Balance Idea: Remove the Gibraltar Naval Base

I cannot see a way to stop the US from crushing Italy shortly after the US enters the war. I’ve gone through many different strategies of trying to stop or slow the US, and they can pretty much ignore everything else, including an occupied Britain and fleets off the their West Coast. Those do next to nothing against a player who stays on target. The game is basically over by turn five no matter how far Germany and Japan have progressed. Even if the Axis have played perfectly and are on the verge of owning Asia and advancing on Moscow (this is being generous), Italy is still going to be struggling in Africa and will hardly have anything to counter the US fleet, air power, and the sheer number of troops that will be landing every single turn.

In addition to that, there’s little reason for the UK to not cripple Italy by destroying Italian ships first turn. There’s really nothing the Axis can do to prevent this. Germany has to give some ridiculous bait to lure the UK aircraft carrier north and prevent it from destroying Italian ships. And then, well, you’ve weakened Germany so win either way. Even the Sealion threat shouldn’t deter the UK from doing this. This hurts Italy so badly that it makes it really not fun to play. Starting out with 10 income, no good way to get one of their national objectives for most of the game, and having a heck of a time making any headway into Africa pretty much seals Italy’s fate.

I don’t think this is a cure-all for the balance issues, but but here’s what removing the Gibraltar naval base could do:

• Give the Italian battleship a decent chance of survival.

• Make Italy’s counter-attack on the UK forces more likely to succeed, or let German planes do the work for less potential loss of aircraft.

• Allow Italy to just maybe collect their Mediterranean NO for a while.

• Let Italy grow a decent fleet while still putting troops into Africa before tangling with the US.

• Let Italy hit Tunis/Algeria/Morocco/Gibraltar while still putting troops into Egypt.

• Slow the US by one turn getting to Italy.

• Remove Gibraltar as the destination of choice for all US ships, and force the US to decide whether to go north or south.

• Give Italy a chance to occupy Gibraltar, giving them another turn to slow down US forces.

• Really allow a German Yugoslavia IC the chance to make a difference in the Med and Africa.

I feel that the Allies are still too strong to start in the Med with this change, but it would be a start.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Can balance issues please focus on weakening the US and not the UK? The UK is already very weak, and removing that naval base(with historically should be there) just gives Africa to the Italians.

Two points:

1. The UK is hardly weak. It can fall to Germany, but the chances of Italy ever taking anything of importance in Africa by the time the US arrives is slim. Even with the capital gone, they are still a viable force in Africa and all they need to do is hold, if that.

2. I see nothing historical about the US using Gibraltar as the staging ground for directly invading Italy AND Germany. You can imagine there is a base there, but it should not be granting extra movement to hit such far-flung targets. There are plenty of other bases that aren’t represented in game terms. Operation Torch isn’t even a consideration because the Axis will never even get into French North Africa, so there goes accuracy.

@oztea:

The gibraltar naval base can not be removed, it is 100% historical.
I think Italy should start with a bomber
Thats it

They can bomb the Gibraltar port between the US and UK turns so the UK cant repair it before the US can use it.
This is historical because Italy bombed both Malta and Gibraltar regularly during the war
This also comes in handy on earler turns to give italy that “slight” advantage it needs.

To balance this there might need to be an AA gun added to Egypt

I usualy buy a bomber on I2 or I3 just so I can start bombing Gibraltar.

You could not bomb it first turn when it is sorely needed, and it’s certainly not a guaranteed thing. When the US is in the war and they are using it to stage all attacks, it would be ridiculously easy to stop the bombing run.

And balance with a free AA gun in Egypt? Now that’s just silly.

@calvinhobbesliker:

If Italy remains with the two transports, then Egypt and eventually most of Africa will fall, especially with a Sealion and the alpha setup reducing India to 3 planes. If Japan doesn’t attack until turn 4, US can’t move to Z91 until US$, and it will be US5 before they can invade anything. An Italian block of Z92 delays this until US6, by which time, Italy should have a sizable fleet and multiple transports and ground units in Africa.

2. I see nothing historical about the entire royal navy being sunk by submarines and planes. If you’re going to remove the Gibraltar naval base, might as well remove the one on Queensland(since the US never used it to attack the DEI).

The “alpha” setup is just silly in the global context and shouldn’t be considered outside of trying to balance the Pacific game. Italy only has a fighting chance if left with some of it’s navy. It’s certainly not assured even if the UK doesn’t bring over fighters. If you are having trouble holding Africa until the US arrives, you should re-examine your strategies.

Your #2 does not follow.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Why not? Any setup change should apply to both games.
What does Italy usually do in your games?

Because the Axis don’t need to be weakened in the global game.

@calvinhobbesliker:

#2 is using your argument(Although a base is historical, an ally never used it to take x, so we should remove the base since the game clearly favors the side with said base) and applying it to Queensland.

I posted the reasons why it should be removed. They are very clear if go back and read the topic. “It’s historical” is not in a good reason to keep it in my opinion. It’s an abstracted game, not a reenactment. I also pointed out that it’s use in this game isn’t historical anyway. The Queensland base does what for balance? Nothing I can see. Removing it does not help out Italy or anything else that needs to be addressed.

I posted an alternate balance idea in another thread you posted in.

@calvinhobbesliker:

As for Italy not having a fighting chance without its navy, that is incorrect. It can take Egypt, fly in German planes, and builda minor in Egypt, meaning it no longer needs navy to take Africa. With the NB and the Suez open, Italy can reach down to Tanzania. Additionally, transports in Z97 can invade Sudan. I don’t think you are playing Italy correctly.

So, let’s say Italy does take Egypt. Let’s not go completely crazy and say they are able to do this on turn 2 and the UK didn’t fly over any planes. Now Germany is risking their fighters on clearing pickets or what? I dunno. So third turn Italy is sailing around with it’s mere two troops and building an IC. Let’s say they’ve made it to Sudan. Hey, just three more turns until they get to South Africa! Maybe those two troops on the transport will get the drop on South Africa with some fighter support. Oh, and the UK apparently didn’t buy anything there…because Germany did Sealion (I’m guessing), which of course cost Germany the game, but whatever. Good job Italy. Now how are you going to stop the US?

@calvinhobbesliker:

Balance does not necessarily mean helping Italy. Removing Queensland NB prevents all the DEI from being reached.

Weakening the Allies in the Pacific, and the already least effective Ally next to France at that, isn’t going to balance the game at all. It just makes ANZAC a bit less fun to play.

@calvinhobbesliker:

The alpha setup weakens both sides equally, removing the same number of planes from both sides and also removing 2 allied transports and 1 Japanese transport. It reduces the number of Indian planes by 2, which would help Italy.

Not even close.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Germany does not lose the game by doing Sealion. Its multiple transports allow lots of units to be shipped into Russia(for example, into Novgorod or Nenetsia).

Fat lot of good that’s going to do. See the numerous play reports. If you’ve got something that works, make a thread on it and tell us your strategy.

If the game is unbalanced, just weaken the US by finding a way to reduce its income or something. Don’t weaken the UK in the only theater it has a chance in.

A fairer fight between Italian and UK forces is much preferable to this notion of giving something to the UK.

I’m up for a game to test these ideas. Since you think alpha weakens the axis, I’ll play axis and we can use the alpha setup.

What exactly did you want to test? That the Allies simply crush the Axis as the game is today? I think you could get this from basically playing anyone or reading the battle reports. I myself haven’t played online in nearly a decade and don’t really have the time or inclination to do so anymore.

@Imperious:

Move the UK carrier and DD to another location so that it cant attack, or just use my original idea:

Italy is neutral until her turn, sop she cant be attacked. ON her turn SHE begins her war, not England.

Moving the carrier would work. My idea was to help with both issues of the immediate sinking of the Italian fleet and the immense movement bonus later for the US.

A neutral Italy isn’t a bad idea, however Italy had already declared war at this point. I suppose you could flub it.