Balanced???

Global 42 is an official axis and allies game. Some might not be aware of it or the fact it was designed for tournament play. It’s been out for several years now. 7 full rounds at which point you count axis controlled IPCs (not counting NOs). If Axis have 125 IPCs on the board they win.

But the point of this thread is about the balance it provides. Granted, it’s almost a totally different game than G40. And many discussions have focused on the idea of balance. Interestingly, I think the turn order is the main reason. Plus it’s kind of nostalgic (when remembering the turn order of Classic/Revised):
Russia
Japan
America
China
Germany
British/UK Pacific
Italy
ANZAC
France

Japan: Starts with 14 planes as opposed to 21. Has the option to conduct a risky naval opener. It may achieve a head start for limited naval supremacy. It could also get India on round 3 if the UK player isn’t careful. However, Japan could easily fall apart due to having 7 less planes and risky opener battles.

Germany: No longer has the Italian can opener threat. This is huge and really changes the dynamics. Germany gets attacked by Russia first, and has to re-cock. German units are in N. Africa and in the Med is a destroyer n’ transport. However, Germany can’t easily go everywhere like it can in G40.

For 7 rounds, the Axis can rampage and win according to the tournament victory rules.

However, if playing according to the regular OOB rules for victory, I think this setup leans Allies but not as much as G40 leans Axis.
Is this a balanced setup as is or would the axis need a small bid, maybe 3-10 IPCs. I think a small bid would make the Global very balanced and probably more fun for both sides.

Nerquen is a master of the game, and in our second game of giving up 2 big new US NO’s and the ANZAC NO, I still have the upper hand I think.  GREAT game, keep watching

@Baron:

@Young:

Actually, scrap that… I love the simplicity of building new factories on victory cities only. However, I did use your fixed setup idea for a few things and changed how factories are downgraded, checkout the changes to the profiles in post #1.

As far as I understand, you cannot buy any Factory.
But, is it possible to the initial owner to upgrade an IC to his former status once it has been downgraded in a Major Factory due to an earlier conquest?
If not, then there is no need to provide the price of any Factory, this should be deleted to avoid ambiguity.

I have since moved this topic to house rules, there you will find an updated rule discription that will answer your questions… I’m getting very excited about this idea and I’ll be making a YouTube video this weekend explaining it.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34493.0

@poloplayer15:

Young Grasshopper has the right idea. The only way that you and your group will get better is by beating him. Each game you will get better. you will minimize your mistakes and capitalize on his. This is how i became a better player. my friend would always crush me. his German juggernaut verses my pathetic red army. Now its pretty even every time Barbarossa happens, and its not just on one front. Its world wide i can stem his advance or cripple his force so much he has to think twice before attacking.

On top of that, try to play against multiple different players, either on this forum, or on TripleA.  You can learn a lot of new and effective strategies.

I strongly believe the US should not collect income until attacked and am happy with their set up in a3. Once attacked, or T3,  they should get a massive bonus, either a one off, or perhaps simply doubling the A3 revisions would suffice.

@suprise:

The A +3 seems to make it easier for the Allies than the A +2
  Still more testing to be done. the Axis could use 24$  extra at the start to share or give to one and place the pieces before the purchase  or include with the purchase and put them out at deployment something an extra little kick or something
  I was hoping for a more balanced game  but that was just the 1st one
  More testing still to be done

I don’t know about an extra 24 ipcs, im thinking maybe a bid for axis that starts at like 20-24 is best.

I might be able to play against your axis too otahere. if you don’t mind little long waits between some turns.

What he is trying to say at least I believe is that the strategies will always focus around capturing VC. He prefers creative strategies where VC are unimportant and the idea is to knock out your opponent. The problem in his logic is that this is a historical game and historically there were certain cities that were essential to winning the war. Capturing Paris won the war against France, the German failure to take Stalingrad was a turning point in the Eastern campaign, so on and so forth. While I can understand his point the fact is that the victory cities are located in the strategic centers (for the most part) even if there were no VC in them those are still the territories you would want to attack and take over so it kind of makes the arguement null and void.

I would abuse improved shipyards right off the bat. I would make sure that the USA had the only floating major navy in both oceans. No point of having an edge if you don’t abuse it. And Japan can’t get its cites if they have no fleet.