Changes still needed to the game, IMHO

After some thought and analysis, I am drifting away from the NO idea simply because I believe it will give Japan a reason to do a strong J1/J2 gambit.

Some players online have almost cracked a good J1 gambit sacking the game from the beginning- it is proven to fall a little short though and too risky so putting some easy NOs out there would just feed this idea and cause some major problems.

However, Japan is still shortchanged in the sense that the US overwhelms them in later rounds.  We need to beef up Japan yet not give it an advantage in the beginning as to break the game with some easy J1/J2 gambits.

We had a similar problem on the Europe side until Larry fixed this in Alpha2 by adding some infantry.  The only way to beef up the Pacific side a little for Japan w/o giving them a huge advantage in the beginning is to add some slow moving land units.

Therefore I propose a slight beef up on the Pac side of the board that sprinkles some more land units for the Japs:

Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to Shanghai

Thats $31 worth of land material boost for Japan equivalent to a bonus $5 NO for Japan for about 6 rounds- enough to weather the oncoming economic storm from the US in later rounds.

Remember the European board that came out 1999 I think the additional $12 that was given to the Germans and the other $12 was spent by the Allies made it a great game, so what if you did something similar with this game. Maybe $12 to Germany and $12 to Japan and split $24 between USSR UK London UK India and maybe ANZAC. Its just an idea. Try cutting the N.O.'s all,  some or none. One thing we’ve done with the other games is to set up multiple boards 3 for 6 players 2 for 4 players then the players can try their ultimate moves, after the second or third round then its all about tactics to achieve the results your after. When the game is over,trade sides then see what your opponent has in store for ya, the next week switch teammates it can make for great rivalries and rematches. When the weather warms up I’ll be able to set up in my Carriage house and do multiple boards. In the 8 games my group has played its been 3Axis victories, 4Allied victories and 1 undecided, they all were Alpha +2. The Global with the original set ups we’ve only tried about 4 times that was last year and I cant remember the results. We played alot of the Anniversary edition  until I bought both boards in Feb. I think I can’t make a judgment until we play a bunch more games.

I am horrible with the search function on this site, could you post a link to Gargaunta’s thread on the J3 India crush?

My .02 about the Romanian IC is that it helps Germany get infantry to the Russian southern front faster.  Armor gets there 1 round faster, but the factory is really for supplying the russian front with infantry.

The other mission it can provide, if you expect your ally to leave the Med in axis control early, is build a trn in the Black Sea.  This sea no longer borders 2-3 territories, it covers from Greece to the Caucusus.  It borders an Russian IC and a german NO.  If Germany can keep that trns alive, it will give them the power to outflank the Russians.  Best part is, if it can survive it can unload Italians first on I3, and then Germans on G4….

What I don’t see is a cost effective way of protecting that trn from enemy aircraft.  I suppose a carrier build would help, and those aircraft wouldn’t be horribly placed to support advances in the south, but now were talking an additional 23 ipcs spent on non-attacking units.

@JimmyHat:

What I don’t see is a cost effective way of protecting that trn from enemy aircraft.  I suppose a carrier build would help, and those aircraft wouldn’t be horribly placed to support advances in the south, but now were talking an additional 23 ipcs spent on non-attacking units.

maybe like a couple destroyers and an airbase in rom to put some planes in, but that make require too much cash to be taken away from the main front.

I think the problem with the airbase or naval builds in the Black Sea is that if Germany can really afford them, the game is probably close to being over anyway.

Why would you build a Romanian complex as Germany?  The ONLY time where it would be beneficial to build one would be on G1, and you need to build a CV and naval units on that turn anyway to threaten England.

Scenario One

G1

Buy major IC

R1

Russia builds at least 10 land units

G2

Buy 10 INF/ART for Romania

R2

Russia builds at least 10 land units

G3

Buy more land units, usually blitzing units, Barbarossa

R3

Russia builds at least 10 land units

Scenario Two

G1

Germany builds 1 CV 1 SS 1 DD

R1

Russia builds land…

G2

Germany builds major IC in Romania, land units

R2

Russia builds land…

G3

Germany builds INF/ART in Romania, Barbarossa

R3

Russia builds…

OR

Scenario Three

G1, naval, G2, ART, G3 ART/INF or MECH/ARM - should be able to build at least 30 land units between G2’s $70 and G3’s $50.  Germany still has unit advantage against the Soviets, also is able to threaten Sealion with G1 buy and force UK to spend on INF for several turns.  Massive stack of INF and ART from G2 buy should be ready to go for G4 Barbarossa, much the same as if you’d built the IC on G2.  G1 major IC build is slightly faster, but also has less options at beginning of game and UK won’t play so defensively.

Effectively you’re losing an entire turns worth of build by purchasing the major IC in the first place, either on the first turn or the second turn.  If you build it on the second turn you have even MORE of a future land unit deficit in comparison to Russia’s builds (-20 potential land units to their +20).  I could possibly see the need for the major IC with the OOB or Alpha +.1 setup with the starting minor IC in Berlin, but with 20 total production in Alpha +.2 its unnecessary.

Best bang for your buck is all ART on G2.  Follow that up with stacks of MECH/ARM to keep the initial wave’s momentum going all the way through Moscow on G8.

Alot of my threads and posts get deleted,  could be why I can’t find that link either :S

I’m with Blitz on this one.  Skip the complex.

Questioneer’s not far off, but I don’t know… an extra 10 ground units in China, to be used to cap India, basically make the fall of india wholly inevitable.

How about a complex in Korea instead?  Or the Naval Base in Hainan?  Only useful if you use em, but wholly effective, without tipping the balance through malignant troop concentration.

Or double up on the units in places like Okinawa, Carolines, and Iwo Jima.  Make it difficult for the U.S. to capture said islands… or well… atleast make it MORE difficult.

Or Maybe bring back the tokyo express rule, from the original Pacific?  Japanese Desroyers can carry 1 infantry… ?  Give Japan an extra sub and destroyer somewhere, to give the navy a little lasting power?  Navy doesn’t win games after-all.

That said - it’s still pretty close folks.  And whats the ruling on how to stop sea-lion now?  I haven’t seen the theory…

@questioneer:

Add 2inf to Siam
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to Shanghai

Hmm…maybe.  Seems kinda heavy, but I don’t have a board in front of me.

How about:
Siam:  +1 Inf
Korea: +1 Inf, +1 Mec
Jehol:  +1 Inf
Shanghai: +1 Inf

@SgtBlitz:

Why would you build a Romanian complex as Germany?  The ONLY time where it would be beneficial to build one would be on G1, and you need to build a CV and naval units on that turn anyway to threaten England.
(snip)
Effectively you’re losing an entire turns worth of build by purchasing the major IC in the first place, either on the first turn or the second turn.  If you build it on the second turn you have even MORE of a future land unit deficit in comparison to Russia’s builds (-20 potential land units to their +20).  I could possibly see the need for the major IC with the OOB or Alpha +.1 setup with the starting minor IC in Berlin, but with 20 total production in Alpha +.2 its unnecessary.

Best bang for your buck is all ART on G2.  Follow that up with stacks of MECH/ARM to keep the initial wave’s momentum going all the way through Moscow on G8.

i was just comparing, and i suppose you don’t win much time with a Romanian IC (even on turn 1), in fact the opposite…

After 3 turns of building you can either have:

1 major IC (romania) + 30 INF (30 + 30x3 =120IPC)
who can reach Moskou in 4 turns and takes 4 turns to build.

or (for the same money)

30 Mech’s (30x4=120IPC)(which start more faraway but are double as fast)
who can reach Moskou in 3 turns and takes 3 turns to build.

edit: just comparing prices, i’m not saying to buy only mechs all the time ;)

Seems like that just makes a target for the Russians.  I would come after it, I know.

I’m just wondering if a 12 point Minor IC in Romania would be worth anything?

I personally wouldn’t make anything there, Germany should be able to capture one of the Russian Minors.  I  generally prefer to build units than bases.

I liked the 12 IPCs spread around from the previous game.

@Cmdr:

I don’t really see Russia being able to take Korea, however, they sort of fixed that in Alpha 2.

Eh?  I’ve seen it multiple times.

@Gargantua:

Alot of my threads and posts get deleted,  could be why I can’t find that link either :S

I’m with Blitz on this one.  Skip the complex.

Questioneer’s not far off, but I don’t know… an extra 10 ground units in China, to be used to cap India, basically make the fall of india wholly inevitable.

How about a complex in Korea instead?  Or the Naval Base in Hainan?  Only useful if you use em, but wholly effective, without tipping the balance through malignant troop concentration.

That said - it’s still pretty close folks.  And whats the ruling on how to stop sea-lion now?  I haven’t seen the theory…

Tried the naval base idea with Larry- I explained why and everything but he wouldn’t go for it, because there was already one in Hong Kong.  For the same reasons, I doubt he would go for the complex in Korea or Manchuria because of the one in Japan already.  You can’t add ships or aircraft- makes Japan way too fast and too strong too early.  Ground units are the only way to go.  You just have to put them far away from the action so that they have to travel far- so maybe NOT add the infantry in Siam, but add the rest where I stated before.

As far as the Sealion thing, still can be done but you usually lose the Med for it and start a little weaker on the Eastern front though you can recover.  There are ways to beef up England and make it hard for the Sealion attack, definitely not a gimmie as in A1 but but still very possible.  IMO Europe side of Global is fine, its the Pac side that needs the tweek.  Japan needs help, but it has to be done carefully.   That’s why ground units (I believe) are the only answer- not NOs or other ideas mentioned.

Revised Proposal:
Add 2inf, 1tnk to Korea
Add 1inf to Jehol
Add 2inf, 1mec to Shanghai

Thats $25 worth of land material boost for Japan equivalent to a bonus $5 NO for Japan for about 5 rounds- enough to weather the oncoming economic storm from the US in later rounds.

One easy way to balance would be the pacific allow Japan to capture any DEI not already captured by the allies, without starting war.

Again, I agree with Peck.

Or atleast, not allow that to be considered a provocation engaging the U.S.