The Axis Advantage is Bigger Than You Think.

I think Axis has a SLIGHT advantage. In fact, I always find more fun playing the Allies, and I see myself winning more often as the Allies. (Thing is I’m also not a good Axis player).

It might be easier for the Axis.( I do not always find it so.) If you really believe that,then make sure the better player plays the Allies. I too am not a great Axis player:lately I get beaten.
Maybe I should have an Axis bid!

I would  have to agree with knp7765 on all his points, particularly on Japan. I enjoy playing the Axis and mostly have played one on one games with my son who plays the Allies. In most games Japan can get to 5 VC but I have only once gotten to six. By the time Calcutta falls, the Us is so strong and China is such a thorn that Japan just loses steam and gradually territories. It is easier to go for a victory in Europe but it is not a for sure thing. I have tried both Sealion and Barbarossa but have only been successful with Barbarossa. Essentially with Sealion the same problem develops as it does with Japan. The Soviets are a monster by the time Germany can swing around to the East . They can easily hold Germany at bay until the US can invade Africa and slowly erode what the Italians have gained. When the Axis have won, it is usually Barbarossa and somewhere around the 4-5th turn a Japan invasion of the Soviet Union the prevails.

I saw that beat down ChalkyWhite gave the axis, so much for their perceived advantage

I still don’t think the game is so imbalanced.

There are few things I don’t like, especially the medi-battle being so one-sided (either Italy dominates or he becomes an useless country, there’s no in-between).

But as far as balance goes, I might say between inexperienced players that Axis can win more often (Allies need a great syngery to win, while Germany/Japan can basically play their own game without affecting eachother).

@Noll:

There are few things I don’t like, especially the medi-battle being so one-sided (either Italy dominates or he becomes an useless country, there’s no in-between).

i agree noll. it is a shame that there is not more of a struggle. the games i have played either italy dominates the region, or gets dominated. it’s not a back and forth affair, or even an advantage that one side slowly wins over.

@Karl7:

The Axis Advantage is Bigger Than You Think.

it’s kinda creepy that you know what i think.
i’m guessing you meant that, the axis advantage is bigger than i originally thought

@Karl7:

After playing 20+ games on the forum and off, most as the allies, I say that the Axis advantage is not slight… its huge.  I’d say at least, AT LEAST, worth a 15 bid for the allies, if not more.

i do agree with you that players of equal experience that want an even chance of winning need a bid.

i am not sure what the optimal bid is yet, i had stated that it would be inbetween 6ipc-15ipc. that was before the change to remove 1 british inf from egypt.(what a mistake that was)

@allweneedislove:

@Karl7:

The Axis Advantage is Bigger Than You Think. Â

it’s kinda creepy that you know what i think.
i’m guessing you meant that, the axis advantage is bigger than i originally thought

But if it’s bigger than I think, and then I realize that and I think it’s bigger, is it still bigger than I think?  :wink:

The Axis advantage is bigger than you, think!

Italy should be tbe real Axis leader, with Germany being his 8itch!

I agree that the game is tilted in axis advantage, I feel that it is very difficult for the allied to stop this plan;

• japan either do india crush, or mechs on the main land, then india in turn 5-6 while attacking USSR asap,
• italy anexes bulgaria, and build 1mech/turn, making him capable of canopening close to 10 units, the rest goes to med campaign, to force the brit to focus on italy to turn 4-5
• germany hits uk fleet turn 1, and do maximum southern barbarossa.

the problem is that when germany gets to rostov, ussr has to retreat to moscow, and ger gets 10 NO + middle east, possibly with japanese support. at this point, the axis often have acheaved an economical advantage on the allied. (while stratbombing moscow)

one thing that could be done is to remove the IC in ukraine, and give an airbase in gibraltar, that would make barbarossa far less powerful, and make uk better against italy.

Thank you Karl for this good Topic. My experience with Global Alpha+3 (40-50 games i think) (and now with the second Edition) is the follow (we assume, that 2 EQUAL Players fight each other):

The Axis has a slight advantage, because they can dictate the first 3 rounds at a minimum the strategic way. Till round 7 they will go forward and the only thing the allied can do is to look for counterattacks and keep they dangling. Round 7-10 are the critical rounds. If the allies can managed this time they will get a slightly IPC advantege. But not always (Kreuzfeld, youve right, my knowledge too).
@Kreuzfeld:

the problem is that when germany gets to rostov, ussr has to retreat to moscow, and ger gets 10 NO + middle east, possibly with japanese support. at this point, the axis often have acheaved an economical advantage on the allied. (while stratbombing moscow)

But the most important thing for an all in all slight (perhaps more than slight) advantage for the Axis are the Victory Cities. The Allies cant prevent all important land at the same time in the first 7 turns. You must land in Europe to force the Germans to build in western Germany (or Europe) AND you must hold Hawai, if Calcutta falls.
My fazit: Slight advantage for the Axis.

My last game (face to face, Global, second Edition, dice, original rules, with tech):
G3 attack on Russia, J2 attack, Ägypt didnt fall (but Italy didnt too in the game), Japan conquers Calcutta in round 7, after that US must spend 4 rounds full in pacific, defend Hawai with 2 Fighters left over (if he takes it, i cant reconquer), Japanese build all for pacific victory (US must reflight 4 Bombers from Europe to Pacific, 4 Trn too), but the russians and british walked to Calcutta for reconquering (which was succesfull in round 17). Last big battle around Hawai in round 18 to destroy the Navy (last hope): Japanese: 8 AC with 12 Fighters/4 Tacs, 2 Bombers, 5 Subs, 3 DD, 2 Cruiser, 3 BB, 3 Trn with 3 Inf/3 Pz VS US/Anzac: 6 AC with 12 Fighters, 6 Subs, 4 DD, 3 Cruiser, 1 BB, 4 Trn (they load of 4 Inf / 4 AA Gun in the turn before). The Japanese wins the battle with 2 Bombers, 1 Tac, 1 Fighter (destroyed BB, because they will killed in next turn from the US Navy from SZ 10, and the planes can land in Midway). Land Battle Hawai: US hold with 4 Fighters. The Axis surrenders! Playing time: 23 hours (2 Days).

@knp7765:

BAH! Using bids to start out the game is nonsense. “Okay, I will play Allies, but only if you give me an extra 10 or 15 IPCs.” PSHAW! After all the play testing and changes to the rules and setup, I can’t believe there are still those out there that think this game is so terribly unbalanced.
There is NO WAY this game has a BIG advantage for the Axis. There might be a slight advantage due to the larger number of military units that the Axis start with compared to the Allies, but that’s they way it actually went back then. The Axis powers built up a huge war machine and the Allies had to catch up.
First, with the latest setup, a successful Sealion seems even more remote. Sure it’s possible but Germany has to commit so many resources to it that the Eastern front gets neglected. Plus, between wiping out the Royal Navy and the invasion itself, Germany will end up losing much of it’s air power. Plus, with the rule that Russia can attack if London is captured, once Russia sees Germany preparing for Sealion, Russia can buy accordingly and end up making good headway against Germany in Eastern Europe and Scandanavia.
If Germany tries for straight Barbarossa, that will take at least 4 rounds and leave England in the game to build up and harass Germany from the west. Also, with England still in the game, it makes things almost impossible for Italy to gain any ground.
As for Japan, they have a whole lot of stuff to try and take and they have to do it fairly quickly. Once the US gets into the war and shows up with a huge fleet, Japan is going to lose the sea war. Everyone knows it is easier for the US to replace warships than it is for Japan. Sure Japan could take India, but they have to commit quite a bit to do so and the US Navy could end up convoy raiding the home island. China is not easy and Japan’s 6th VC has to be Sidney, Honolulu or San Francisco, all of which are very hard after commiting a substantial force to get Calcutta.
As for which of us play what country, we usually roll our combat dice. Each person takes a turn rolling the dice and whichever country roundel comes up, that’s what nation that person plays for this game. If more than one country symbol come up, that person gets to choose which of those countries to play. This way no player has to play the same country every game.

100%

well it is hilarious sometimes when you do G1 and France defends itself or wipes out all but one tank. or when you can’t hit a ship to save your life and uk ends up having a huge fleet after G1.

or when you do j1 dow and philippines defends itself. I know these things are under 1%, but I seen it and I been screwed from the get go!

@Cow:

well it is hilarious sometimes when you do G1 and France defends itself or wipes out all but one tank. or when you can’t hit a ship to save your life and uk ends up having a huge fleet after G1.

or when you do j1 dow and philippines defends itself. I know these things are under 1%, but I seen it and I been screwed from the get go!

Ah yes, I am reminded of a game where France held out against Germany AND Italy round 1. Britain send some reinforcements, especially fighters, and France bought themselves more troops. Germany’s 2nd invasion also failed and it ended up falling to Italy to take Paris round 2. I was flabbergasted. This all totally screwed up the Axis plans for that game and they were beaten quite soundly. Russia just had a field day rolling over Axis units and grabbing up a lot of territory.

Karl –

Nice of you to acknowledge this.  I do concede the game we started about a year ago.  Yes, the inevitability of an axis win turned me off the game for about half a year.  Keep in mind that it could have been even worse than it currently is.  I think that Italian can opener ability which forces the Russians back into Moscow instead of coming out to fight at Stalingrad for the oil fields is the main reason.

I have recently started playing games against myself using the now available Triple A software that makes this easier and I won’t play until I figure out a way to beat the axis playing myself as the allies, or at least until I figure out how to work the bid so that it’s even.

Again, I think that the key is the Italian can opener.  Sorry, it’s not the early german attack since I can crush my allied self with my axis self even allowing the allies to declare war first on every front.  Simultaneous movement (all axis go followed by all allies go) would solve a big chunk of this in my opinion, but can openers are a big part of the game.

Brian

I realize that the Russians could create bigger blocks to try to stop the Italians from can opening, but that’s just too expensive and places the Russians on the losing side of a war of attrition.

I completely agree with the Gibraltar airbase suggestion.

I also wish that the Axis were not able to produce inside Russian territory.  At least the Italian can openers would have to be replaced with Italian mechs coming in from Italy instead of Ukraine.

Russian scorched earth?  Axis powers yield only half the ipc value of conquered territories?