AA.Org Official Alpha 3 Thread

[ghr2]

@Cmdr:

@Alsch91:

Because the amount of resources that Russia would have to use to get through Germany’s defenses in Scandanavia would cause Moscow to fall.

Not really.  You need 1 Infantry to take Norway, Finland and Sweeden.  That’s hardly enough taken from Russia to cause Russia to fall. (Have the Americans and British clear the zones iwth aircraft and walk a dude in.)

Thats ofcourse if germany does not make any effort to stop them since it will take atleast 3 rounds for a guy from karelia to hit all 3, and since germany goes after the western allies and before russia, it makes it even more unlikely for this situation to occur.

[Alsch91]

Exactly.

Jen, your Germany was asleep at the wheel.

[Jennifer]

It’s insanely hard to stop Russia from getting the islands in the Med, assuming a traditional Allied offensive.  It’s just the nature of the beast.

I am making the following recommendation to Larry:

1)  Russia was an ally in-so-much as they were attacking Germany.  Therefore, no Russian equipment may use American, French, Australian or British equipment for transport purposes (ie, you cannot load infantry on transports or land fighters on carriers, etc, etc, etc) and vice-versa.
2)  If Russia attacks a true neutral, all other true neutrals remain true neutral.  This is to reflect the fact that Russia attacked True Neutrals in the course of the real war and yet, the world didn’t become anti-America/England etc.  It also helps with game play.
3)  National Objective Reduced to 2 IPC for each counquered neutral or true neural in Europe or Scandinavia or Turkey with the following exceptions:  Sardinia, Sicily, Crete and Ireland.
4)  If the United States of America or the United Kingdom attack a true neutral then all true neutrals on the board immediately join the axis powers:
A) If the neutral is in Africa or the Middle East it becomes Italian.
B) If the neutral is in Europe or S. America it becomes German.
C) If the neutral is on the Pacific Map (Asia, etc) it becomes Japanese.

Clarification:  Russian units may still defend with other allied units.  They are allies!  The only change is that they cannot share transportation means.  Cossaks need to bring their own ponies!  Patton is NOT sharing his Armored units!  Montegomery is too much of a primadonna to lend his mechanized units, etc.

[Clyde85]

This sounds like abject insanity to me, you are making a claim that has no basis in reality. Yes you probably COULD do something like this, you COULD use massive allied air power to clear out true neutral states so the Soviets could walk in to get the territory and NO income, but why would you want to? You COULD use an allied fleet to open up the dradanells and pick up a Soviet infantrymen from the black sea and transport him over several turns to the coast of Italy and have in land in Sardinia, but why would you want to? Why would you want to go to all the trouble just to give the Soviets a slight IPC bump?
    Also, what kind of German players to you play against? How incompitent is/are you opponent(s) that they cant figure out how to keep things like this from happening? You have made a claim and havent brought enough specific evidence to support how this could happen in an actual game. Im not saying I dont see how something like you describe COULD happen, the letter of the rules say as much, what im saying is that the possiblity of it actually being a problem, or evening happening at all, are so small as to barely be worth a second thought.

[Jennifer]

Let me rephrase it then.  I HAVE USED AMERICAN AIR POWER TO CLEAR BOTH TURKEY AND SWEEDEN ALLOWING ONE RUSSIAN INFANTRY TO TAKE BOTH TERRITORIES UNOPPOSED, FURTHER I HAVE USED AN AMERICAN TRANSPORT TO MOVE A RUSSIAN INFANTRY FROM SYRIA TO SARDINIA AND SICILY WITH NO RISK TO RUSSIA AND I HAVE IN MORE THAN ONE GAME LANDED A RUSSIAN INFANTRY IN IRELAND.

That help?

[Clyde85]

No, typing things in Caps Lock dosnt help it make any more sense when it already has no bases in reality to begin with, it just makes it easier for people with vision problems to read it.  :-D

You are making claims of things you did with out any context of the games in which these things occured. Without the aid of the contex of the games in which these alleged things happened all you are effectively doing is typing ARGLE BARGLE BARGLE so everyone can read it clearly. You have not explained what any moves were prior to these evets, what turn they took place, what the other players situation or condition was, you are just making a claim based on an exploit of a rule you noticed, not proving a point or showing that this is a REAL game problem.

[Jennifer]

Look, it’s pretty simple.

America and England had an airforce in Russia to prevent Moscow from falling.  A large airforce.
America had a large fleet in the Med to cripply Italy.  With the new convoy rules, this is a little harder but not impossible since you can do more damage than normal. (BB doesnt always do 1 damage, it could do 3.)  With this fleet, the Americans were able to recover a Russian unit that walked to Syria.  Then it was a matter of protecting the transport as they offloaded into Sardinia and Sicily.  Not exactly hard to do when Italy has at most 3 or 4 aircraft on any given game day.
England had a decent fleet in the N. Atlantic.  It wasn’t going to defend against the 20 or so fighters Germany had, but it was enough to keep Germany from threatening Sea Lion or reinforcing Norway, Finland.
Russia blitzed an armored unit up, snuck into undefended Finland, sailed into Norway and Sweeden the round after and raced back to Karelia.  Since they had Novgorod, this wasn’t an issue.
Since the allies had an insane number of planes, strafing the small stack of Germans in Finland and the infantry in Sweeden cost next to nothing. (I think all in all there were 3 planes lost which is about what you would expect from 7 or 8 defending infantry.)  Those losses cost Russia nothing, but made them independantly wealthy.
With Japan landing in W. USA routinely, Russia was earning more money than ANY other nation on the board!  (Keep in mind,without Sweeden, Germany earns no objective money and with the Allies all over the Med, they were getting none of the Middle East money either.)

This is pretty standard in our games, has been since Alpha 2.

[Clyde85]

Ok, well that gives a glazing over of what was going on…… kinda. I still dont see how any of the things you say happen ROUTINELY in you games are even possible, it dosnt seem to mention what turn any of this happened in either. I was hoping you could give a more detailed, turn by turn description of what happened this this alleged game.

@Cmdr:

America and England had an airforce in Russia to prevent Moscow from falling.  A large airforce.

How large? What turn did it get there? and what route did it take to do so? (incase anY airbases were used)

@Cmdr:

America had a large fleet in the Med to cripply Italy.

Again, how large, what was it composed of, whe was it built, and when did it get to the Med?

@Cmdr:

England had a decent fleet in the N. Atlantic.  It wasn’t going to defend against the 20 or so fighters Germany had

How big and what compisition is considered “decent”? Where did Germany mass its 20 fighters and why couldnt it provide cover for a fleet placed in say, the Baltic to allow them to reinforce themselves in Scandanavia?

The list of questions goes on like this, without hard evidence and atleast some other players making similar complaints and dont think this can be taken seriously as a game balance problem.

[Jennifer]

It’s only been 5 days, there is no routine yet.  Routine that is referenced is routine for Alpha 2 games.  Large American fleet (150-250 ipc value), moderate British fleet (100-190 ipc value) and large airforce (roughly 30 allied non-russian planes.)

As I’ve said, this is accomplished by about Round 11.  I detailed this out in the other thread in great detail.  Basically, for the cost of 2 Russian Infantry, by round 11, Russia has:  Norway, Sweeden, Finland, Ireland, Sardinia and Sicily.  If the Russian guy isn’t strafed and needs to be replaced, then by round 13 add Crete to the list. (Otherwise Round 14 and cost is now 3 Russian infantry.)

Just about anyone who’s ever played can tell you how to get that sized fleet in the Med and up by England by that time.  The only purpose of the British fleet is to keep SZ 125 open for the Russian IPC, so even if you cower with the Americans, we’re talking 35-40 IPC for Russia instead of 40-45 IPC for Russia.  Not a huge difference really, since they only have the one complex anyway…and all you need is 30 IPC to keep the Germans from ever cracking that shell.

[Jennifer]

Germany’s problem is landing zones for the fighters.  The British only need to protect SZ 109 so they can drive a destroyer to SZ 125 and sink any submarines.  On top of that, they have 6 fighters to scramble to protect the fleet.  That’s 24 Punch for Fighters requiring 8 Attacking Fighters just to match it.  Add to it any surface fleet and defending carrier bound fighters and you’ve out matched the Germans pound for deutsch mark.

If that wasnt bad, in order to hit SZ 109 they need either W. France or Holland to land on.  Usually that’s not a problem, but towards the beginning and end of the game, it can be an issue to contend with.  Not to mention once you land there, you have no pre-existing airbase to extend your range or scramble with, nor do you protect SZ 112/SZ 113 against British attack.

For instance, Germany has 2 Strategics, 5 Tacticals, 13 Fighters and no kriegsmarine (since they rarely do anymore).  To counter this Britian has 6 Scrambled Fighters, 4 Carrier Fighters, 2 Carriers, 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 3 Submarines and 5 Destroyers (a moderate fleet.)  Assuming Germany has a place to land, they only have a 15% chance to win.

England had to invest to get the fighters and had to move the carrier into position to cut costs, but since they were sending fighters to Russia like mad to prevent it from falling, they have the fighters to move back.  To clear SZ 125, they send 10 Fighters, 1 Destroyer and pretty much anything Germany might have gotten there, is gone.  So they might be costing Russia 5 IPC, but are losing 6 IPC in submarines to do so.  A losing battle for Germany.  (And iwth only a 17% chance to kill the destroyer, they might lose something attacking SZ 125 to reclose the shipping lanes.)

America has a larger fleet, mainly because they have to protect SZ 91 and SZ 95 to perform their landings.  Figure about double what England has, if not 2.5 times what England has.  We’re talking 11 rounds remember, so America has earned about 800 IPC give or take a few dozen IPC.

[Carnage]

I’ve never had a game go to round 11…
What is Japan doing while the US focused so intently on Europe?
My read of the situaion (without knowing in detail what Germany has) is the game was over turns ago unless Japan is ready to land on the Western USA. Even if they can I’m not sure that the Axis could even dream of coming back.

C

[Jennifer]

Many mistakes players make are to over invest in the Pacific and “go for the win” in the Pacific.

To successfully prevent Japan from winning in the Pacific you need to match him carrier for carrier, destroyer for destroyer and fighter for fighter in the Pacific.  Well, that’s only partially true, America needs this equipment to contain Japan, add to that destroyers and submarines from Australia and India for use in “trading” with Japan.

Often times I like to add a carrier for Australia, sometimes even two carriers.  This adds a lot of defensive punch and that’s what you are really looking for in the Pacific.  However, these are a secondary concern, your primary concern must be to have no less than 3 destroyers to use in blocking the Japanese warships!

It is often necessary for the United States to purchase a naval and / or airbase in the Pacific.  Unfortunatly, this will end up replacing destroyers that America would otherwise be purchasing, so it is often wise to save 5 or 6 IPC a round for the United States to assist (that way you have 21-22 IPC set aside for the Pacific each round, if you have to drop a base, that leaves you with enough that you can still drop a destroyer without greatly upsetting your Atlantic planes, as it is only an extra 1 or 2 IPC you lost from your Atlantic mission!)

Atlantic side is another faltering point for the United States.  Many people are inclined to keep building warships well after the mission objectives have been accomplished, because it’s what they have always done!  Once you control the Med and have a few warships to protect transports from Strategic Bomber attacks in SZ 91, you can stop investing in warships for the Atlantic.  Actually, you can stop investing in armies as well, since you can just use what you have stockpiled if you need too.  (Best solution might be to downshift and send only partial shipments to replace losses.)

Essentially, by round 11, I expect the Pacific to look thusly:

Japan:  15 Aircraft, 5 Aircraft Carriers, 2 Battleships, 2 Cruisers, 6 or 7 Destroyers, 3-5 Submarines, 7 or 8 Transports
America: 8 Aircraft, 4 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 6 or 7 Destroyers, 5-7 Submarines, 2 or 3 Transports
Australia/India: 7 Aircraft (3 Airbase, 4 Carrier), 2 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Battleship, 2 Cruisers, 4 or 5 Destroyers, 2-4 Submarines, 3 Transports (1 British, 2 Australian)

Atlantic side we are looking at:
Germany: 1 or 2 Submarines, maybe + 11 Aircraft
Italy: Nothing
England: 1 Battleship, 2 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Cruiser, 2 or 3 Destroyers, 1 or 2 Submarines (maybe, for Convoys in SZ 125, SZ 105), 3 or 4 Transports, 6 Fighters - Fleet in SZ 109 or SZ 110
France: Fighter, Destroyer (in the Med)
USA: 1 Battleship, 2 Aircraft Carriers, 1 Cruiser, 4 or 5 Destroyers, 2 or 3 Submarines (for Convoys), 8 Transports, 4 Fighters - Fleet in SZ 91 or SZ 92

[Guest]

@Cmdr:

Let me rephrase it then.  I HAVE USED AMERICAN AIR POWER TO CLEAR BOTH TURKEY AND SWEEDEN ALLOWING ONE RUSSIAN INFANTRY TO TAKE BOTH TERRITORIES UNOPPOSED, FURTHER I HAVE USED AN AMERICAN TRANSPORT TO MOVE A RUSSIAN INFANTRY FROM SYRIA TO SARDINIA AND SICILY WITH NO RISK TO RUSSIA AND I HAVE IN MORE THAN ONE GAME LANDED A RUSSIAN INFANTRY IN IRELAND.

That help?

By the time such things are even possible, its long game over anyways.

[special forces]

@RedArmySoldier:

By the time such things are even possible, its long game over anyways.

Indeed

[Jennifer]

I find it done by round 11 which is about 4 rounds before one side conceeds the game in a traditional Alpha 2 or antique Alpha 3 game.

[Clyde85]

@RedArmySoldier:

By the time such things are even possible, its long game over anyways.

@special:

@RedArmySoldier:

By the time such things are even possible, its long game over anyways.

Indeed

I agree, I think this is only something you will see happening in games where players are doing things just to see if they can, not for any practical reason therefore meaning it isnt a real game problem.

[special forces]

@Cmdr:

I find it done by round 11 which is about 4 rounds before one side conceeds the game in a traditional Alpha 2 or antique Alpha 3 game.

Okay, but if by round 11 Germany still hasn’t even captured Moscow, then i don’t see it happening for the Axis anymore. In such a case that Russian NO doesn’t matter much, abuse or not.

Apart from this, Larry wrote the following:
• 3 IPCs for each original Axis or neutral territory in Europe (including Turkey) that the Soviet Union controls. Theme: Propaganda value and spread of Communism.

which i (can) interpret as counting only for true neutrals (i admit, it’s as easy to interpret the other way around)
The whole sentence is bad, actually… “including Turkey”? Why write that?

Finally, if all your games end up with such a Russian situation, wouldn’t you call the whole game awfully broken?

[Carnage]

I just can’t see a game panning out the way you’ve described. While I do think the rule should be adjusted I don’t think that it’s in any real danger of being abused until well after the games been decided.

C

[gazza]

just one question if uk attacks sz97 and takes greece r1. sz97 is left with 1cv and 2ftr if italy attacks with one ss and gets lucky

can them fighter land in greece on the italian go ? …

[knp7765]

@special:

The whole sentence is bad, actually… “including Turkey”? Why write that?

A lot of people don’t consider Turkey a part of Europe.  My gaming group uses Neutral Blocks and we have Turkey grouped with Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan rather than with the European neutrals.

@gazza:

just one question if uk attacks sz97 and takes greece r1. sz97 is left with 1cv and 2ftr if italy attacks with one ss and gets lucky

can them fighter land in greece on the italian go ? …

Yes, the British fighters can land on Greece on the Italian turn, since UK already took it over on the UK turn.  It’s similar to the Italians taking a Soviet territory then Germany flying a bunch of planes there to back them up.  Or the US taking Normandy and the Brits landing planes there to back them up.