Hi all, I realize this question may be fairly common, I have seen some discussion of it here and on other boards but I would appreciate any additional comments. It does appear that it is quite difficult for the Allies to win a 8 VC game. Calcutta and Lenningrad seem to be too “accesible” to Axis players who are skilled and determined to pursue them.
What have been some successful counters to this apparent Axis advantage?
What is the best balanced alternative Victory Conditions, a 9 point game or are there better options?
We never play for a minor victory, because indeed it’s not fair. What you could do, is decide that the Axis (and Allies, of course) have to be in control of both victory cities for several turns (e.g. 2) in a row.
Thanks Mr. Bo that sounds like an interesting way to get around the imbalance. You stated that your group never plays for the minor victory. Have you found that a 9/10 point victory level is a pretty good game. Quite frankly I would think that trying to get to 10 points makes for a very long game and only delays the inevitable. It would seem that if one side or the other has 9 victory cities and is in position to control another then the losing side has very little hope of coming back.
We always play 9 point games… 8 is too easy for the Axis and 10 they never can make… it always is the balanced number that either side can substantially achieve…
GG
My crew doesn’t often use victory cities; alternate set-up rocks!
Indeed, 10 victory cities is too much. From my perspective (allies), once Germany has fallen, the game is won (capturing Japan is inevitable when they’re on their own and they usually surrender).
Agent O, I know it’s been asked a lot, but I’ll give it another shot: where can you find alternate setup rules? I believe I tried a link once, but it was dead…
Thanks for the response, We had a 4 man game on Friday and the allies actually won the 8 point victory. (due to newer German player and some bad purchases). It does appear that unless you have some real breakdowns for the Axis there is no hope for the Allies.
We will probably stay away from the 8 point victories from now on.
By the way I would also like to get info on some alternate setups.
@The:
Thanks for the response, We had a 4 man game on Friday and the allies actually won the 8 point victory. (due to newer German player and some bad purchases). It does appear that unless you have some real breakdowns for the Axis there is no hope for the Allies.
We will probably stay away from the 8 point victories from now on.
By the way I would also like to get info on some alternate setups.
yeah id also like info on some alternate setups… it would be cool to setup the game diferently every once in a while
I told Mr. Bo about it - at least the way we handle it in my circle. We just set up the game as normal, but rearrange the teams. However, there may be some alternate rules online somewhere as well…
In the group I play AAR with, we changed the VC from Calcutta to Australia. This seems to work since it helps to put more emphasis on the Pacific theater
Having just started with Revised, and having won what is called a “minor” victory on T1, I have to concur that 8 cities is a joke.
9 does indeed make more sense, at least for the Axis. Then you are looking at also taking Moscow (in all probability) putting 1 of the 3 allies out of the war. With Russia gone, and Germany and Japan still holding their initial 3, there is no hope for the Allies… it is a war of attrition with the Axis building at 180%+ of the allies.
For the Allies, 9 cities makes more sense too.
Snagging Shanghai in UK1 is pretty easy to do, and Manila can often be taken in during R2, depending on how the US and UK work their fleet. Then it comes down to Rome or Paris.
If Allies can take and hold Shanghai, Manila, and Paris/Rome at the end of a given turn, then the Axis is screwed. Another war of attrition, this time one that the Axis cannot win.
8 cities can be a fluke for EITHER side. But getting 9… that denotes some significant strategy, combat success, and a degree of economic power that would make “world domination” inevitable (except in the most extreme case of dice f*ck ever recorded).
I prefer either 12 VC or who gives up first.
Actually had a pretty good game the other night, had to quit early, we were playing for 11 though.
LA - Japan
D.C. - US
London - Germany
Calcutta - UK
Berlin - Germany
Paris - US
Rome - UK
Moscow - Germany
Leningrad - Germany
Manila - UK
Shanghai - UK
Tokyo - Japan
LA and London had just been taken this turn. We allow all 5 players to use a dual-impulse phase like from WAW, and Germany and Japan used theirs at the same time and just barely managed to take them. I was playing the US and Russia. We haven’t, as of yet, successfully held Russia, none of us. It just seems to be cursed ground. I have seen some of the unluckiest die rolls for the Russian player defending against Germany. I’ve seen the Caucasus fall without the defenders land a single hit. Same with Archangel. We think our board may be cursed. The next game we’ve agreed that Russia is going to be a co-op player, with ALL of us working for a Russia strategy, using what has kinda worked for each of us in the past. Any suggestions?
WOULD U LIKE TO PBEM WAW?
We never play with victory cities. If Moscow or Berlin are captured, we can see the way it goes, and then the part who has lost a capital city give up.
