Pacific Changes, and how they could affect global balance, DOW, and other things

@all-encompassing-goose

It’ll be fun to play against yourself and then move the game so it will simply be a cool arms race to try to invade the East Coast (the only problem is the advantage for the Allies, but then to gain enough resources to win you might have win the game already, but you can just leave Stalingrad, Egypt, and Leningrad open and conquer London and set your eye on the East Coast-invading Quebec might help, as well as Ontario, but then you might accidentally win). That final battle will look amazing.

But then again, that’s why it’s considered bizarre-it’s just not an easy way of winning, unless you specifically make it so such a situation will occur.

Thanks for info. Will plan on coming next year.

I too like to press hard on Europe as US vs a J1 DOW, but I’m not yet convinced you can do so for more than 1 1/2 buys. 1dd/2ss/2AC (stealing Pacific planes to fill) into Europe on US1 is usually enough to complete the allied Med domination, depending on G1 and Taranto success. Add another carrier/dd if necessary, otherwise, 100% Pacific navy for the next 6-8 turns. I call this the “Kill Italy First, but also Kill Japan First!” strategy. Patent pending :)

My theory is that US cannot afford to build transports until the late game against a J1 Dow. Your job is to be Death, the Destroyer of Navies: AC/dd/ss/fig only for the first 8-10 turns, and swap in some bombers if Germany really wants a Sealion. Have your allies do the dirty work with land units: submarines for days, baby.

@rjkesq82:

A&APlayer - that would be awesome! (PBEM) I am very interested. Thank you for such wonderful insight as well!

After playing a few more times, we have seen Axis 3 wins Allies 3 Wins…lol…

I think being the allies is soooooooooooo much harder simply because of execution. It’s easy to SAY what to do and KNOW what to do…but man, with 3 people all needing to work 100% in sync and not much room for error; that is easier said than done.

That being said, I have now seen Japan play VERY good games, but because of a misplayed Germany, the axis still fall. Kinda stinks for Japan…that they can play near flawless but if Germany collapses or plays bad, it won’t even matter. Lol.

The allies have several advantages over the axis countries, but you hit the nail on the head  . . . they have to mesh well together in order to win. And that seems to be a major hurdle for Japan. It’s very rare to see a Pacific win for the axis. I don’t know how much of it’s because the allies usually target Japan first or because there’s just a natural plateau once they get too spread out.

Usually it’s either both axis sides are rocking early and the allies surrender in the first couple of rounds or Germany is the one that gets the win. Japan just seems to reach that point where they just can’t quite get there. Too easy for the allies to stop Japan, even if India falls. A strong Japan might not win the game, but they can do wonders for taking the heat off Germany.

Shoot me a PM and I can help you get started on a PBEM game.

That’s what I thought too, Garg.  Only Cow knows for sure  :lol:

http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=9936

Had have only 2 global games so far…  but both have been Allied victories.  I have yet to play the Axis as of yet.  both times Berlin fell because A. Demark was lightly defended once the Americans and British had fleets.    and B.  Berlin was lightly defended because all resources Axis resources were in Belgium, Normandy ,  and the eastern front.

When I play the Axis I think I need to make sure I can counter any land invasion in force rather than straight coastal defend.

I think that a Good Soviet Player will definitely defend through turn 4 when the US is in the war in Europe or at least has a fleet in SZ 109 or SZ 110.  I’m not sure that the balance with Japan is all that good since an experienced player can do so much damage with 19 planes in Alpha 2.  But since Japan is so far away from the Soviet union and the axis players waited till turn 4 or later to attack the soviet union,  my view of balance with the Japanese is tainted.

Seems extremely hard to get the Axis to defeat the allies unless they roll extremley well whereas the Allies can roll badly again and again and still pull it out.  This could also be the relationship between IPC’s as the Allies definitely can waste units and rebuild especially the Americans.

I really don’t like the NO’s for America so much.  its just too many NO’s for the US that are very difficult for the Axis to hit.  Maybe remove the Central /Western/Eastern 5 IPC NO .

Again we’ve only done 2 Global games so far.

SHARED THIS ON LARRY’S SITE ALREADY, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOUGHTS HERE ALSO:

Ok Larry,

Me and an official playtester of yours here in Michigan (his name is mentioned in the rulebook for Europe 40) played Global with the new setup given with all the aircraft taken away and such. Here was a short summary of what happened:

On the Europe side:

Germany played pretty predictably, sinking most of the UK navy, taking France and the Eastern European pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals with Italy. They continued to build on their air force to keep the UK from building ships right away. Began to stack some ground units as well. Italy expanded into Africa and shored the Middle East slowly controlling the Med.

UK responded by NOT attcking the Italian navy and pulling back the rest of the navy it had left until it could come back to England with a strong navy that included the US. UK took the Pro-allied Brazil and shucked the troops to Africa to help the SAfrican force which slowly pushed the Italians back up to Egypt turning the tide in Africa.

Russia stedily built a force consisting of infantry spiced with some tanks, artillery, tacs and mechs. Stacking behind some dead zones and waiting for the declaration of war.

US spent about 70-80% of its cash in the Pacific since it could not even approach Africa/Europe before a state of war.

Now for the Pacific side:

India with little cash built mostly infantry and stacked. Combined navy near India and activated the Persian troops to bring back and help defend India. In Global, India has a little more help from some extra troops west and a few ships, including one French destroyer to help defend. Also, it can fall back with its stack to West India if needed.

ANZAC naval base is much needed and I am glad it is there- balances nicely.

China was stonger, but does what it normally does and stacks at Yunnan to wait to wear down Japs. China units are really used as a delaying tactic for the India crush.

Japan didn’t see an advantage to the India crush in J1 but felt that the initiative came to them in J2. They didn’t want to wait until J3 because they felt the Allies would have established a long-term defense of India. So with that the Japs declared war on J2 taking back the Dutch East Indies and unleashing the fury. Japan built transports J1 and J2 and built more planes to replace the ones missing from the new setup in J2.

Now even though both Japs and Allies have the same amount of planes removed, Japan can build them faster and move them closer to the action (India). US could also build their planes back but it takes them longer to get them to the battle scene (India). Brit India and ANZAC can’t build much of an airforce because of the typhoon of Jap units coming fast, so India stacks and ANZAC tries to distract and/or try to send some units.

Japan can make the US wait longer to send ships and planes down to ANZAC by using its navy as a shield. I as Allies, I made tactical blunder ruining my chance to meet the Jap onslaught of India from behind through Australia. However, if not for this the setup seems very balanced and gave some options to both sides.

A hot topic question will be “what to do with the Russian inf on the Pacific side??”
It is very frustrating for the Russians, if you attack immediately, Japan will bring the heat to wipe them out with now China and Russia give large concessions to Japan $$$. If you stack and sit. Japan has to garrison Manchu with a small force but continues to spearhead to India. I figure as the Russians, you have to attack with the 18 inf at some point. The hard part is when. Timing is everything in this decision.

With US entering the war at turn 2, the US began to throw a good amount of cash to the European side, mainly because of the blunder in the Pacific- India would not last long now- 2-3 more rounds. I recovered nicely putting pressure on the French coast quickly until I made another tactical error involving Gibraltar- arrggh!!!- new rules and new map takes a little while getting used to.  :-(

Besides these 2 blunders, I thought the Global game was pretty fair and balanced with a slight edge to the Allies. I definitely think the Allies are a little easier to play because that sides is spilt into 6 sub parts (countries) that are easy to prepare while you are waiting for the Axis to finish. The Axis with so many more units in the beginning, take longer and you have to be very efficient both in the short-term and the long-term planning.

Anyway that was are anaylsis so I hope it helps.  :-)