I’ve run through the game using Global Rules a few times and something has always bothered me (and most of the other players I play with) …the USA is wicked rich. It seems extremely weighted to the USA that they START the game with 52 IPC, and can use this to push out lots of new units and prepare for war. Fact is that while some items were being produced before Dec 7, 1941 - most of it was smaller amounts of defensive measures. The IPC allowance, we feel, is disproportionate to that of historical reality. This essentially allows the USA to collect 156 IPC in the first three rounds to build a massive armada before it enters the war.
To address this issue, we are currently running a game with these criteria: USA starts with 25 IPC. The end of the first round they get 30, end of second round they get 40. For each round after that (or earlier if they are attacked and go to war), they get a base of 70 + any new territories it manages to hold. This, to us, simulates the ramp-up of production in a more realistic way. Otherwise, again, it’s like the USA just gets to build and fortify for a Pacific on-slaught of the Japanese.
I am looking for some constructive feedback to enlighten me on the theory behind the USA raking in so much money - and why our idea is perhaps a wise view (or totally confused).
Thanks.
– Nacho
I’ve run through the game using Global Rules a few times and something has always bothered me (and most of the other players I play with) …the USA is wicked rich. It seems extremely weighted to the USA that they START the game with 52 IPC, and can use this to push out lots of new units and prepare for war. Fact is that while some items were being produced before Dec 7, 1941 - most of it was smaller amounts of defensive measures. The IPC allowance, we feel, is disproportionate to that of historical reality. This essentially allows the USA to collect 156 IPC in the first three rounds to build a massive armada before it enters the war.
To address this issue, we are currently running a game with these criteria: USA starts with 25 IPC. The end of the first round they get 30, end of second round they get 40. For each round after that (or earlier if they are attacked and go to war), they get a base of 70 + any new territories it manages to hold. This, to us, simulates the ramp-up of production in a more realistic way. Otherwise, again, it’s like the USA just gets to build and fortify for a Pacific on-slaught of the Japanese.
I am looking for some constructive feedback to enlighten me on the theory behind the USA raking in so much money - and why our idea is perhaps a wise view (or totally confused).
Thanks.
– Nacho
Nacho, you are absolutly correct about the huge U.S. pre-war income. At the end of round three they can have a giant fleet already in position to strike in round four with massive reinforcements on the way. I have posted an income schedule under house rules that I am going to play test in our session this very day. Will probably take two sessions to complete.
I disagree.
USA needs the income or they’ve got no hope of stopping Japan from winning the game in the Pacific. Particularly with Larry’s latest setup, the game is properly balanced for USA to be starting at 52.
I agree with Domicron, it’s needed for balance. Otherwise the game is just a walk over for the axis.
You’ll see aswell that there is a DIRE need for the U.S. player to be experienced, and know what they are doing.
I’ve run through the game using Global Rules a few times and something has always bothered me (and most of the other players I play with) …the USA is wicked rich. It seems extremely weighted to the USA that they START the game with 52 IPC, and can use this to push out lots of new units and prepare for war. Fact is that while some items were being produced before Dec 7, 1941 - most of it was smaller amounts of defensive measures. The IPC allowance, we feel, is disproportionate to that of historical reality. This essentially allows the USA to collect 156 IPC in the first three rounds to build a massive armada before it enters the war.
To address this issue, we are currently running a game with these criteria: USA starts with 25 IPC. The end of the first round they get 30, end of second round they get 40. For each round after that (or earlier if they are attacked and go to war), they get a base of 70 + any new territories it manages to hold. This, to us, simulates the ramp-up of production in a more realistic way. Otherwise, again, it’s like the USA just gets to build and fortify for a Pacific on-slaught of the Japanese.
I am looking for some constructive feedback to enlighten me on the theory behind the USA raking in so much money - and why our idea is perhaps a wise view (or totally confused).
Thanks.
– NachoNacho, you are absolutly correct about the huge U.S. pre-war income. At the end of round three they can have a giant fleet already in position to strike in round four with massive reinforcements on the way. I have posted an income schedule under house rules that I am going to play test in our session this very day. Will probably take two sessions to complete.
I look forward to hearing your report on how it went. I too am testing a new IPC schedule for the USA and will share too.
Gargantua and domicron right. its so the us can effectively fight a two front war. its needed for balance and FDR had started a big build up of the armed forces because he knew that the us couldn’t stay out of the war forever. it wasn’t as big as the war time build up but it was still pretty big.
Perhaps those that disagree with my position that the U.S. pre-war income is too high should check my proposed schedule under house rules. We played six rounds of Alpha+1 today using that schedule. The U.S. still gets the same amount of income just not as quick. I will post the results of the game so far as soon as I can take some photos. Probably tomorrow. The income schedule we used slowed down the U.S. a little but they are still putting a lot of pressure on the Japanese. Well more on that tomorrow.
