How is the balance with the new Alpha 2 changes? Please give your view.

@eudemonist:

Where do fighter escorts stage for a bomb run on Germany?  Carriers off Denmark?

One could stage fighters on carriers for this, but it seems more common to have them on Norway.  Make Norway Russian controlled, reinforce the heck out of it with American aircraft and British ground units and set up your SBR runs from there.

If I lose Norway as Germany, the writing is on the wall for me.

@taschuler:

If I lose Norway as Germany, the writing is on the wall for me.

It’s pretty rare I see Norway survive if Germany does not go Sea Lion.

This American all-pacific strategy sorta requires that A&A40 Europe be broken, doesn’t it?  This requires that Moscow be absolutely impenetrable in the standalone game……it is not.  This strat is testable by playing each game standalone.

This entire strategy requires Moscow to somehow hold out.  Nevermind the Pacific, play Europe alone with no American involvement for 8 turns.  The strategy has nothing to do with the Pacific whatsoever, does it?  It is really a balance question about Europe, specifically the viability of Barbarossa.

If I take UK with Sealion on G3 or G4, I’m going to take Leningrad and Stalingrad both before G8, guaranteed, with no American involvement.  Game over.

Additionally, all the talk of tossing away 3 DD a round to stop American advance by sea is sorta ridiculous when you taken into account noncombat movement, isn’t it?  I kill the Jap DD with air units, then advance in NCM anyway with my entire fleet.  They can block movement of the main fleet for a single round, not round after round losing 24 IPC per round, or whatever number you conjured up to account for losses of DD that nobody actually ever does.  If I want my American fleet in SJ6, I’ll have it there in at most two rounds assuming they’re stationed in Hawaii.

You spend WAY too much time crafting theory, and WAY too little time implementing them.  You have almost no concrete examples of how games have played out for you, it’s just all talk of how things might go, or may go.  Tell me how this strategy works against a good Axis player.

Additionally, as the Japan player, I’m going to grab the DEI for the 20, and Malaya since you’ve got India sending units towards the middle east.  I’ll take Phillipines denying you that NO, so your 75 is now only 70.  I can easily grab two islands, so you’re now at 65.  Guess what I’m at…yes, also 65.  Your strat demands that you outpace my fleet 900 to 500…well, we’re at general parity right now, so I’d like to see your resolution.  ANZAC isn’t building fleet because I’m threatening from my Naval base at…well pick one, Phillipines most likely.

Also, America has to ferry most of their builds from the East coast since the West is limited to 3 units per round until your build on A3.  I just don’t see you stopping my economic gains flat cold to be able to get such a huge lead on fleet size.

Best you can hope for is pressuring Japan from grabbing the final VC, while simultaneously (because I don’t think Europe is broken) pushing for Rome, Egypt, or Paris since my Germany will take Moscow.

Well first off I think it is a poor move for the allies to have Calcutta produce and defend the Middle East.  They should be at most sending 1 inf 1 arm and perhaps an art and that should be enough to capture Iraq. (2 inf added in Persia)  Calcutta’s primary concern after sending that token force west is to capture and hold SE Asia, adding Siam and FIC to their coffers.  Also Calcutta is need to take China’s ass outta the fire and save the day in Asia.

In the All Pacfic American build they don’t deal with the land war, that’s China/Calcutta and perhaps Russias job.  USA takes the islands, controls the seas and perhaps builds an IC in Philippines or Celebres.  If done right I see Japan at most having 6 rounds of fun in the pacific before their options are so limited its flee the pacific or die.

Shadow,

You make one bad assumption in your arguments.  You assume OOB rules, since there are no Alpha 2 Global Rules for Europe only. (otherwise, it would be Alpha 2 Europe, no?).  OOB Europe probably isn’t “broken” but then, America cannot go 100% against Japan in Europe because Japan does not exist in Europe.

Alpha 2, a wise Russia, will not fall before Round 13 or 14.  A moderate Russia will not fall before Round 10 and only the worst Russian players will fall before Round 10 since it pretty much means you have to build nothing but tanks and planes and leave no blitz blockers to achieve that!

Sure, Germany COULD ignore England and go all in on Russia and maybe if they did that, they could get Muskva before Round 10.  The problem there is, Russia still achieved it’s goal, it prevented Germany from getting a Victory City win before Round 10 AND, America can more readily reinforce England than it can Russia!  So Muskva falling before London is probably a major boon to the allies!  Maybe more than probably, perhaps almost certainly!

Now, first, you are not getting London on Germany 3.  I won’t let it.  You would have to get almost perfect dice on Germany 1 to even have a slightly better than average chance at it.  So let’s assume round 4, eh?  By then, Russia’s going to be at war with you (invading you this round) so you are either tied up with all your units in transport range and very weak against Russia, or with not enough units for the amphibious but enough to keep Russia out.  But let’s assume you run into someone who builds in Canada or Africa with England and thus cannot readily stop Sea Lion.

You say you will have Stalingrad AND Leningrad AND London?  I highly doubt it.  How?  I mean, before round 12 or 13 at which time you have lost London.  There’s no way you are punching through a 50 infantry, 20 artillery, 15 armor army to get anything major in the Russian territories.  Perhaps you will get S. Ukraine OR Novgorod, but I doubt you’ll have Volgorod and Novgorod at any point in the game.

Pacific Side:  Japan won’t be getting the DEI.  I’ll have enough fleet positioned to sink the Japanese one if it moves away from the Philippines and with a combined navy of at least 750 if not 1000 IPCs (not including air power) the Japanese fleet won’t be attacking me.  England should be giving me: 1 Battleship, 2 Cruisers, 2 Destroyers, 1 Aircraft Carrier, 2 Fighters, 2 Transports; Australia should have at least 1 transport, 3 fighters, 1 cruiser, 4 or 5 destroyers and half a dozen submarines to augment the Americans with (airbase for their fighters for added defense.)

At best, Japan will have 40 IPC by round 6, 35 IPC by round 8 and 20 IPC by round 10 - or so it has been achieved in quite a few games now.

As for England in the Middle East, please keep in mind they go there AFTER China is secure.  Once Japan is investing 100% into the ocean to stop themselves from having 0 income (after Convoy raids) China and some units from India and Russia should easily liberate territories and keep the Japanese contained in Manchuria/Korea (where they can be convoyed to death.)  It is then, and only then, England is heavily invested in the Middle East…and we’re talking about round 8, which is about when Italy is getting there as well.

Overall:

England takes Sumatra, Java, E. Persia, C. Persia, NW. Persia
Australia takes Dutch New Guinea
America takes Formosa, Okinawa, Celebes, Iwo Jima, Mariannas, Pauline, Hainan (latter three if needed to stop an all out air blitz by Japan if the dice are early, else, no point in them they are not worth anything.)

Russia, pulling back, can easily smash whatever Japan sends into Yakut/Yenisey and then push a few infantry back into the far east.
China, pulling the fighter back to Burma to be saved by England if it becomes necessary, should easily get a few dozen infantry and at least a dozen artillery to hold Japanese forces in Manchuria.

From there, it’s all a matter of keeping Germany from getting either London or Moscow depending of in they went Barbarossa or Sea Lion.  That’s so easy it isn’t even funny!  Germany needs 3 infantry for every 1 defending infantry.  That means 20 IPC defense equates to 60 IPC offense needed to win.  Worse, Defense is added immediately, offense has to move there.  That takes time and money.  Time and money that are fast running out for the Axis as America, with 100 IPC a round, is coming to bear on the Atlantic, clearing it, taking Brazil, landing troops below the Sahara, taking Gibraltar, massing an invasion of London from Gibraltar/Canada/Iceland, preparing to drop troops in Norway, France, Italy….

OOB was more scewed towards the allies than A+2, so quite the contrary, I’m seeing a more powerful Germany than before.  According to your premise, you’re saying A+2 Europe is so impossible for Germany/Italy to win that America can abandon Europe and go total Pacific, and your conclusion was OOB was EASIER to facilitate this than A+2.  Interesting.

Now, I will take DEI with Japan, every single game.  It’s up to you as the allies to take them back.  I will take Phillipines.  I will take either Sydney or Calcutta.  The fourth VC is the breaking point where I may or may not fail - accumulated dice rolls from the entire game up until then will decide where Japan’s fate goes from there.  I always take DEI and 3 VC.  You can go all out America for A1, A2, A3, but those rounds are only at 52 and most builds are introduced in the East because of the minor industrial rule.  On A4 you’re only collecting 70 since I’ll have Phillipines - this build can get you close to fleet parity but that’s ok since I’ll be done building transports and troops.  On A5 you’ll be collecting 65 since I’ll have 5/7 Islands.  You’re clearly not building transports to reclaim islands or territories since you’re just building fleet.  On that very round, I’ll be collecting at a parity. (26 original, 5+ China, 20 DEI, 5/7, Malaya, Phillipines, Hong Kong).  Coincidentally, that round I’m crushing at Sydney to win, and most of your new fleet is at Western or Hawaii.  I can outright beat you in IPCs on J5 and continue the trend in J6+.  Now against you, I’ll assume I don’t have that window and will need to stockpile my TRN and Troops better for a round or two, but baiting you seems like a good tactic as fleets fair well in defense.  You’re too obsessed with SZ6, I’d exploit that.  Additionally, Nothing juicier than an ANZAC who tries to build a fleet on turns one and two when they have only a token inf force defending.  If I see that, then I’m taking Sydney, Hong Kong, Phillipines, and 2/4 DEI on J4, and I’d love to see you concentrate on SZ6 them, since I’d just walk on int to Honolulu.

Sigh…yeah, it looks like you got it all figured out then.

Within the 50 odd pages of this thread, the 100% US Pacific strat is spelled out, at least how to build a huge american fleet that the Japanese cannot ignore.  One powerful enough to take whichever sz’s it wants.  In all my games of Alpha 2, I have yet to take Calcutta or Sydney as Japan, and that’s with all types of US builds other than 100% Pacific.  You must truly be a master if you can pull all these Jap moves off with a strong Allied player across from you.  With such bold statements like ‘I take DEI, Philipines, and my pick of Sydney and Calcutta’ you had better explain those moves so that we are all up to speed with your uber-strategy.

Would also like to add that I am not sold on the crushing strength of the US 100% pacific build just yet.

If you can’t take VCs with Japan, then of course any American strategy will seem uber.

Here is my generic Japan Strategy, which I heavily modify depending on the flavor of the day…nothing special.

Build 3 Transports with Japan on J1.  Attack into China with planes and infantry, leave all your Artillery on the coastal territories since these Artillery will be used for all your Amphibious assaults - don’t bring Artillery into China it’s a waste, use aircraft or just dont go far into China (defined at more than two zones inside China).  Move your bombarding ships south with your transports, keep the carriers and about 4 aircraft at Carolines - always have the replacement planes ready for each carrier.  Build 4 transports on J2.  J3 you attack with fleet and 10 transports each loaded with inf and art.  Attack Hong Kong by land, Phillipines and all 4 DEI by amphibious assault.  USA will have their fleet at Western or you just attack Hawaii since you’ll win in J3 no problem since their builds are largely on the East Coast and take two turns to unite at Hawaii.  J4 take Malaya or crush towards Sydney if most of your infantry survived.  Don’t leave any transports undefended since those 10 need to last the remainder of the game.  Your fleets should be at Japan, Carolines, or Phillipines at this point.  Now it’s too far out to game plan, but next step is either Calcutta or Sydney - you have 10 TRN to get the job done and plenty of aircraft.  As long as you use Naval Bases, Japan can whip around the Pacific quickly and efficiently.

@shadowguidex:

This American all-pacific strategy sorta requires that A&A40 Europe be broken, doesn’t it?  This requires that Moscow be absolutely impenetrable in the standalone game……it is not.  This strat is testable by playing each game standalone.

This entire strategy requires Moscow to somehow hold out.  Nevermind the Pacific, play Europe alone with no American involvement for 8 turns.  The strategy has nothing to do with the Pacific whatsoever, does it?  It is really a balance question about Europe, specifically the viability of Barbarossa.

It doesn’t require Europe to be broken (nor the Pacific) as stand alone games.

It does require that Moscow/England can hold out for a number of turns without American involvement, yes. Not that Germany/Italy couldn’t win, but that they can’t win fast enough (consistently).

And if that premise is true - the kicker is that combining America from Global into Pacific game breaks Pacific as a standalone. Which is effectively the situation you’re looking at when the US goes all-in on that side of the board for enough turns to ensure that Japan can’t win, after which you can focus Global America into the Europe game.

So no, it does not require any one of the two single games to be broken.

@JimmyHat:

and perhaps builds an IC in Philippines or Celebres.

Sorry, you can’t do that.

edit: don’t tell me that alpha 2 allows this now? :/

@shadowguidex:

If you can’t take VCs with Japan, then of course any American strategy will seem uber.

Here is my generic Japan Strategy, which I heavily modify depending on the flavor of the day…nothing special.

Build 3 Transports with Japan on J1.  Attack into China with planes and infantry, leave all your Artillery on the coastal territories since these Artillery will be used for all your Amphibious assaults - don’t bring Artillery into China it’s a waste, use aircraft or just dont go far into China (defined at more than two zones inside China).  Move your bombarding ships south with your transports, keep the carriers and about 4 aircraft at Carolines - always have the replacement planes ready for each carrier.  Build 4 transports on J2.  J3 you attack with fleet and 10 transports each loaded with inf and art.  Attack Hong Kong by land, Phillipines and all 4 DEI by amphibious assault.  USA will have their fleet at Western or you just attack Hawaii since you’ll win in J3 no problem since their builds are largely on the East Coast and take two turns to unite at Hawaii.  J4 take Malaya or crush towards Sydney if most of your infantry survived.  Don’t leave any transports undefended since those 10 need to last the remainder of the game.  Your fleets should be at Japan, Carolines, or Phillipines at this point.  Now it’s too far out to game plan, but next step is either Calcutta or Sydney - you have 10 TRN to get the job done and plenty of aircraft.  As long as you use Naval Bases, Japan can whip around the Pacific quickly and efficiently.

The problem I see with that is you are not replacing your land forces in China and you will be losing some every turn to Chinese attacks.  Also UK Calcutta will also be able to help kill your land forces out of China.  And then the US will show up with it’s super mega fleet.  That will force Japan to spend almost all on fleet and that will most likely result in you being kicked out of the 2 victory cities in China. Especially if the 18 Russian Infantry attacked which I think is a very good idea if US is going Pacific first.  Japan is just facing too many opponents and it is around this time that it’s back begins to break.

Once Japan is locked out of the 2 victory cities in China it is very hard to get back in.  China can really fortify each turn with the rules that allow them to place units anywhere in China.  Even if Japan manages to cap Sydney it won’t mean much with Asia on lockdown by the Allies.  At that point US can cruise to Europe and save the day.

I am not sure the all Pacific Strategy breaks the game though.  I am still trying to make up my mind but I actually think it is harder to counter when USA ruins the economy of Italy first with the help of the UK.  In the last 10 or so games of Alpha I have played the Allies are hovering at about an 80-90 win percent ratio.  It does not seem to matter who is controlling which side as the results are coming out the same.  So my current thinking is leaning towards the idea that the Axis still need some minor buffs.

@special:

@JimmyHat:

and perhaps builds an IC in Philippines or Celebres.

Sorry, you can’t do that.

That explains A LOT on why people seem to think the Pac-Strat won’t work!  I understand!  You think you can build complexes on islands!  Well, you cannot, but it sure explains why you are so confused!

Shadowguidex is correct.  Japan cannot build 40 IPC land AND 40 IPC water to win China, Russia, India and the Pacific.  It has to choose, mainland or Pacific.  Most players choose mainland and that peter’s out eventually as Japan takes SERIOUS convoy damage from not having the boats to stop America.

As for Germany/Italy NEVER being able to win, I never said that, and I will never say that.  What I am saying is that America has enough time to contain and neutrallize Japan AND get units to Africa/Europe to pressure Germany BEFORE Germany and Italy can win.  I did not say they would be weak.  I did not say England, France and Russia would be in Berlin/Rome with no America help.

Oh, and for the record, I am thinking an Atlantic Strategy would only be slightly less powerful for America.  Then only because you need enough units in the Pacific to keep Hawaii, Midway, Wake and Aleutians from falling really so you have 4 NOs.

I have yet to play global, put played pacific extensively, and have been playing europe a lot. Does the Global game change it that much to the point it has nothing to do with WW2. Because if America goes all out Pacific, then there must be some serious changes to Germany wich makes them so weak, it would be more like Germany in WW1 fighting Russia and the UK in WW2. If the European theatre is remotes simialar, there is no way Germany would not knock out the Russians without some serious help from America

I have not followed this discussion for a while but I read some. I would like a few of you to comment on this point.

Withou first fixing the historical accuracy, then making a level playing field, you are ruining a game that is rich in history, almost 30 years worth. How many of you out there don’t care if this game has anything to do with WW2. Because another easy fix would be to give the Italians a massive navy parked right off the coast of the USA forcing them fend off a pending invasion of Washington.

The objective of any great game is to keep it as exciting as possible while keeping it simple. The changes I have read about, the Alpha 2 changes are the opposite of keeping it simple.

For balance, simplicity, and accuracy, the Chinese should be much stronger, the Japanese much weaker, but enough of a navy to take Australia, DEI, and even Hawaii if the USA ignores it, with Australia and Hawaii being much bigger prizes that would then make Japan a power house. SIMPLE NO’s like an IPC penaly for losing Hawaii, representing a huge morale loss among the American people, and New Zeland just being a much bigger prize.

But underlying all of this is the biggest problem of every AA game that has ever been produced, wich is, Navy’s take way to much of your production to make any naval actions worth taking unless you absolutely have too. Way too much. You sacrifice much better opportunityelswhere

I played out a couple games of Europe40 the last 24 hours with my A&A partner, given the following mods:

1. No american involvement until turn 8.
2. At turn 8, we give America extra cash - we set this figure at 100 IPCs.
3. On turn 8, we add a large american fleet at Panama including 4 loaded CV.
4. On turns 7,8,9 we added stacks of six infantry at Novosibirsk.

Germany defeated Russia in both games.  It’s just incredibly difficult to turtle up Russia given that Artillery/Infantry nullify the old infantry advantage, and Tank/TAC or Fighter/TAC.

Russia was taken on turn 11 in one game (I played Axis), and turn 12 in the other (I played Allies).  America had conquered Normandy in the first, and had assaulted Rome in the second but failed to acquire it.  The both games ended with Axis at 8/11 VC (Paris, Cairo, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Moscow).

Now this was even considering that America would theoretically be finished with Japan at the beginning of turn 8, which means Japan’s gains and fleet would be totally nullified in turns 4, 5, 6, and 7.  I must also state that America cannot create a 900 IPC fleet by turn 8 - it’s impossible - I’m a math teacher, I know when numbers don’t add up - you’d need to add additional spending to Japan side past round 8 to reach the mystical number, but by my research Germany/Italy have Europe wrapped up by turn 12 (figure turn 14 with bad dice).

I need to fall on the side of the balanced approach for America - I cannot support an all-out Japan OR all-out Europe strategy since either approach requires a broken single theater game.  Sorry Jenn, but I need to see your stratehy flushed out with a LOT more specifics and less generality before I could ever conclude that it has merit.

And Japan marching on Moscow was always utterly ridiculous.

These changes “Jennifer” would obviously have to be offset by, In the Pacific Game, give the US much less IPC’s. Dare I say and equivalent amount of what they really spent against the Japanese. Until Germany fell, only 10% of the US resources went against the Japanese. But they had to devote some resources. They had to defend Australia. That what the battle of Guadalcanal was all about.

In the “Global Game”, give the Germans what they deserve. A chance to have a somewhat successful battle of the Atlantic. Either start the US with less troops so it takes them longer to build up, make German subs cheaper than other nations subs, or give the US its extra war time IPC’s over several turns instead of all at once. That would be more realistic.

Lastly,

The game was not designed to be played exactly how the real war went. Read the introductions to every game version and you will see that. But it was designed to represent a specific period in time, but now you are in charge. There was a point in History, sometime between 1939 and 1940 where the Axis had a decent chance of winning. If the fix makes it more complicated or twists history in a ridiculous way, it ruins the experience.

Axis and allies is about enjoying History and reliving it, otherwise it is not Axis and Allies.