Changes still needed to the game, IMHO

[questioneer]

@Cmdr:

Granted, not all of those should be implemented at the same time, perhaps the best six could be chosen and a die thrown, prior to Germany 1, to determine which would occur?  No idea.  Essentially what I am saying is that the game is not balanced and I do not feel that “bidding” is the solution this time.

6 out of the 7???- I respect your opinion but you’re crazy- its not gonna happen unless several games results come in reflecting that (besides your games)- and at this time they don’t.

Right now your lucky if 1 of these will make it.  Narrow this list down to your top three.  I’ve already given my opinion.  I agree that the game is Allied advantaged but not nearly as extreme as you claim it to be.  I just suggect the addition of Hong Kong and Manila to the #4 NO for Japan in the current Alpha+2.

Some of your opinion on the setup are pretty exteme on these points you give.  Not gonna refute them right now because of time- I’ll let Frank T and the others do that.

Jen, why don’t you just play some of these guys and get some game results to prove your point, then they may join you in your proposed changes???  Again, less talk- more game results.

[Chompers2]

Jen I have never played a forum game before but I have probably played at least 20 games of Alpha +2 by playing my friend Chompers in person.  We play sometimes twice a week and we drink lots of Red Bull as we play for 12 hours at a time when I am not working.  We also played about 20 games of OBB and I certainly agree OBB is broken in the Allies favor.  I also played Spring 1942 for about a year before Alpha came out.  I have learned a lot playing him but probably don’t have your level of experience yet.

That being said I would be interested in playing as the Axis against you in a forum game with you being the Allies. You could show me what you think is broken by ganging up in the Pacific against me early and then I would have a chance to test my counter moves.

I am having trouble figuring out how to play by forum.  I am so used to looking at the board for all possible moves and counter moves and I am afraid I will miss things playing by forum with out the board to look at.

That being said if you are interested in a game by forum and would be able to help out in what I need to play I would like to test our difference of opinion out.

[Battlingmaxo]

@Frank:

I am having trouble figuring out how to play by forum.  I am so used to looking at the board for all possible moves and counter moves and I am afraid I will miss things playing by forum with out the board to look at.

Don’t sweat that Frank. I had the same problem when I first started on forum with AA50. I planed my moves off the board and then reconciled Battlemap. I was using battlemap exclusively by US 2 so it doesn’t take long to make the adjustment. :-D

[Jennifer]

@Battling:

@Frank:

I am having trouble figuring out how to play by forum.  I am so used to looking at the board for all possible moves and counter moves and I am afraid I will miss things playing by forum with out the board to look at.

Don’t sweat that Frank. I had the same problem when I first started on forum with AA50. I planed my moves off the board and then reconciled Battlemap. I was using battlemap exclusively by US 2 so it doesn’t take long to make the adjustment. :-D

Agreed.  I still pull out a board for some games because it does give you more information, I feel, because the brain is more attuned to seeing things with the peripheral vision that you might miss if you have to scroll the map around.

@Frank:

That being said I would be interested in playing as the Axis against you in a forum game with you being the Allies. You could show me what you think is broken by ganging up in the Pacific against me early and then I would have a chance to test my counter moves.

Let me finish losing to Gamer iwth my Axis and then sure.

@questioneer:

6 out of the 7???- I respect your opinion but you’re crazy- its not gonna happen unless several games results come in reflecting that (besides your games)- and at this time they don’t.

No, pick the best 6 and then roll a die to figure out which ONE to use.  Gives the bidding players the randomness they want, gives those of us who want some staticness the sameness we want.  It doesnt have to be 6 from the list either, it could just be 6 changes, the Axis player rolls a die on Germany 1 and that is the “boon” that they get.

[Chompers2]

Okay that will give me time to research how to play by forum.

[JimmyHat]

@Cmdr:

No, I think you underestimate just how strongly Russia can defend itself.  There is just no realistic manner in which Germany can get Moscow before Japan is neutrallized and America has started landing in Arkhangelsk.

---

ghr:

Germany won’t have a blockade in SZ 125.  All the good players have found ways to stop Sea Lion, with Sea Lion stopped, England is more than capable of preventing a German blockade.

Likewise, Germany has no NO.  None.  Not a single one.  Since Russia has taken Norway and Finland, they do not get the Sweeden one, since they are at war with Russia they do not get the Russian one, and how in the blazing nine levels of hell are you getting units to Caucasus?  Find a decent opponent man!

Germany is getting maybe 40-45 IPC, Russia is getting 40-45 and Germany has lost more units than Russia has.  Yes, you get the 19 plunder, you also lose a lot more than 19 in your opening attacks.

Most of the time Germany does not even bother building the transports.  Sea Lion is readily blocked now that teh tactic has been revealed.  Thus, the German tactics have changed so that they nail what they can of British ships, take France and start moving over to face Russia.

Russia sees this coming, sets up a minor attack force in the north that readily grabs scandinavia, and then stacks behind that neutral territory where it can pummel everything from one stack, preventing Germany from getting any closer.  I even have enough time and money left over to send half a dozen tanks down and get Iraq and C. Persia for Russia (England is glad to give it up, lol, of course, I am also England…)

***it sounds like your strategy has stagnated.  Sealion is a bust, so why try it? now Germ can’t hold Scandinavia, Russia captures Scandinavia.  Perhaps it might be advantageous for your German strategy to build a few trns to outflank the Russians?

Germany could, theoretically, throw all they have into St. Petersburg, you are correct there.  You have purchased 10 transports and you have moved 22 units to St. Petersburg.  Yay.

To counter, I have taken Poland, Hungary, S. Germany, Romania, Greece, Bulgaria, Albania and Yugoslavia for the Russians giving me +23 IPC to counter the 7 IPC you got for St. Petersburg and NO.

***So to counter a 1 turn naval grab of Novo…Russia has taken Greece?  Thats close to 3 turns after barbarossa, and that’s with German falling back.  I don’t see it.  And you forgot West Germ and parts of France.  Seriously, if Germany can’t even stall the Russian Bear I think you’re doing something wrong.

You’ll have, perhaps, 24/25 units there next round, I will have over 60 units in Belarus and Arkhangelsk (combined total) with plenty of firepower to prevent you from getting closer to Moscow.  However, you will not have units in Range to liberate south Europe because you just dumped them all in St. Petersburg.

***no you won’t, you just lunged your entire army into the Balkans. cmon Jenn, they can’t be everywhere at once, choose one, north to Scandinavia or south through the balkans.

I actually prefer if my German opponent does this!  This is wonderful!  Stalin is greatly pleased as he now no longer even needs Churchill, let alone not needing Roosevelt!

And yes, that can all be taken in one round, or two depending on where Germans are.  What really matters here is you blew 70 IPC on Transports in a failed Sea Lion attempt and are now scrambing to find a purpose for them.  Then, to top it off, you put them in SZ 115 where they are too far away to pick up units from W. Germany, Denmark or Norway and return to SZ 115 that same round.  And, if that wasn’t bad enough, you just moved a major portion of your army into a location that is easily blocked.  And if you claim you do not move all that, then why bother doing any of it?

***would love to know the super secret method of getting Russians in Greece and Albania the first round of Barbarossa. :roll:

So really, it all comes down to Germany has to go in by the traditional method, Infantry Push and that’s going to be a long, LONG, dragged out nightmare for Germany.  Quagmire comes to mind…  First I stop you in E. Poland, then N. Ukraine/Belarus, then Bransk (dont need stuff in Smolensk, I can hit Belarus from Bryansk just as easy).  Since all you have is the one transport, a minimal defense of St. Petersburg is enough.  And the Caucasus is probably the safest square on the map!  You’ll never get through S. Ukraine and Rostov…you might TAKE S. Ukraine and Rostov, but you’ll never get THROUGH Rostov to Stalingrad or the Caucasus.  Russia has too much defensive firepower for that to become a reality.

I suggest trying this, a cv, dd, sub build G1.  Follow with 1-2 trns on G2.  Now you can outflank the Russians and you’re fleet will survive long enough to do so.  Rest of your purchases will go to Russia.  Nice thing about this G1 build is it forces UK to respond with a few ground units in order to stop a sealion…which is never coming.

I put my comments in the quote, annotated with a '’

[Jennifer]

Yes, that build is standard for a non-sealion and a sealion Germany.  The other standard is a major complex in Romania.

Neither really works well.

[suprise attack]

I added to # 54

[Pelanderfunk]

I’m a little surprised that Sealion or Romanian Major are the two “standard strategies” for Germany. I wouldn’t use either one if I really wanted to win Europe.

I’ve found that buying mechs almost exclusively for the first three turns as Germany (with a little left over for subs or whatever other little things you might need) puts too much pressure on Russia for them to handle. If they turtle to Moscow, grab their other victory cities and head for the Middle East/Caucus money. If they try to defend everything, position your full force in the middle and attack the weakest of the three cities, of just go for Moscow.

[Gargantua]

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22981.0

And more or Less, I said the U.S. can just as effectively go after the Atlantic, whislt shutting down the pacific with minimal investment (using less than 30% of income)  Just put all your effort into simply holding Hawaii - EASY, and Australia, Pretty easy.  It’s not about winning, it’s just about making sure you don’t lose.

I also noted that some of the invdividuals making the most significant contributions to this thread, under the exact same setup, not 2 months ago, had the opposite thoughts regarding their positions, because of the supposedly unavoidable loss of London to Germany…

I mentioned that I found it scienctifically interesting, that as the said individuals lost games - not won, their position changed.

Then I alluded to the fact that Russia in Denmark is… over the top.

I’ve copied this post, and will KEEP posting it if it gets deleted, or edited, I encourage you all to quote me and do the same.

Edit: your post gets edited and removed because of your tone against other players and as a result of complaints action was taken. WE don’t tolerate attacks and flames and types of posts where you say " just ignore x, they have nothing to offer" when  this thread was doing just fine BEFORE you showed up to add salt to it.

Edit: Thank you for making things so clear Imperious.  I was unaware that honesty was a bannable offense.  I’ll make sure I double check all my posts from now on.

[Axisplaya]

@Gargantua:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22981.0
I also noted that some of the invdividuals making the most significant contributions to this thread, under the exact same setup, not 2 months ago, had the opposite thoughts regarding their positions, because of the supposedly unavoidable loss of London to Germany…

I did not dare to make these comments since they do not contribute at all to refute the theory (USA kill Japan and then go after Germany/Italy), but man, i so totally agree with you…

[Gargantua]

IF I had the time, I’d challenge Jennifer’s theory as well.

But my gut tells me, her theory against say, someone like Jim010’s Axis theories would equate to 9 out of 10 losses for the allies, and requests for alterations to axis setup.

[Chompers2]

I agree for the Allies the game is more about not losing than winning.  Gargantua made a thread awhile back about bypassing the money islands and doing a turn four India crush.  My opponent did this to me in a game and I had managed to smash Germany and Italy pretty good with the US while UK London got a fleet up and Russia grew some teeth.  The problem was I was too focused on crushing two Axis Capitals that I did not make it back to Hawaii in time for the crucial battle and lost the game.  Since then I have a won a couple of games as the Allies as I have been focused on denying necessary victory cities on both sides of the board.

My opponent Chompers almost always builds a naval base in Hainan J1 and sends his whole fleet to Sea Zone 36.  From there I have seen him crush India turn 3 by building an Airbase in Siam J2, landing the Air Force there, making sure he has either Yunnan or Shan State on lock down for Japan so the planes can land there after attacking India J3.  He attacks the Allies J2 to insure he holds the necessary territories and also to clear any potential blockers.  Then on J3 India is a done deal because the entire Japan Air force can hit it as well the 3 starting transports and the transport that is built J1.  India only has 2 turns of building to prepare for this.  Even all Infantry builds the first 2 turns is not enough to save India.

It is also possible to land in Australia J2 with the Hainan Naval and land the Air Force there J3 and then on J4 take Sydney if the Allies do not put blockers in place right after J1.

The craziest thing I have seen the Hainan Naval base used for is to punish US for going to Europe first 100%.  On J2 he sent the Navy from Hainan to Caroline’s and then from there took Hawaii from me J3 and on J4 was putting pressure on America.  Yes I could have prevented this if I had built in both theaters US1 but I had decided before hand to reel in Italy and Germany first and stop Japan from winning the game after.  This game is currently in progress and the outcome is uncertain.

So my thoughts so far is the game is pretty balanced but this thread has giving me a lot to think about.

[questioneer]

@Frank:

My opponent Chompers almost always builds a naval base in Hainan J1 and sends his whole fleet to Sea Zone 36.

I have done this with Japan also- I tried to get Larry to install the NB in Hainan in the Alpha+2 setup but he wouldn’t go for it.  That NB build in Hainan creates a nice triangular shipping route that can be deadly both on offense and defense for Japan for the reasons you stated- I think its been one of my better moves for Japan in the game.

[Jennifer]

@mantlefan:

@Cmdr:

Yes, that build is standard for a non-sealion and a sealion Germany.  The other standard is a major complex in Romania.

Neither really works well.

Who are you playing that a Major IC in romania is standard? Blowing 30 IPCs to get units one turn closer; no wonder Germany can’t take Russia in your scenarios. That strat was debunked over at HGD even before Alpha+.2

How much money does Germany need to spend to fend off a britain that is trying to keep the Italians down?

What exactly is Germany doing in these scenarios where Russia has Denmark and all of E euro?

One turn closer???  You mean two rounds closer and thus you are 74 IPC faster against Russia. (37 IPC for the first round, 37 IPC for the second round.)

[Gargantua]

How about -30 for buying a useless complex?,

and lets not forget, the turn you build it, you could have built 10 units instead that could basically be there the next round anyways.

Talk about cart before the horse.

Any decent Axis and Allies player knows that logistics and mathematics are the key point of the game.

Why should one go about wasting IPC’s on a needless complex, when they could build ground units instead that through logisticall planning - can be there anyways?  And not to mention they’ll get the “threat” benefit of said units because they exsist on the board immediately.  All because someone is willing to look more than 1 turn ahead.

No wonder some people think the axis are losing.  Sounds like they are wholly defunct of decent strategy.

[Geist]

You’d actually slap the ten infantry down on round one move them to Hungary on round two and then to Romania or possibly East Poland on round three vs a complex on round 1 and builds placed in the south on round 2. So you are simplifying logistics somewhat. That being said, I’m not sold on the complex in Romania myself, but, I can see some merit in it.

[Chompers2]

I think the Romanian complex could be useful in late game to help the Axis gain the final victory city when time is of the essence, as US is working to deny Axis victory.

In a game I recently played I did go Pacific first as US and was successful in maiming Japan.  The problem I faced was my opponent was kicking down the door to Moscow when I got the US in major force in the Atlantic.  By that time Germany had grown too large IPC wise for me to have any hopes of taking Berlin.  So I basically was using the US to deny his 8th victory city by locking down Cario and London.  After I locked down Cairo my opponent conceded because we have been playing the game for 15+ hours over two days and he figured it would take another 8 hours to get back to Cairo.

Had my opponent built the Romanian complex once Russia’s demise was certain and starting producing ten tanks a turn he could have invaded Turkey and drove to Cairo.  His line of supply with Mega Germany would have been quicker than my line of supply with Mega US.  I thnk that would have allowed him to smash through and win the game.  There was no way I going to be able to revive Russia.

Also I think someone mentioned on here somewhere about using Germany to take India at the cost of even letting Berlin fall if need be as long as Japan took Australia first.  If that was the tactic than I think the early Romanian Complex might prove quite useful.

[Gargantua]

So the complex is ONLY useful in the instance of moving strictly infantry and artillery 1 zone closer to the eastern front?

Mec / Armor it makes no difference?

The question is raised, is it worth giving up 10 of your own infantry, to get a 1 - up move on Mother Russia in terms of front line logisitcal replacement?

My answer is no.

[Chompers2]

@Gargantua:

The question is raised, is it worth giving up 10 of your own infantry, to get a 1 - up move on Mother Russia in terms of front line logisitcal replacement?

My answer is no.

I would probably agree if the Romanian complex is used for only attacking Russia.  I also think the Baltic Fleet G1 provides the most bang for its buck.

That said I think you can do some funny things with that Romanian complex late game once Russia’s fate is sealed.  One idea I mentioned was to attack Turkey and drive Tanks to Cairo.  Another would be to attack Turkey, build 10 subs from the Romanian Complex and then use the Air Force with the subs to sink the US fleet in Med.

I know it is considered a No No to attack strict neutrals but I think the consequences are not as severe late game and it can be worth it to achieve an important objective.