That I know but just try giving Stg Bombers a d8@1 and figs a d8@3 for dog fighting only.
How is the balance with the new Alpha 2 changes? Please give your view.
-
This American all-pacific strategy sorta requires that A&A40 Europe be broken, doesn’t it? This requires that Moscow be absolutely impenetrable in the standalone game……it is not. This strat is testable by playing each game standalone.
This entire strategy requires Moscow to somehow hold out. Nevermind the Pacific, play Europe alone with no American involvement for 8 turns. The strategy has nothing to do with the Pacific whatsoever, does it? It is really a balance question about Europe, specifically the viability of Barbarossa.
It doesn’t require Europe to be broken (nor the Pacific) as stand alone games.
It does require that Moscow/England can hold out for a number of turns without American involvement, yes. Not that Germany/Italy couldn’t win, but that they can’t win fast enough (consistently).
And if that premise is true - the kicker is that combining America from Global into Pacific game breaks Pacific as a standalone. Which is effectively the situation you’re looking at when the US goes all-in on that side of the board for enough turns to ensure that Japan can’t win, after which you can focus Global America into the Europe game.
So no, it does not require any one of the two single games to be broken.
-
and perhaps builds an IC in Philippines or Celebres.
Sorry, you can’t do that.
edit: don’t tell me that alpha 2 allows this now? :/
-
If you can’t take VCs with Japan, then of course any American strategy will seem uber.
Here is my generic Japan Strategy, which I heavily modify depending on the flavor of the day…nothing special.
Build 3 Transports with Japan on J1. Attack into China with planes and infantry, leave all your Artillery on the coastal territories since these Artillery will be used for all your Amphibious assaults - don’t bring Artillery into China it’s a waste, use aircraft or just dont go far into China (defined at more than two zones inside China). Move your bombarding ships south with your transports, keep the carriers and about 4 aircraft at Carolines - always have the replacement planes ready for each carrier. Build 4 transports on J2. J3 you attack with fleet and 10 transports each loaded with inf and art. Attack Hong Kong by land, Phillipines and all 4 DEI by amphibious assault. USA will have their fleet at Western or you just attack Hawaii since you’ll win in J3 no problem since their builds are largely on the East Coast and take two turns to unite at Hawaii. J4 take Malaya or crush towards Sydney if most of your infantry survived. Don’t leave any transports undefended since those 10 need to last the remainder of the game. Your fleets should be at Japan, Carolines, or Phillipines at this point. Now it’s too far out to game plan, but next step is either Calcutta or Sydney - you have 10 TRN to get the job done and plenty of aircraft. As long as you use Naval Bases, Japan can whip around the Pacific quickly and efficiently.
The problem I see with that is you are not replacing your land forces in China and you will be losing some every turn to Chinese attacks. Also UK Calcutta will also be able to help kill your land forces out of China. And then the US will show up with it’s super mega fleet. That will force Japan to spend almost all on fleet and that will most likely result in you being kicked out of the 2 victory cities in China. Especially if the 18 Russian Infantry attacked which I think is a very good idea if US is going Pacific first. Japan is just facing too many opponents and it is around this time that it’s back begins to break.
Once Japan is locked out of the 2 victory cities in China it is very hard to get back in. China can really fortify each turn with the rules that allow them to place units anywhere in China. Even if Japan manages to cap Sydney it won’t mean much with Asia on lockdown by the Allies. At that point US can cruise to Europe and save the day.
I am not sure the all Pacific Strategy breaks the game though. I am still trying to make up my mind but I actually think it is harder to counter when USA ruins the economy of Italy first with the help of the UK. In the last 10 or so games of Alpha I have played the Allies are hovering at about an 80-90 win percent ratio. It does not seem to matter who is controlling which side as the results are coming out the same. So my current thinking is leaning towards the idea that the Axis still need some minor buffs.
-
@special:
and perhaps builds an IC in Philippines or Celebres.
Sorry, you can’t do that.
That explains A LOT on why people seem to think the Pac-Strat won’t work! I understand! You think you can build complexes on islands! Well, you cannot, but it sure explains why you are so confused!
Shadowguidex is correct. Japan cannot build 40 IPC land AND 40 IPC water to win China, Russia, India and the Pacific. It has to choose, mainland or Pacific. Most players choose mainland and that peter’s out eventually as Japan takes SERIOUS convoy damage from not having the boats to stop America.
As for Germany/Italy NEVER being able to win, I never said that, and I will never say that. What I am saying is that America has enough time to contain and neutrallize Japan AND get units to Africa/Europe to pressure Germany BEFORE Germany and Italy can win. I did not say they would be weak. I did not say England, France and Russia would be in Berlin/Rome with no America help.
-
Oh, and for the record, I am thinking an Atlantic Strategy would only be slightly less powerful for America. Then only because you need enough units in the Pacific to keep Hawaii, Midway, Wake and Aleutians from falling really so you have 4 NOs.
-
I have yet to play global, put played pacific extensively, and have been playing europe a lot. Does the Global game change it that much to the point it has nothing to do with WW2. Because if America goes all out Pacific, then there must be some serious changes to Germany wich makes them so weak, it would be more like Germany in WW1 fighting Russia and the UK in WW2. If the European theatre is remotes simialar, there is no way Germany would not knock out the Russians without some serious help from America
-
I have not followed this discussion for a while but I read some. I would like a few of you to comment on this point.
Withou first fixing the historical accuracy, then making a level playing field, you are ruining a game that is rich in history, almost 30 years worth. How many of you out there don’t care if this game has anything to do with WW2. Because another easy fix would be to give the Italians a massive navy parked right off the coast of the USA forcing them fend off a pending invasion of Washington.
The objective of any great game is to keep it as exciting as possible while keeping it simple. The changes I have read about, the Alpha 2 changes are the opposite of keeping it simple.
For balance, simplicity, and accuracy, the Chinese should be much stronger, the Japanese much weaker, but enough of a navy to take Australia, DEI, and even Hawaii if the USA ignores it, with Australia and Hawaii being much bigger prizes that would then make Japan a power house. SIMPLE NO’s like an IPC penaly for losing Hawaii, representing a huge morale loss among the American people, and New Zeland just being a much bigger prize.
But underlying all of this is the biggest problem of every AA game that has ever been produced, wich is, Navy’s take way to much of your production to make any naval actions worth taking unless you absolutely have too. Way too much. You sacrifice much better opportunityelswhere
-
I played out a couple games of Europe40 the last 24 hours with my A&A partner, given the following mods:
- No american involvement until turn 8.
- At turn 8, we give America extra cash - we set this figure at 100 IPCs.
- On turn 8, we add a large american fleet at Panama including 4 loaded CV.
- On turns 7,8,9 we added stacks of six infantry at Novosibirsk.
Germany defeated Russia in both games. It’s just incredibly difficult to turtle up Russia given that Artillery/Infantry nullify the old infantry advantage, and Tank/TAC or Fighter/TAC.
Russia was taken on turn 11 in one game (I played Axis), and turn 12 in the other (I played Allies). America had conquered Normandy in the first, and had assaulted Rome in the second but failed to acquire it. The both games ended with Axis at 8/11 VC (Paris, Cairo, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Moscow).
Now this was even considering that America would theoretically be finished with Japan at the beginning of turn 8, which means Japan’s gains and fleet would be totally nullified in turns 4, 5, 6, and 7. I must also state that America cannot create a 900 IPC fleet by turn 8 - it’s impossible - I’m a math teacher, I know when numbers don’t add up - you’d need to add additional spending to Japan side past round 8 to reach the mystical number, but by my research Germany/Italy have Europe wrapped up by turn 12 (figure turn 14 with bad dice).
I need to fall on the side of the balanced approach for America - I cannot support an all-out Japan OR all-out Europe strategy since either approach requires a broken single theater game. Sorry Jenn, but I need to see your stratehy flushed out with a LOT more specifics and less generality before I could ever conclude that it has merit.
-
And Japan marching on Moscow was always utterly ridiculous.
These changes “Jennifer” would obviously have to be offset by, In the Pacific Game, give the US much less IPC’s. Dare I say and equivalent amount of what they really spent against the Japanese. Until Germany fell, only 10% of the US resources went against the Japanese. But they had to devote some resources. They had to defend Australia. That what the battle of Guadalcanal was all about.
In the “Global Game”, give the Germans what they deserve. A chance to have a somewhat successful battle of the Atlantic. Either start the US with less troops so it takes them longer to build up, make German subs cheaper than other nations subs, or give the US its extra war time IPC’s over several turns instead of all at once. That would be more realistic.
-
Lastly,
The game was not designed to be played exactly how the real war went. Read the introductions to every game version and you will see that. But it was designed to represent a specific period in time, but now you are in charge. There was a point in History, sometime between 1939 and 1940 where the Axis had a decent chance of winning. If the fix makes it more complicated or twists history in a ridiculous way, it ruins the experience.
Axis and allies is about enjoying History and reliving it, otherwise it is not Axis and Allies.
-
Russia just simply doesnt have the ability to both retreat and turtle everything they have - 4 retreats means Germany at the door after 4 turns and continue to crank out 10 or more infantry per turn - Russia should be finished without assistance from the other allies, by turn 12…at the latest…and thats with incredibly skilled Russian play. Against a poor Russia, or low luck Russia…I see Moscow falling as early as turn 8, perhaps sooner if the player REALLY fails to turtle.
Once the turtling starts, it’s bye bye IPCs within 2 rounds. I’ll have German tanks all over Asia once I reach the outskirts of a turtled Moscow.
Russia NEEDS America to open another front.
Oh, and for the record, if Sealion was successful, Stalingrad falls much easier than Moscow. It’ll be over by turn 10 at the latest…nowhere near enough time for America to shift gears.
-
Shadowguidex is correct. Japan cannot build 40 IPC land AND 40 IPC water to win China, Russia, India and the Pacific. It has to choose, mainland or Pacific. Most players choose mainland and that peter’s out eventually as Japan takes SERIOUS convoy damage from not having the boats to stop America.
Exactly. If you can’t take a territory by amphibious assult with Japan, then it’s not an important territory to have, additionally it’s only worth 1 IPC. The interior of China is worthless - WAY too much investment for way too little gain. I’d rather capture Australian provinces. The caveat is that China needs to be neutered early. I usually kill practically everything they have, then inexplicably fall back to my starting territories. The main point is - do not waste your precious Artillery on China, keep it all on the coast and use it for Hong Kong then for your Amphibious assaults. Use some planes to kill those Chinese.
-
@Cmdr:
Any Russian city taken +1 to enter the war
Any Dutch territory taken +1 to enter the war
Any American territory or unit destroyed/taken, automatic entrance into the war.
Any allied capitol taken, +1 to enter the warGood thinking Jenny, I love it. If I was to streamline this into perfection, it would be like this:
US ENTRY RULES
US player roll 2 DOW dices at each beginning of his turns until he is at war. A roll equal to or less than the total numbers of modifiers is a successful entry. Mind you, he roll 2 dices, so 2 eyes are the minimum and 12 eyes are the max in one roll.
A successful entry trigger the war NO at his Collect Income phase the same turn, but the license to attack is delayed one turn.MODIFIERS TO ADD TO THE DICE ROLL:
- 1 for every pro-neutral or Western Allied territory (excluding the Chinese, USSR, strict neutrals and pro-Axis neutrals) that the Axis control at the beginning of a US turn.
- 2 for every Allied territory with a city that the Axis control etc.
- 3 for every Allied territory with a capitol that the Axis control etc.
- 6 for every Axis attacks on US units or territories.
example: Before US turn 2, Axis forces control France(3), South France(1), pro-neutral Yugoslavia(1), Sumatra(1) and French Indo China(1) for a total of 7 modifiers. Axis also controls Finland, Bulgaria and 3 Chinese territories, but they dont add modifiers. Now US roll 2 dices at the start of his turn, and if the total eyes are 7 or less, US must DOW the Axis, collect the war NO in his Collect income phase, and may start attacking in turn 3
-
-
First, I think we need to remind some posters that we are talking about Alpha 2 Global, not Europe rules. What Germany can and cannot do in Europe is vastly different than what they can and cannot do in Alpha 2 Global.
First:
The unit compositions are significantly, if not vastly, different between the two boards.
Second:
The unit locations are VERY significantly, if not vastly, different between the two boards.
Third:
OOB England cannot scramble to save it’s fleet, but in Alpha 2 it (and Italy) can. That’s a HUGE shift in what can and cannot be done.
Fourth:
Russia has more land power in Alpha 2 than it does in OOB.
Point is, one cannot use the rules from the box to justify how balanced or unbalanced a strategy in Alpha 2 is, or if Alpha 2 is balanced at not. If one defines a “seperate” game as Anniversary Edition and Global 1940, then one must state that Global 1940 and Alpha 2 are also “seperate” games.
That said, I find it quite easy, almost routine, to have Russia keep the Germans out. The only time I have had issues keeping the Germans out or taking Russia is when Germany gives up the Atlantic and goes all in after Moscow. (Japan as well, ignoring the Pacific and letting their fleet get beat back to SZ 6 so they can dump everything they have into Russia as well. Yes, that means almost completely ignoring China and India too, necessary evil.)
The problem with that is, you are trading Japan for Russia AND you STILL didn’t get a VC win because England is now an impenetrable fortress!
It goes without saying that if Japan is putting 40-60 IPC a round into Russia, they are also not getting a VC win.
One last point, keep in mind it is not what victory cities you control, it is on what map you control them! Japan could have London, Washington, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Calcutta and Sydney, but they have not won!
-
Me and my friend just completed a game of Alpha +2 . We made a few changes in the pacific that balanced things out nicley for us.
We removed the TT from Hawaii and gave the UK india fleet an additional TT.
Japan recieved an additional TT in SZ 6 .We removed the FIC NO from Japan .
We changed the US DOW to any attack upon US territories , australia , India , or Hong Kong , or the capture of London.
We also use a rule that Aircraft carriers on the attack can only take hits when all other attack value peices have been removed as casualties or just subs and the carrier and its planes are left. This also helps italy with it’s fleet survival.
-
I like the additional transports. It helps England get more established since they can take the DEI faster and it gives Japan that crucial 4th transport. (Old players are used to 4 transports for Japan since Japan used to only be able to put out 8 units a round on their capitol.)
I like the change to America’s entrance into the war. The fact it took Pearl Harbor to get enough people mad enough to allow the politicians entrance into the war SHOULD be recognized! It’s been uncomforable to me that America can just up and declare war, even if they are never provoked!
Did you have issues with Japan “bagging” in-so-much as staging enough to take India/Australia all in one fell swoop and thus leaving America alone?
I also like the carrier idea, I would apply it to defending carriers as well. The idea was to keep the enemy AWAY from the carriers, not float the carriers out to protect the battleships.
-
Battle of Leyte Gulf anyone? We don’t want to take away the option for a power (Japan) to use its carriers as 2 hit bait for their remaining aircraft and surface ships to take on the enemy ships.
-
Battle of Leyte Gulf anyone? We don’t want to take away the option for a power (Japan) to use its carriers as 2 hit bait for their remaining aircraft and surface ships to take on the enemy ships.
Could be wrong, but were those not escort carriers?
Perhaps we need an escort carrier house rule. Carries either a fighter, or a tactical bomber, can only carry 1, takes 1 hit and dies, costs 12 IPC, attacks 0, defends 1. I’ve tried introducing a similar notion before, but it was never picked up for Enhanced (Anniversary or Revised Enhanced.)
-
@Cmdr:
Battle of Leyte Gulf anyone? We don’t want to take away the option for a power (Japan) to use its carriers as 2 hit bait for their remaining aircraft and surface ships to take on the enemy ships.
Could be wrong, but were those not escort carriers?
Perhaps we need an escort carrier house rule. Carries either a fighter, or a tactical bomber, can only carry 1, takes 1 hit and dies, costs 12 IPC, attacks 0, defends 1. I’ve tried introducing a similar notion before, but it was never picked up for Enhanced (Anniversary or Revised Enhanced.)
I think 10 would be a better price for such a unit. If that costs 12 i would spend the extra 4 to get the soaking and space for an extra plane. And abit more defence.
Suggested Topics
