• Customizer

    oztea, those are some cool ideas for UK NOs.  The second one does seem a bit complicated and fairly easy for Germany to cancel out but it’s not impossible for Britain to gain it.

    @Axisplaya:

    But what exactly guys make you think that there is an imbalance that needs to be compensated by a new UK NO ?

    Personally, I just think it stinks that UK only has that one NO which is usually gone by round 2 or 3 and almost impossible to get back unless Italy really gets fouled up and Germany is too focused on Russia.  UK is one of the MAJOR players.  All the other major players have at least 3 or more NO possibilities.  I just think England should get more than one.

  • '10

    @knp7765:

    Personally, I just think it stinks that UK only has that one NO which is usually gone by round 2 or 3 and almost impossible to get back unless Italy really gets fouled up and Germany is too focused on Russia.  UK is one of the MAJOR players.  All the other major players have at least 3 or more NO possibilities.  I just think England should get more than one.

    But…have you seen what it looks like by round 9-11 when US is all over the board in the atlantic and in the med ? UK can have all her territories liberated and often make around 40 IPC per round. And you want to add some more NOs ?
    Personally i think it’s hard enough for the Axis without boosting UK more than it should.

  • Customizer

    Well, first let me say that most of our games end up in Axis victories, and that usually happens within 7-9 rounds.  The games that have been Allied victories usually take longer, about 12-13 rounds or so.

    If Japan is doing a decent job of keeping USA busy in the Pacific, and if they manage to take Calcutta and the DEI then they should be able to, then the US isn’t going to be all over the Atlantic and Med.  In that case, Germany will probably be SBRing and convoy raiding UK into the poorhouse while driving deep into Russia and Italy will be taking advantage of a weakened Britain and taking many British territories throughout Africa and the Middle East.  It will just get harder and harder for Britain to reclaim those territories.  THIS is the case where I think UK needs another NO or 2 so they at least have a chance at bringing in a little more income.

    Now, in the case of games where the Allies are doing better, then I agree UK will be making plenty of money.  Odds are in that type of game, America has managed to at least neutralize Japan and is more heavily invested in Atlantic/Med operations.  Germany will probably be stretched thin trying to keep Allied navy and air force at bay while dealing with Russia.  Italy probably has gotten pushed out of Africa, lost their fleet in the Med and is cornered in Italy.  Then UK will probably be very strong and doesn’t need to have another NO or two.  This will probably be late in the game as well.  My problem is with the early game, when UK has very few options.  I still think they should have more than just one NO opportunity.


  • I think its fun to play Axis with this NO, as if America was to go 100% atlantic (very unlikely) it be a witch hunt after the german subs. The subs might sail to africa or south america and still denying UK income.

    It also become vital to keep some german fleet activity against UK, which is as realistic as it can be.

  • TripleA

    Good National Objective, UK making less than italy = something is wrong. Especially since the italian naval is strong, UK is out of position to act, UK won’t see that money till late in the game anyway when it is broke off its ass.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

34

Online

17.4k

Users

39.9k

Topics

1.7m

Posts