bids? -
I don’t like the idea of cash only bids for one reason, in LL axis turn 1 with no unit bid is disgusting.
G1 Kar, Egypt, sinking of all UK boats except dd/trans.
J1 Flying Tigers, US BB, 2 DD/Trans’s, all 3 islands + burma +kwang.As yes, i know the game isn’t supposed to be played LL but all those attacks can be done in dice as well, and axis have good odds on all and none are game ending if they fail. Annoying yes, but not game ending.
-
Just to add one little thing, I know everyone thinks that the Europe half of the map is designed properly but the Pacific is where the problem is, I disagree. If Egypt could hold till UK1 with most of its units Italy isn’t as big of a threat, that fig can reinforce India on turn 1, armor can attack India turn 2 with the TJ inf, it adds more options this way. Also, the G1 setup is messed up, there should be absolutely no way to get all 3 NOs without serious risk, and there really is none on the G1 Kar. With the G1 Kar and/or Egypt you force specific allied responses or they loose the game. Also, the simple fact that Russia cannot last at all against a G push without serious UK help is another reason for the KGF format. If egypt alone could keep its armor/fig on turn 1 that would open up some serious possibilities in the pacific in my opinion. If Italy wasn’t making almost what russia was at the end of turn 1 and germany what russia and the UK combined almost, maybe the UK/US could focus a bit more in the pacific. Perhaps if the UK didn’t have to invest every penny they have into a navy they could afford an IC on UK1 a bit easier.
-
@ Bugoo, if we play with cash only instead of unit bids, then obviously the bids must be higher, b/c unit bids are stronger b/c they are placed before the game starts. It’s only a matter of finding the right amount of cash.
Probably, cash only bids should be twice as high as unit bids, but the priniple is mainly the same in both unit bids and cash bids. So would you give me 18 ipc cash with allies instead of a 9 ipc unit bid :-D
My point is that before we tried to play with cash bids, we cannot say for sure if this is a better or worse solution as to balance the game, before we tried it. It’s just the same as I had to play several dice games to know that the game balance in AA50 is influenced by LL vs dice, while LL or dice didn’t effect game balance in revised.
-
The bid system is not used to “balance” but rather to determine who plays what .Say I don’t want to play them unless you give me that much IPC. Someone can then bid lower to play with them, etc.
Actually the bid does both. It might not if both players bid zero, but other than two zero bids, there will be some sort of altering to the initial set-up with the bid. Even $1 IPC is altering the set-up. It’s probably so small to really affect the game, but it might alter soemones preffered buy for G1 (like 5 tanks and 2 inf, for example)
-
My FTF play group is trying several combinations of the above, and that wasn’t an option for the voting.
Reducing NOs, optional rules (tweaked the interceptor rule to NOT subject the ftrs to aaa fire), and our own China mods (simpliest was to allow the ftr tyo be moved before the game starts). Will these mods be played online or in a tournament? Probably not, but I would rather have a balanced game in my FTF play group than worry about playing with universally accepted rules.
One game in and we have a great game going. More testing is needed, but the results are favorable.
We have found that unless Japan is kept in check somehow, the axis will eventully prevail. This is not easy to do af often Germany is the bigger problem early and you can not just ignore that problem. Oh, and it’s not such an easy problem to address for the allies either. Therein lies the issue.
-
My friend and i have tried many rule variences and have come to the conclusion that with NO’s and/or fighter escort the axis are too strong and tech simply is too much of an unknown and can unbalance both ways. We’ve found the most fun and balanced game is no NO’s, no tech, no fighter escorts and closing of the Dardanelles.
-
But by not playing with NOs, the Pacific theater cease to be one : what’s the point of retaking islands if they do not benefit neither side?
But if we “follow history”. Didn’t Rommel successfully pushed the UK forces in Africa and failed to destroy them because of lack of resources and Allies’ reinforcements?
Right now, my group isn’t as dedicated as me. We don’t go and read all strategies. So we aren’t feeling any imbalancement yet. But I intend to suggest the bid system if they it. Otherwise, we usually use the dice. Highest gets to pick first, etc.
Robert
-
/axis roll
I took the easy way and just listed the alternatives. How did you change NOs in your group? We can set-up a larger poll if people want after this one.
Another possibility for bidding would be to say: we bid number of territory changes to NOs. So if Allies win the bid with 2 territories, they might choose to make the third German NO need both KAR and CAU and then make the UK home NO count with 5 of 6 territories (i.e. Egypt can be lost and still get it).
-
My friend and i have tried many rule variences and have come to the conclusion that with NO’s and/or fighter escort the axis are too strong and tech simply is too much of an unknown and can unbalance both ways. We’ve found the most fun and balanced game is no NO’s, no tech, no fighter escorts and closing of the Dardanelles.
I play with the same rules except the closing of the Dardanelles. I have found the game to be very balanced with that rule set so far.
-
/axis roll
I took the easy way and just listed the alternatives. How did you change NOs in your group? We can set-up a larger poll if people want after this one.
We made the NO’s worth only $4 instead of $5.
-
Perhaps NO tweaking has some potential. I think bids are best.
Without NOs, Axis will need a bid of at least 10, maybe 15.
With NOs, Allies need the bid. Probably around 9-13.
-
AA50 does not need any balance. Look at the thread regarding results which show pretty clearly no issues.
If anything China may need help to make it more playable, but thats not really addressing any balance issues but its just making China less dynamic because the flying tigers is destroyed in most cases and this leaves a sour taste historically, because thats how it went. The playtesters did a really good job on this game.
However, if LL is played thats not AA anyway.
AA is a dice game with strategy and lots of players.
-
"However, if LL is played that’s not AA anyway.
AA is a dice game with strategy and lots of players."
I agree with this.
Playing a 6 players game is not the same as doing a 1v1. 6 players have different views of how to get things done. Because of that, funny things happen. Lack of cooperation, insults, good jokes, etc. I for one hate to have someone dictate my moves.Real dices is different from any program. It adds some “fun/surprise” to the game. Some people hates this, but I think it prevent games from becoming too linear. History is full of lucky/unlucky events
Robert
-
@Imperious:
However, if LL is played thats not AA anyway.
AA is a dice game with strategy and lots of players.
I strongly disagree with your statement on LL.
FYI LL is still dice, and A&A with LL is still a strategy game, although with less randomness.
A&A can be played by 2-6 players, so 1vs1 is within the rules. -
Real dices is different from any program.
Robert
ADS is also a program as LL, if you play a software version of A&A.
Many times when I read the arguments against LL, I get the impression that none of the players who are against LL have ever tried it, it seems they don’t know what it is. If some of you ever happen to try some LL games in a hypothetical future, you’d be amazed of how much luck there can be in some LL games. It removes the extreme wild swings, but it’s fully possible to win a LL game mostly based on luck, believe it or not. Just ask me, or better, ask some of my opponents if they have been very unlucky also in LL games.
Suggested Topics
