Hello vets!
So using your experience: What is for you the overall balance on the long range for this 42SE? … 50/50? … 60% Axis? … More?
I saw some bids (witch is clever but not simple) going between 10 to 20 IPCs for the Axis …
What about this try: EACH RUSSIAN TERRITORY STARTS WIN A MINIMUM OF 2 INFANTRY
Why this choice:
Your feelings? Don’t hit me please … At least not on the head! :-D
Moderator’s edit: Added tag [1942.2] to title.
Nice idea , but I fear that would be too much help for the Allies .
Have you tried it out?
@wittmann:
Nice idea , but I fear that would be too much help for the Allies .
Have you tried it out?
Nope this is just an idea … We will try soon.
But as a single visitor I saw several 42SE battles with a bid of 20 IPCs in favor of the allies with those same allies being smashed 50% of the time by the Axis … So I imagine those 6 infantry should not overbalance the game!. But I agree that only the experience will tell us!
GG
18 IPCs is well within the range of “normal” bids for the Allies in 1942.2. So there’s nothing crazy about giving Russia 6 extra infantry. The question is whether that pushes your game in an interesting direction. With more infantry, Russia will be able to hold out longer against German/Japanese attacks, and they may have some more flexibility to purchase some tanks or fighters, on turn 3 or 4. Russia would still want to make conservative purchases (infantry + artillery) on turns 1 and 2 because it will take some time to gather those extra 6 infantry and march them over to the front lines.
With no bid and less-than-heroic support from the US/UK, Moscow often falls around turn 6 in this game. So your “swarm of infantry” rule would keep Moscow alive for an extra couple of turns, maybe until turn 8 or so. Meanwhile, the western allies are still going to have a very hard time in the Middle East and in the Pacific. Egypt will usually fall on round 1, the US Atlantic fleet will almost always fall on round 1, the bulk of the US Pacific fleet will usually fall on round 1, the British Pacific ships will usually be dead by turn 2 or 3, China will usually be dead by turn 2 or 3, and India will often fall on round 4. Can the western allies rebound from these “predictable setbacks,” build a dominant fleet, build an adequate pipeline of loaded transports, and seize enough key territories to balance the loss of Moscow, all by the end of turn 8? Typically this means conquering either (France + Italy) or (Philippines + Borneo + East Indies + Kwangtung). Anything less, and the Axis will be able to take the income they get from looting Moscow, turn their tanks around, and drive the Allies back into the sea on turn 11 or 12, seizing a permanent economic advantage that will ultimately end in Allied defeat.
Does that sound like an interesting challenge for your play group? If so, give your bid a try. If not, maybe try a different bid. There’s nothing ahistorical about a Russian bomber corps in 1942 – the Soviet Union manufactured tens of thousands of modern bombers in every year of the war, and actually had quite a large air force for the era. The Russian navy was smaller, but still played a significant role in operations in the Baltic (preventing the German navy from re-supplying the Siege of Leningrad by sea) and the Black Sea (evacuating tens of thousands of Soviet soldiers from encircled positions in Ukraine and safely withdrawing them to the successful defense of Stalingrad).
18 IPCs is well within the range of “normal” bids for the Allies in 1942.2. So there’s nothing crazy about giving Russia 6 extra infantry. The question is whether that pushes your game in an interesting direction. With more infantry, Russia will be able to hold out longer against German/Japanese attacks, and they may have some more flexibility to purchase some tanks or fighters, on turn 3 or 4. Russia would still want to make conservative purchases (infantry + artillery) on turns 1 and 2 because it will take some time to gather those extra 6 infantry and march them over to the front lines.
With no bid and less-than-heroic support from the US/UK, Moscow often falls around turn 6 in this game. So your “swarm of infantry” rule would keep Moscow alive for an extra couple of turns, maybe until turn 8 or so. Meanwhile, the western allies are still going to have a very hard time in the Middle East and in the Pacific. Egypt will usually fall on round 1, the US Atlantic fleet will almost always fall on round 1, the bulk of the US Pacific fleet will usually fall on round 1, the British Pacific ships will usually be dead by turn 2 or 3, China will usually be dead by turn 2 or 3, and India will often fall on round 4. Can the western allies rebound from these “predictable setbacks,” build a dominant fleet, build an adequate pipeline of loaded transports, and seize enough key territories to balance the loss of Moscow, all by the end of turn 8? Typically this means conquering either (France + Italy) or (Philippines + Borneo + East Indies + Kwangtung). Anything less, and the Axis will be able to take the income they get from looting Moscow, turn their tanks around, and drive the Allies back into the sea on turn 11 or 12, seizing a permanent economic advantage that will ultimately end in Allied defeat.
Does that sound like an interesting challenge for your play group? If so, give your bid a try. If not, maybe try a different bid. There’s nothing ahistorical about a Russian bomber corps in 1942 – the Soviet Union manufactured tens of thousands of modern bombers in every year of the war, and actually had quite a large air force for the era. The Russian navy was smaller, but still played a significant role in operations in the Baltic (preventing the German navy from re-supplying the Siege of Leningrad by sea) and the Black Sea (evacuating tens of thousands of Soviet soldiers from encircled positions in Ukraine and safely withdrawing them to the successful defense of Stalingrad).
Hello Argo!
Thanks for the answer and advices.
If I get you clearly: You agree with our amount of 18 IPCs but you think that obliging Russia to spend all of them into Infantry is another limitation? It’s not enough to balance the game? Notice that they will have the units AT THE VERY START of the game (so sooner than any classical spend IPCs) and that they still benefit of the 24 official IPCs to spend! Plus to be honest we always add a AAA in Karelia!
But OK I respect your experience of numerous battles and you are certainly right that it may not be enough to help the allies.
So imagine that my group want to balance this game with a permanent rule but DO NOT WANT ANY BID SYSTEM: What would you do to re-balance the allies?
And what if we even don’t want extra IPCs but directly extra units on the setting? What would you give them?
Yeah, being forced to build all infantry weakens the bid so that’s it not quite worth the full 18 IPCs. Being forced to assign 100% of the bid to Russia also weakens the bid. Worse, being forced to place those infantry well behind the front lines means that they are slow to make a difference in battle, and so they are worth less. Sure, you get your unit in the Urals “at the very start of the game,” but when is that Ural infantry going to see combat? Turn 3? Turn 4? A unit in the Urals before round 1 starts is about as good as a unit in West Russia before round 3 starts.
My favorite way to balance the game is to give the Americans a non-combat turn and a purchase phase before the game starts. It was originally Black_Elk’s idea, I think, maybe with help from Baron Munchhausen. I think this one simple change totally balances the game and also adds lots of fun new options.
If you just want to give the Russians extra starting cash but not allow any bid, I think 26 IPCs would probably be fair. Maybe 30 IPCs if your group is relatively new, since the Axis tend to be easier for beginners.
If you want to give the Russians extra units at the start of the game, I think 1 inf + 1 tnk + 1 bomber is plenty, as long as you put those units in core territories, e.g., Moscow, Caucasus, West Russia, Archangel. Not in Evenki.
Hello!
Your American Free Production option is very interesting.
I like it because simple + following the logic turn (America before Russia) + fits to the historical American powerfull Industrial production
Last questions:
GG
It radically protects all US Navy assets. And China is less piece of cake.
IMO, it does not make Allies too powerful.
And I rather prefer this over moving German StB into Ukraine per Larry Harris Tournament settings.
I think the USA non-combat turn zero pretty much balances the game 50/50! If you want, you can give the Axis a bid of 3 to 6 IPCs, but I doubt it’s necessary.
I don’t think Russia gets erased by Germany. Russia actually starts with a healthy number of troops even out of the box, and because Russia goes before Germany, Russia has a chance to shape the European map in its favor. With an USA turn zero, the Allied Atlantic fleets will survive, which means much earlier Allied pressure on Norway/France/Morocco, which really limits Germany’s ability to secure a permanent economic advantage against Russia. In other words, in my opinion, the problem with the OOB 1942.2 setup isn’t that Russia is too weak – it’s that the US & UK are too weak. Giving the USA a zero turn helps protect both US & UK assets, which fixes this problem.
Related to #2, if you haven’t already read Black_Elk’s sticky thread on Russian Openings, you really need to. It will totally change the way you see the 1942.2 board.
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35487.0
