Thank you! Seems like G2 is better than G3.
2nd Edition Balance
-
RocMonster has it completely right.Â
Even if germany took the USSR, US was too powerful. No way Germany would get cairo before Germany was crushed. The ability to place a 10 factory on any 3 territory was just too powerful for the US.Â
It looks like ROC was talking about 2e, in which case, at least since Alpha 2, US Major IC’s can only be built on originally US territories.
-
RocMonster has it completely right.ÂÂ
Even if germany took the USSR, US was too powerful. No way Germany would get cairo before Germany was crushed. The ability to place a 10 factory on any 3 territory was just too powerful for the US.ÂÂ
It looks like ROC was talking about 2e, in which case, at least since Alpha 2, US Major IC’s can only be built on originally US territories.
Ya I was talking about the new 2nd edition, but the same principle applies. US doesn’t need to build a major factory. She just has a 3 way transport shuck. 8 transports that drop men into africa 8 transports that go back to US for more men, and 8 transports that pick men up from africa and take them to SE or Italy. You can use a couple transports to take norway when the chance is given and build a factory there. then you just build men up north with US to pester Germany. The real damage is the 16 men plus 6 from factories that US puts down everyturn. That coupled with the UK men I don’t see how Germany can defend their homeland and take Egypt. A smart UK player is building 5 infantry a turn in africa (3 in Egypt and 2 in SA with the 2 in SA being transported up everyturn). this plus the 10 men UK builds at his home to place in europe is just too much.
-
It sounds like, ROC, you find a lot of infantry stack games. I realize this doesn’t work for everybody, but we add a ton of house rules as NA’s at my house. Rommel is a special tank that can have 1 tank and 1 mech built on his space per turn, Russia can build 2 tanks per turn for 9 IPC (but all after that are normal price) Britain can have montgomery who boosts attack and defense of british tanks in same territory (this one is almost too powerful), the improved mechanization tech which makes a pair of mech and tank cost 9 while having tanks boost mechs to 2 attack.
There are a bunch of changes that I keep seeing that don’t take care of the real innovation that needs to be made; getting away from inf stacks two spaces away trading territories until someone can make a push. It seems like with this World War I game coming out, if it is pretty similar to A&A, people are going to be complaining that it’s too similar to World War II in gameplay style, when in reality these big stacks of infantry in WWII are more like WWI.
-
Well sadly that is how the game is played, and my Germany doesn’t have only infantry. I just find that when transporting men the best combo is all infantry with 1-2 arty thrown in with extra money. Just get as many units as you can on the field of play, and before you attack that is when you build the tanks. I like your houserules. They seem like a lot of fun, but you’re right on the montgomery one. I don’t see that being too powerful until late game, but when the battle for germany comes down and UK has 10 tanks all rolling at 4… Though the same could be said for germany getting rommels 1 tank 1 mech on is space. That is probably the most powerful, since Germany’s problem is his supply lines. I could see this breaking the game very easily.
-
Well sadly that is how the game is played, and my Germany doesn’t have only infantry. I just find that when transporting men the best combo is all infantry with 1-2 arty thrown in with extra money. Just get as many units as you can on the field of play, and before you attack that is when you build the tanks. I like your houserules. They seem like a lot of fun, but you’re right on the montgomery one. I don’t see that being too powerful until late game, but when the battle for germany comes down and UK has 10 tanks all rolling at 4… Though the same could be said for germany getting rommels 1 tank 1 mech on is space. That is probably the most powerful, since Germany’s problem is his supply lines. I could see this breaking the game very easily.
Yeah we are definitely not at all confident the game is balanced with our NA’s, but the selection process of them (choose 1 for each power and roll for 1) keeps the game fresh. If it ever does bog down to inf stacks, there was a decent amount of cool things before that.
-
BTW, I tossed our NA’s up:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29513.0
(None of these were used in games online where I thought axis had it too hard.)
-
very cool Von Lottow!
-
I would enjoy playing with your house rules, particularly based on the layer of immersion it provides. I know some purists may not like some or all of the rules for a multitude of reasons, but that added layer of depth (such as the commanders) surely makes for a more intriguing game from my perspective.
I also wouldn’t mind a Banzai opportunity for Japanese units on an island facing an Amphib. Not sure how to implement it, but something along the lines of after the first round of combat if the Japanese are outnumbered in units 2-1 on the island, the Japanese can opt to Banzai where the units are reversed in the battleboard and Japanese units get a -1 to their rolls for that single round of combat.
-
I would enjoy playing with your house rules, particularly based on the layer of immersion it provides. Â I know some purists may not like some or all of the rules for a multitude of reasons, but that added layer of depth (such as the commanders) surely makes for a more intriguing game from my perspective.
I also wouldn’t mind a Banzai opportunity for Japanese units on an island facing an Amphib. Â Not sure how to implement it, but something along the lines of after the first round of combat if the Japanese are outnumbered in units 2-1 on the island, the Japanese can opt to Banzai where the units are reversed in the battleboard and Japanese units get a -1 to their rolls for that single round of combat.
What do you mean by purists? (not coming after you, I’m just curious)
I’ll dig up some of my banzai stuff (what I posted is like draft/arrangement 4 or 5)
-
Some sort-of Banzai type NA’s I’ve had on our charts in the past:
Dug-In Defenders: Subtract 1 from the bombardment value of each enemy ship bombarding an island you own. Your infantry on islands defend at 3 in the first round of land combat.
Banzai Charge: In an attack where you have no land or air units other than infantry, your infantry attack at 2 AFTER the first round of combat (This even includes if you started a battle with units other than infantry, and those units are no longer participating).
An even older one:
Banzai infantry: Japan may purchase Banzai infantry for 4 IPC each. They are treated like infantry, except that when you are in a battle where your ONLY land or air units are Banzai infantry, they attack at 2 and defend at 3.
-
VLV: Purists, in general don’t want to change the overarching strategy of the game outside of adding a unit here, changing a NO there. They strive for simply balance so each side has a fair opportunity to win the game. Some of your rules may imbalance that simplicity equilibrium and add even more layers to the strategy of the game - something a purist may claim “diverges too much from the original game”.
I, however, rather enjoy added layers of intricate strategy :-D
-
VLV: Purists, in general don’t want to change the overarching strategy of the game outside of adding a unit here, changing a NO there. They strive for simply balance so each side has a fair opportunity to win the game. Some of your rules may imbalance that simplicity equilibrium and add even more layers to the strategy of the game - something a purist may claim “diverges too much from the original game”.
I, however, rather enjoy added layers of intricate strategy :-D
Ah, now i get what you are saying. I have always been aware that these are more along the line of FLAVOR BLASTED chips, than a nice, well balanced vintage wine. :-D Both are good, depending on the mood.
Hope I am not violating a “flavor-blasted” trademark there.
-
LOL! Some of your rules are insane, but pretty cool and would be fun to play with. Obviously it breaks the game in many ways, but maybe give some of these bonuses to a less experienced player. You know he will have a lot of fun with them :)
-
Dumping units into Africa itself only takes away Italian IPC and NOs. The whole game really rests upon Cairo. Can Germany take Moscow (and the other USSR VCs) while Italy holds Cairo before losing any European VCs? Once we realized that, my friend playing Germany dumped all original fighters into Africa, supporting the Italian move to Cairo. He also moved the German surface ships to the Med. Once Italy took it, it was impossible to take back in any reasonable time length. Also, Italy should keep harassing Gibraltar, as time is more important than units at the middle to late stage of the game. Finally, Italy sacrificed a few destroyers just to slow US progress in the Med. The Allies had no chance. This, even with USSR taking Finland, Norway, and Iraq early, for a combined IPC increase of 16 (not including typical war-time NOs).
The problem for US, despite the massive income, is the cost of transports and game time to move them. I’ve planned a very precise, efficient use of time and money for the US, but it’s still a slow train to get moving. The problem for USSR, of course, is placement. But building arty on the front, mech infantry/tanks in Moscow and Volgograd, and falling back as necessary was just enough to slow the German/Italian onslaught. (Which, btw, Italy should definitely commit a small contingent if not else than to threaten a German blitz.) UK should focus primarily on Africa and not losing the homeland.
-
If UK builds a factory in egypt round 1, Italy has a very tough time getting Cairo at all. If Germany is crazy enough to try sealion after a UK 1 cairo factory buy, Italy might get Cairo then, but Sealion when USA can spend 60 in the Atlantic every turn is a different duck from Sealion when USA has to spend most of it’s coin in the PAc to stop Japan.
In Europe 2nd ed. I buy a fact with britain every time. I welcome a sealion. Russia becomes a God.
-
I like buying a carrier first round with Germany. If UK builds a factory in cairo then he also has to kill the fleet in 97. If he does both of these then London is very light and I would probably build 9 transports with Germany to take UK. Once Uk is gone on T3, which is almost a 100% if UK attacked 97, 96, and bought the IC first turn, then Italy is free to take Cairo and get the IC in Egypt. Italy for the rest of the game would be making 30+. All you have to do is make sure you leave enough Units on Uk that US can’t liberate. Yes, Russia will be making a lot of money at this point, but only for a turn or two. Then you get her back down into the 35 range. Italy will soon be pressuring russia the Caucus region, and US won’t have many places that he can go besides norway. I think if Germany builds navy it is safer to wait till R2 to build the factory in Egypt. I also build a factory in persia R2 with UK. Use transport off egypt to pick man up and take persia R1.
Suggested Topics
