@Fleetwood:
Germany only needs to hold it against the UK because America is probably not in the North Atlantic yet. The end of the round check for victory is before the USSR’s turn which would be to knock the Germans out of Karelia. That’s a big reason not to play Minor Victory IMO, making completely short term plays.
Economic victory in MB occasionally encouraged short term plays, and often forced the Allies to defend against such plays, causing them to lose ground in “the big picture”. There were times I’d lost as the Allies (to economic victory) when I felt I might well have won had I been allowed to continue. I don’t think this tainted the game.
What I’ve found (in Minor Victory) is that the short term plays rarely ever actually win the game. What they do is forces the Allies to defend against these short term plans (by holding India), which cramps their style, providing game balance and annihilating any KGF approach.
Also, I recall the Russians couldn’t force Germany out of karelia for at least a couple turns.
@Zhukov44:
It’s extremely tough for Allies, I think that’s why its unpopular. It might be doable with a bid to India…
it seems tough for Allies to avoid losing in the first 3 turns.
I’ve never lost as the Allies in the first three turns. Whenever I’ve seen the Allies lose so quickly it’s because they have not fortified India to the fullest of their abilities. They get greedy! That said, it’s still hard for the Allies (but very nearly balanced , I think).
Have either of you guys played this out (with a good opponent) a half dozen times or more? (I take it you haven’t Dan, or you’d have noticed that “flaw in your logic” after losing or winning your first or second game on round one). I think you’d find you can India can hold for a long time - more than three turns to be certain. But with reduced Allied presence in Europe, you have to hold India and Stalingrad for long enough to capture France or liberate Leningrad. I think this is closely balanced, dynamic, and fun. But to each their own. :)