How is the balance with the new Alpha 2 changes? Please give your view.

[eudemonist]

@Cmdr:

@eudemonist:

I strongly believe waiting until round four to attack with Japan is a death sentence right out of the gate.

Between Kwangtung, Phillipines, Borneo, Java, and FIC, you’re talking about a 30 ipc swing in territory alone, makes up for the extra U.S. objective money. On top of that, add maybe four bucks from disrupting ANZAC convoys (and four bucks hurts a LOT when you start with ten) and another couple from interdicting off Malaya.  You lose 10 ipcs from not getting the peace bonus, but convoy damage you can inflict offsets some of that, you’re halfway to controlling the DEI, you’re taking away a 5 ipc USNO, and you can stomp on India and Australia’s navy while they’re still tiny.

For a modest income boost early in the game, you are handing the Americans 75 IPC + the ability to drop 10 units a round into the Pacific?  This does not seem wise.  In fact, I have play tested it and I happen to know this is not wise.  America can recover from early losses, Japan can never recover from a single loss, anywhere.

Handing them 75ipcs?  I guess you’re talking about their bonus 25?  I think, if you look at the math, attacking J2 instead of J4 actually only “hands” them 25, as they would collect the bonus at the end of US3 anyhow.  The VERY MOST you could hand them would be 50, with a J1 attack.  Hyperbolic math does not help your case.

Did I mention we’re talking about a thirty IPC swing in territories, which makes up for that 25?

I have also playtested it quite a bit, and have reached a very different conclusion than you.

[questioneer]

@jim010:

Sorry, I meant Questioneer.  I have never played you.

@Cmdr:

Who knows?  I might go all into the Atlantic.  Only problem there is it’s really easy on Japan to get a VC win without America very heavily invested in the Pacific…but it sure would throw whoever I play off their game, no?  lol

Yes, I am playing that strat with you.  I’m actually glad you know ahead of time to see if you can do something about it- makes for a good playtest. :-)

[Geist]

@jim010:

…then you’ll want to go get rated…

I already come highly rated.  :wink:

Endorsed by 9 out of 10 Doom bots!

[jim010]

Endorsed by 9 out of 10 Doom bots!

The 10th Doombot was defective and had to be destroyed.

[jim010]

Yes, I am playing that strat with you.  I’m actually glad you know ahead of time to see if you can do something about it- makes for a good playtest. :-)

After looking at this, it will be hard to come up with a counter.  It’s more of a philosophy than a strategy, so there will be no set moves.  I doubt any 2 games will look the same.  I’ll see what I can do.

[JamesG]

One thing that may worth considering here is that shifting some US NOs over to the Atlantic may be better for the overall fun factor of the game.

Even if the “US 100% Pacific” strat isn’t broken, but merely viable, do we want it to be viable?  Isn’t one of the design goals to have the US be at least somewhat active on both boards?  In previous versions of AaA, KGF (to the point of basically ignoring Japan with the US) became a common and effective strategy.  G40/Alpha2 took great pains to make sure ignoring Japan with the US is no longer viable.  I would assume that allowing the US to instead go KJF and ignore Europe is equally undesirable.

[Jennifer]

@jim010:

Yes, I am playing that strat with you.  I’m actually glad you know ahead of time to see if you can do something about it- makes for a good playtest. :-)

After looking at this, it will be hard to come up with a counter.  It’s more of a philosophy than a strategy, so there will be no set moves.  I doubt any 2 games will look the same.  I’ll see what I can do.

It does make it harder.  Much akin to handling the 3 on 1 games of yester-year where it was more overall strategy and less “do this, then that…”

I find any overly detailed strategy becomes easy to thwart, primarily because it’s overly detailed!  Just kill one step, and you kill the micro-managed strategy.

[jim010]

That would work if the strategy can be countered.  The India Crush could not be countered.

[Imperious Leader]

It might only go to show that this may be the first time a movement philosophy made a game imbalanced for one side, since exact moves are not really what unlocks the key to winning. This only shows that some ideas can’t be understood unless you play the game by adopting this ‘Philosophy’.

I hope Jim can somehow crack the code like he did with Sealion.

[Jennifer]

Well, in the old days when there were only 6 German territories (Germany, S. Europe, W. Europe, E. Europe, Finland/Norway and Ukraine) detailing exact moves was a lot more simple.  Now adays there are seventeen sea zones; SZ 4, SZ 5, SZ 7, SZ 8, SZ 15, SZ 16, SZ 17, SZ 18, SZ 19, SZ 20, SZ 21, SZ 22, SZ 23, SZ 25, SZ 26, SZ 33 and SZ 35 all as sea zones from which SZ 6 may be attacked, and that doesn’t even factor in the possibility of a Naval base in Alaska or French Indo China.

It is MUCH harder to detail how and where to set up your attacks now.  There is so much flux to deal with, it’s more than a flux capacitor can handle!  (Fine, I didn’t need to add that comment.  I wanted to though!)

Not to mention, with Airbases and aircraft carriers at naval bases, there is a HUGE attacking force that can come from all over the board to attack one sea zone, making it all that much harder to keep an eye on every possible attack situation and contend with it.  It’s one of the reasons I think Japan will get pushed back to SZ 6, it just cannot handle all these ships attacking from different angles with different units coming to help.  Hell, a strategic bomber on Hawaii can attack SZ 6 and land on Guam.  The same bomber on Guam can get to India or vice versa.

So really, giving a detailed list of how to move your units around the board would take WAY too long to write out, let alone, the only people reading it would be hunting for the one inconsistency to take out (probably out of context) in an effort to make it as if someone said something they did not or to impune the character of the person making the detailed post.

Yes, there really are people out there that will take a quote out of context and use it thusly.  I know, hard to believe, but they exist.

[kcdzim]

@Cmdr:

There is so much flux to deal with, it’s more than a flux capacitor can handle!  (Fine, I didn’t need to add that comment.  I wanted to though!)

oooo flux jokes.

There’s so much flux, you couldn’t solder with it!

[Jennifer]

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23121.new#new

Empirical evidence.  It is round 8.  Japan is contained.  Italy is a monster, but they are on the way out.  America has put 8 new destroyers in SZ 101 leaving a build of 3 destroyers to replace losses along the picket of Japan.  Part of the Japanese fleet has retreated to the Red Sea, but has been marginalized by British and Australian forces. (neither side can win, which means the allies win, in this situation.)  New Britian has been an absolute THORN in my side, having lost 6 ground units to clear it, but that is no longer an issue and Australia should be getting both their NOs this coming round.

Russia has (miraculously according to some) survived Germany and in the invasion of it’s far eastern territories by Japan.

China is still here with their fighter.

England has been lost to Germany, but again, so what?

Italy controls the Middle East, but that won’t last long, as you can see. (Latest map attached for convenience.)

American forces are in China.  (4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 3 Armor and 3 Strategic Bombers.)  I could have taken Okinawa and Formosa, but saw no need.  I probably should have taken Formosa at least, but eh.  I didn’t see it until NCMs, so…

---

Anyway, proof of concept.

---

Edit: Removing the term “miraculous.”  There was no miracle.  The comment was meant to drive home the point that those who claim Russia cannot survive alone against the Europeans are incorrect.  Germany/Italy control zero Russian territories as of the end of Australia Round 8.

Bo_v_Jen_03_08Daustralia.AAM

[edfactor]

Actually if Russia survived only by miraculous dice, its proof that the Axis should have won this game.
Britain is gone and Italy is a monster i believe means that the axis has:
London, Paris, Rome, Cairo, Berlin, Warsaw, Lenningrad, if Germany has absolutely lost in Russia then the allies may be fortunate enough to have won the game, but depending on the exact position it could still be possible.

And indeed if this is the situation then Germany lost the game by not moving south to take Volgograde or at least to threaten it (or if he took Volgograde then he needed to move north to threaten Lenningrad)

Anyway your description of the fight in Russia as miraculous leads me to believe the Axis should have won this game. So its far from a proof of concept.  I’ll try to look at your link later. back to work now :(

[Jennifer]

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

You should really look at the map to see what’s where.

Germany has:  Berlin, Paris, London
Italy has: Rome, Cairo

There are no Russian territories under German or Italian control.

Japan has been halted and is being pushed back from Northern China and the far eastern Asian territories.  They have a strong force in Yakut, but they cannot advance less it be destroyed.  They have a strong force in Jehol, but again, unless they want it destroyed, they cannot advance.  They are locked in SZ 6 with a small contingent by Iraq/C. Persia defending the Italians.

---

Essentially, my statement of miracles for Russia was being humorous.  Russia has needed no miracles to keep the Europeans at bay.

[Jennifer]

I expect, on Germany 9, that Russia will lose: Vyborg, Karelia, Novgorod, Arkhangelsk (maybe), Baltic States, E. Poland and Bessarabia.

Of which, Russia should be able to liberate all by Karelia on their turn without much effort.

Italy (Round 8) will take E. Perisa and NW Persia most likely, facing Russians in Caucasus.

Meanwhile, England is free to roam the Indian Ocean and will be sending forces towards the middle east.  As one can see from the map, the British are not needed in the Pacific, nor are the Australians.

Interesting feature to point out:  With a naval base in W. Australia, Australia can shuttle troops to India in one round.  Eh.  We’ll see if that was a waste or not.

Also, I left all the “bases” the color of the nations that purchased them.  That’s why Java has an orange airbase while being an Australian territory.

---

In my opinion, Germany and Italy are strong,. but it would be prohibitive for them to stack any territory very heavily in Russia, meanwhile, Japan has been pretty domesticated.  That is, all things considered, Japan is largely not a threat any longer.  Yes, they have the complex in Korea and Manchuria, so they can put 6 ground units (plus whatever the can transport) ashore, but they’re pretty locked in just where they are.  (6 units for Japan but China makes 7 or 8 units.  Should be a wash if you factor in transports and airpower.)

If you look at the land strength you’ll see:

Russia = 434
Germany = 319
Italy = 180, but most of that is in the Middle East right now

That’s a pretty equivalent sized army, considering there were some who said Russia wouldn’t be around by round 9 or 10.

[Krieghund]

@Cmdr:

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

The claim was that the USSR would fall if Germany threatened Sealion, then contained UK and focused on Barbarossa.  Sealion against a fully defended and prepared England is suicide for Germany.

[jim010]

I hope Jim can somehow crack the code like he did with Sealion.

Problem is there is no code here, like Sealion or the India Crush.

Should I win against Questioneer with a set of moves, I could lose against ghr2 with those same moves.

Since the Axis have the initiative, though, they should be able to set the tone for the game.  I would look at on average when does Japan fall vs when Germany gets its VCs.  I would then look at how to speed up Germany’s capture of VCs, and how to stall the US from taking Japan (a good defense is a good offense).

[Jennifer]

@Krieghund:

@Cmdr:

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

The claim was that the USSR would fall if Germany threatened Sealion, then contained UK and focused on Barbarossa.  Sealion against a fully defended and prepared England is suicide for Germany.

That was your claim.

There was also the claim that Germany would win with a 100% focused effort against Russia.

However, this claim was that Russia would fall soon after England without American intervention, this is a proof of concept that the Americans are not needed to save Russia from falling and thus, could be used to contain Japan without aiding Russia until that objective was achieved.

To test the 100% focused effort against Russia, I would have to play a game in which that was the method of choice.  My thoughts on the matter (my hypothesis) is that England would thus be in position to stop the VC win, even if Russia fell to the Germans, which I also do not think is highly likely to happen, if the Russian player retreats resourcefully.

As for the threat and then retreat, I don’t think there are a lot of players who would advocate changing horses midstream let alone consider it the wisest of moves.  To adequately threaten sea lion, you really need 7 transports and all your aircraft.  That’s at least a 36 IPC outlay for transports, + 30 IPC for the carrier, destroyer and submarine to make the fleet viable against counter attack from England for a total of 66 IPC.  If you are going to use it, then it’s a wise investment, if you are going to shuttle it around like a 300 pound Helga singing “Ride of the Valkeries” then it may be overkill for what you need to accomplish and thus, wasted IPC.

[Krieghund]

To adequately threaten Sealion, Germany need only destroy as much of UK’s home fleet as possible and buy navy, including two transports, on turn 1, then keep the Luftwaffe ready to strike.  If England lets down her guard enough, more transports may be purchased later.  If not, then on to Russia.

[Jennifer]

That’s not really enough to get me to freak and dump ground units into England, however.  I would probably go move to SZ 106 and put units into S. Africa for an African campaign in that case. (Along with ground units in England.)

From there I can put fighters out, destroyers out and armor out, without much worry.  If Germany dumps transports, I have plenty of time to dump ground units and pull fighters back to defend England.  It’s really only the round 2 and round 3 periods that England is vulnerable, after that, England’s pretty well impenetrable, unless the British player makes a mistake and doesn’t run the calculators or failes to see some of the invasion force, which can happen, but that’s more a tactical error, not a strategic one. (defined: Player scrubs a round, tactical error, does not mean his overall strategy was flawed, just his actions for one round.)