@Mr-Kell Ah yes they do but you can’t get the infantry to Paris before Germany can but you can get the fighter so that adds on defense. If you pay attention to what I set up, it’s still pretty damn favorable for Germany, it just has to bring in the airforce to make it a victory.
Addressing AAP40 Game Balance: "So Easy, A Caveman Can Do It"
-
@Yoper:
You mean this?
LOL!!! :-D :-D :-D
That’s what I was looking for!!!
-
May I take the liberty Kauf. OH YEA, he means it. This really did balance the game!
-
I will give this a try next time I play Japan.
Of the proposed game balances I’ve seen (US immediate 40 bonus, no J1 attack, negative J aircraft bid) this seems to disrupt the concept of the game the least.
-
I will give this a try next time I play Japan.
Of the proposed game balances I’ve seen (US immediate 40 bonus, no J1 attack, negative J aircraft bid) this seems to disrupt the concept of the game the least.
That’s exactly what we found, that this change was the least impactful toward scrambling the original intent of the games set up.
“Buckeyeboy” is my best friend Tim, and he is the one who came up with the idea. You know, you get to the point in a game where it’s just not balanced, and especially with a game like Axis & Allies with all it’s variables, and you start thinking about what to do to balance it. There’s just so much that can be effected, and I for one was thinking, you change one thing and its going to ripple on down the line. I was thinking that to find what it would take to balance the game, it was going to take a long time and a lot of playtesting.
I’m not saying we’ve hit the nail on the head, but we did give it three shots last week, and amazingly it seems to be what we’re looking for.
I mean, to actually achieve what you were trying to find as far as balancing up this game on the first try seems kinda like hitting the lottery to me. BTW, Tim, if you get a good feeling about any numbers in the near future, send me a PM! :-D
The three games we played were fun, competitive and very much still along the same lines as games we’ve previously played. That extra boost to the US war effort seems to be just right in opening the game up for the Allies without being overwhelming. It also keeps with one of the games main concepts, that being that the US player is still free to choose how to spend the IPCs depending on what strategy he/she wishes to pursue.
Tim very rightly pointed out during one of our phone bull sessions that changing the actual set up by adding pieces, whether by bid or directly, was going to be way too drastic, and was going to change to original intent of the game way too much.
By adding 40 IPCs to the US immediately, the games we played were great. Granted we stopped once we had gone far enough into the mid-game to determine that we had a game on our hands.
I would highly recommend to anyone interested to give this a try. I think I can speak for Tim on this as well as myself too, in saying that we think you’ll like what you find.
May I take the liberty Kauf. OH YEA, he means it. This really did balance the game!
Right on brother! That’s what I’m talking 'bout! :-D
-
I went out to Dayton last week, my best friend Tim and I (he goes by Buckeyeboy on here) played 6 games of AAP40 from Monday around 7:30 to Wednesday around 7:30. Drank lots of beer, ate many “Lucky Sandwhiches”, and I got to see just how huge the AK Steel plant down there is.
Of the 6 games we played, 5 we played by giving the US their 40 bonus IPCs “immediately” on the turn the Japanese attacked, which was turn 1.
The last time I was out there, we played 3 games by giving the US the 40 IPC bonus immediately, and all three games went into the mid game turns as anybodies game. We stopped there because we wanted to reset and see if the next game would yield similar results. All three games did.
Our aim was to see if by giving the US the 40 IPC bonus immediately, if it would balance the game any. So we were kinda playtesting the idea.
This time around, we played the games just a little further longer, until we could sorta see that one side or the other had gained an advantage, and had the upper hand.
After the first 4 games this time around, we played two that had the Allies having gained a clear advantage, and two where the Japanese had gained the upper hand.
They were all great games too, plenty of battles with both sides in the game.
Then I had the great idea to try playing the game as the Allies agian with the OOB rules. That game went just as every other game we’d played with the OOB rules, the Japanese rolled while the Allies just kinda sat on the sidelines, never really getting into the game full swing.
Then we went back to the “immediate 40”, and had probably the best game yet. We played it to a complete standstill, and ran out of time. It was anybodies guess as to who was going to gain an edge in that game. The last turn we played saw a huge naval battle in SZ37 which saw the annihilation of both fleets involved, which included 3 CVs per side!
Anyway, a pretty good playtest session. 5 games using the “immediate 40” meathod, and they went 2 Allied, 2 Japanese and 1 undetermined tie.
The problem we found with the OOB rules was that the Japanese could attack J1 taking the PI & taking the Celebes. On J2 they took the rest of the DEI. On J3 they took Singapore, and built a major IC there on J4.
By turn 4, both China and Britian were down to earning 4-5 IPCs each, with China nearing elimination in the game. The Japanese would play extremely smart up to that point in the game, conserving it’s forces and not giving the Allies any cheap victories.
Once this point in the game was reached, the Japanese were pulling in 65+ IPCs to the US & ANZACs 65-70 IPCs, and the Japanese were matching US-ANZAC buys. The US-ANZAC forces still hadn’t come even close at that point to making up the gap in strength the Japanese start the game with, and so the game stumbles forward into its end game with the Allies fighting an uneven match.
We played well over 150 hours of the game using the OOB rules trying to figure out how to stop this strategy as the Allies. The game really was no fun to play as the Allies. You even knew what the Japanese were going to do each game, yet there was nothing the Allies could do about it. We came up with some really imaginative Allied moves, but the Japanese start with enough pieces to counter anything the Allies did.
By giving the US their 40 bonus IPCs immediately as soon as the Japanese attack, the game takes on a whole new feel. The Allies are suddenly fun to play.
Most important of all, the Allies can do some serious damage if the Japanese just plod along doing the same thing every game. For the very first time, as the Japanese, we’ve suddenly been watching the Allied moves with a close eye and starting to formulate counter moves to the Allies!
So we’ve played 8 games now with the immediate 40 change, and every game has been a good one.
-
I like the idea. However, it might not give any reason to do a J2 attack, which I think is important. An idea I came up with would be that the U.S. gets the full 40 immediately in a J1 attack, 20 immediately in a J2 attack (at the end of the turn they will collect the normal NO for 40), and 10 immediately in a J3 attack (again, collect the NO for 40 at the end of the turn). I am interested in seeing at least J2 as a viable alternative. Let me know what you think of this.
I posted this in the original thread that got moved. I would like to see players actually consider a J2 attack, and this might do it.
-
I like the idea. However, it might not give any reason to do a J2 attack, which I think is important. An idea I came up with would be that the U.S. gets the full 40 immediately in a J1 attack, 20 immediately in a J2 attack (at the end of the turn they will collect the normal NO for 40), and 10 immediately in a J3 attack (again, collect the NO for 40 at the end of the turn). I am interested in seeing at least J2 as a viable alternative. Let me know what you think of this.
I posted this in the original thread that got moved. I would like to see players actually consider a J2 attack, and this might do it.
I think in J2 and 3, the US gets 0 extra money
-
I like the idea. However, it might not give any reason to do a J2 attack, which I think is important. An idea I came up with would be that the U.S. gets the full 40 immediately in a J1 attack, 20 immediately in a J2 attack (at the end of the turn they will collect the normal NO for 40), and 10 immediately in a J3 attack (again, collect the NO for 40 at the end of the turn). I am interested in seeing at least J2 as a viable alternative. Let me know what you think of this.
I posted this in the original thread that got moved. I would like to see players actually consider a J2 attack, and this might do it.
I think in J2 and 3, the US gets 0 extra money
I do J2 attacks sometimes, they sometimes work, but by that point you were able to injure the Chinese.
-
Someone tried to put extra chinese infantry on all empty territory?
Does it make a difference?
-
Someone tried to put extra chinese infantry on all empty territory?
Does it make a difference?
It made China an annoy bitch.
Suggested Topics
