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

Japan can take India with a good plan well executed, but that requires they practically empty out Manchuria and Korea of troops to have enough - and even then it’s probably 50/50 against an equally skilled opponent.  India first seems like the most solid gambit.  India can be weakened with SBR and by taking Malaya, Hong Kong, and Borneo right away, leaving them with only 7 IPCs.  Point - India isn’t too bad as is.

Russia on the other hand, needs tweaking.  First, my gripe about the Soviet Far East.  The 18 Infantry that are inexplicably stationed in SFE are a nightmare to handle.  They are supposed to be pulled out and sent back to Moscow, but my opponent likes to have them sit there and menace me.  The last game we played, he invaded Korea and set up a minor IC - then proceeded to build a submarine each round into the Sea of Japan.  By the rules, you cannot load transports from a zone in combat, so until Japan liberates Korea, each and every round Japan was unable to load transports from Japan during the Combat Phase, due to the one submarine each round - it ruined my ability to invade Honolulu which was essentially undefended.  I think the power that declares war should provide the other with much more than 12 IPCs - perhaps 30?  The current SFE setup ONLY favors Russia - that’s lame.

Also, Russia has a few too many Infantry to work with.  In G3 or G4 when Germany is most likely to want to invade, Germany is always already outnumbered by Russian troops.  As long as the Russian player isn’t dumb and places them in the correct zones, it’s extremely difficult for Germany to make a 50/50 shot at Moscow.  That’s all I want - a 50/50 shot assuming average die rolls.

@shadowguidex:

… then proceeded to build a submarine each round into the Sea of Japan.  By the rules, you cannot load transports from a zone in combat, so until Japan liberates Korea, each and every round Japan was unable to load transports from Japan during the Combat Phase, due to the one submarine each round - it ruined my ability to invade Honolulu which was essentially undefended…

Submarines don’t block movement or prevent loading, even if you attack the submarines in that seazone.  Transports can still load and move during the combat phase.  They can also load and move during the noncombat phase.

In Alpha 2.0 they prevent unloading during the combat phase only, but only if the player performing the amphibious assault (the ONLY way to unload during the combat phase) doesn’t also have a surface warship present.

Now, if he’d built a destroyer, that’s another matter.

Would adding say 5 tanks and 3 infantry to Germany do the trick perhaps?  That might cause the Russians to feel some pressure early and create need for Allied intervention to save the Soviets bacon.

If Italy is going to remain a broken design then I think Germany has to become pretty powerful to give the Axis a close to 50/50 chance at victory.

I admit to being highly confused with the new sub rules as well, are you sure enemy subs only block unloading and not loading in combat movement?  Also you’re sure they don’t block in noncom?

how do I acquire a copy of the alpha two changes?  Do the Japanese destroyers have the option of trasporting one infantry as in the pacific game? If so, should incorporate due to the low number of Jap transports. Also, for playability, America is enormous. Maybe start USA with $40 or $42 and then add $25

MThomas969@aol.com

@JimmyHat:

I admit to being highly confused with the new sub rules as well, are you sure enemy subs only block unloading and not loading in combat movement?  Also you’re sure they don’t block in noncom?

Yes.  Well, I’m 99% sure.  I admit that exceptions trip me up, but, the logic breaks it down like so:

Transports cannot load from a hostile (or contested) seazone.
Enemy subs alone do not make a seazone hostile (nor contested).

Transports thus can load from a seazone containing subs.  It’s a rule that’s been around since AA50 (page 14).

As for the Noncombat move block that’s established by Alpha 2.  They prevent amphibious assaults from occuring if there isn’t a surface warship (owned by the transports power, friendlies don’t count) in the seazone with the transport.  That’s the only thing they prevent.  Thus, noncombat drops in friendly territory are not blocked.

If I can get 2 games in this weekend I’ll convince the guys to change it up and try something a little different.
   Three weeks ago I mentioned it to them and I got weird looks, the week before that when we went to set the second game two of them looked at the set ups on the lids and looked at me and back to the lids.
   I need to have 2 boards set up one of each set up.
   I also had a thought about, if people think Japan is to weak to be in it after 12 or so round, to give them the OOB set up with the ALPHA+2 rules
  When they start to get board with the board try something diff.
                                          Cool tanks

Frank, I routinely take Australia with Japan lately.  I don’t think it’s very far away at all, and it’s pretty much Japan’s only hope of having enough income to counter the Americans.

@kcdzim:

Yes.  Well, I’m 99% sure.  I admit that exceptions trip me up, but, the logic breaks it down like so:

Transports cannot load from a hostile (or contested) seazone.
Enemy subs alone do not make a seazone hostile (nor contested).

Transports thus can load from a seazone containing subs.  It’s a rule that’s been around since AA50 (page 14).

As for the Noncombat move block that’s established by Alpha 2.  They prevent amphibious assaults from occuring if there isn’t a surface warship (owned by the transports power, friendlies don’t count) in the seazone with the transport.  That’s the only thing they prevent.  Thus, noncombat drops in friendly territory are not blocked.

That’s correct, except for the “(or contested)” part.  Only a hostile sea zone will prevent loading.

@sargon:

how do I acquire a copy of the alpha two changes?

They can be found here.

@sargon:

Do the Japanese destroyers have the option of trasporting one infantry as in the pacific game?

No.

Is the rule where you can load in a zone with enemy ships on the turn you declare war thrown out then?

No.  That exception is still in effect.

Are there anymore changes in consideration?  Beta coming soon?

@Krieghund:

That’s correct, except for the “(or contested)” part.  Only a hostile sea zone will prevent loading.

Is there a difference?  Admittedly, I referred to the AA50 book online (smaller file, easier to refer to), and “contested” is a word specific to the transport loading rule on p14.  I assumed they meant exactly the same thing as it says “You cannot load units while in the original contested sea zone.”

The Pac 1940 rule book cleaned up the language, but considering many of us are familiar with old nomenclature, I thought it was better to include the old language.

“Contested” is one of the terms we’ve specifically tried to clean up.  It should refer only to a space in which combat will occur or is occurring in during the current turn.

A sea zone can be contested without being hostile, if the only enemy units in it are subs and/or transports and those units are being attacked.  Such a sea zone would not prevent transport loading.

The Allies won last nite. Some bad opening rolls for Germany didnt help, everybody had their fair share of them. It came down to Japan getting weaker and weaker after round 8 or so,  and buy 20 there was just no way. 
  A few key battles with better rolls on one side or the other would have changed the outcome
  A very good game back and forth
  ALPHA+3 ???  I CANT WAIT !!!

Since Alpha + 3 won’t be released as soon as expected, i will try to contribute to this thread with my game play report .

Before i get to start, i just want to point out something : i’m a noob to play by forum, just started a few weeks ago in here, but been playing intensively since then. I see myself as an average player, nothing more (or maybe slightly above average, well i hope so anyway  :-D).

With few words, this is what happens in my games with that Kill Japan First strat that has been presented by Cmdr Jennifer : Japan gets crushed. That’s a fact. I won’t even try to deny it.

But on the europe theater, Germany ALONE is able to patiently build a stack and push into Russia to the point where when finally US decide to swing to Europe theater, it is usually too late to save Russia, and once moscou falls, there is no taking it back. Ever.

Here are 7 links to my finished games on this site.

1-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23096.165

2-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23122.0

3-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23384.0

4-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23428.0

5-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23662.0

6-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23589.0

7-  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23174.0

I was Axis on 5 of these 7 games. My only loss comes from a Kill italy first strategy (game 2) where my oponent found himself incapable of cracking it and reversed to hammer Japan when Africa was too strongly holded by UK for the Italians to become a threat for a while. Germany has spent so much to protect the Italians that the Russian became a really too tough nut to crack.

On all the other games where i was Axis (game 1, 3, 4, 5) my oponent went for the Kill Japan First Strat, and while my Japan is really under heavy pressure, i’m doing well on the Europe theater.

Game 4, IMO, is interesting. We just have about all the components of the KJF strat underlined in this thread. Japan has finally been kicked off his precious sz6 and is completely dominated buy the allies (lol US has 12 bmb in the pacific), even if a big italian fleet is there to help. Russia has exactly the kind of stack we are talking about here : over 70 inf on the board, some art, 12 planes !! Still, i think that this game cannot be salvaged by the allies now. The german ofensive is just too powerful and will get rid fo Moscou within a few rounds.

Game 7: i was Allies and tryed myself the KJF strat. I must say : my oponent has totally outplayed me in the early rounds with superior positional play, and the salvage of this game was a miracle. I must not have played the KJF correctly i guess…

From home live games, i can say that our group hasn’t find either the KJF strat as strong as described in this thread, but i must admit we only tryed it twice in live games.

At my level of play, i can say this : CLEARLY, the KJF strat is not the most dangerous strat for the Axis from my gameplay experience.

My worst nightmare when i play Axis is this : an oponent who will spend at least 40% of his US income in the Atlantic each turn, starting round 2 AND stay in control in the pacific. And by staying in control i mean whatever it takes to just deny victory to Japan, not trying to be the big boss in the pacific.

Cheers !

I’m not opening the maps, but I can say that the neutralize Japan first strategies that fail all have one thing in common:

America buys transports.

America does not need transports!  You only need 4 ground units to take ALL OF THE PACIFIC!  You need warships!

I can also say that the only time the strategy almost fails before recovering is because America spends too much time in the DEI.  Screw the DEI!  Let Australia and England crack that nut, you need to bottle the Japs up in SZ 6!

In every case in which the Americans go in through the North or Central Pacific, the Neutralize Japan First strategy works by round 9 or 10, from that point on, Japan is not really playing anymore and America can focus on Africa which quickly falls!

Thanks for the links, Axisplaya.  Proof of play is what we need.

Cheers

Alpha 2 is fairly balanced. I feel that perhaps Italy should start with a few more ground units in Europe that may be used against Russia. Other than that, it seems to be fine.

You simply need to wait for new strategies to come out. In most games, Germany goes for a Sealion, or at least prepares for one. An all out attack on Russia is a far better strategy. Indeed, a good British player can even stop an attempted Sealion with a naval build. Yes, you read that right - a naval build. I hate it when British players buy stacks of infantry. They’re useless. They sit in London and do nothing. Build a navy to defeat the Germans.

If America commits entirely to Japan, Japan will fall. That’s the way it should be. There is too much going against Japan in that scenario for any balancing act to change. The problem with that is that Germany will win the game by herself. If she hits Moscow, and she will if America does not step in, then it is game over.

America has to be balanced. The fact that Cmdr Jennifer thinks that a KJF strat, even the northern route that doesn’t use transports, will work is pretty preposterous. Granted, I do agree that hers is the better version of most KJF strats I’ve seen and used, but you must build in the Atlantic too, or you’ve lost to Germany and Italy.

In response to the OP, Alpha 2 is balanced, with a few minor tweaks necessary. Particularly the Mediterranean and Japan’s income.