BotA R2 DeadTom v. AlexGreat

Veq, see my PM. You can forward to DeadTom, of course.

This has nothing to do with insufficient skills here, DeadTom deserves the lead he is in because he plays well. Doesnt change my opinion, though.

TripleA Turn Summary for game: New World Order, version: 1.8.7

Game History

Round :6

Combat Move - ColonialFrench
            1 Armour moved from W.Egypt to Tobruk
                  ColonialFrench take Tobruk from Italians
            1 Armour moved from Tobruk to W.Egypt
            1 Transport moved from sz36 to sz11
            1 Transport moved from sz11 to sz2
            1 Infantry moved from S.Canada to sz2

Purchase Units - ColonialFrench
            ColonialFrench buy 1 Armour and 1 Infantry; Remaining resources: 2 PUs;

Combat - ColonialFrench

Non Combat Move - ColonialFrench
            1 AAGun moved from S.Canada to sz2
            1 Mot.Inf moved from Portugal to Madrid
            1 Infantry moved from Portugal to Madrid
            1 Infantry moved from Portugal to Madrid

Place Units - ColonialFrench
            1 Armour and 1 Infantry placed in S.Canada
            Turning on Edit Mode
            EDIT: Removing units owned by ColonialFrench from S.Canada: 1 Infantry
            EDIT: Changing PUs for ColonialFrench from 2 to 4
            EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode

Turn Complete - ColonialFrench
            ColonialFrench collect 9 PUs; end with 13 PUs total

@alexgreat:

What you say is that it makes no difference? Perfect, make all those areas German from the start, and move within one movement phase. Of course they can open up possibilities, doesnt need to be an attack against Moscow.

Look, I dont need more than look at the logo on the top right and on the name of the designer (you know what “Sieg” means and which language it is) to have a good idea about the way this game should go. That does not mean that bad play (mine, surely) isnt the biggest influcence on outcome, but dont your game notes mention the game is slanted towards the Axis when more experienced people play? How many times the allies would win against very good Axis players? 5/10?

Infantry is as cheap for the Axis, and gives even low income countries like Finland and Romania to stack heavily. And Russia would have to buy more factories to really build in huge numbers.

N.Finland and Leningrad (once German) outproduce Archangelsk, Ukr. and Donets are the same as Stalingra and Rostov. Yes, leaves Moscow to plug the holes. Omsk and Warsaw are similar, yes, Omks can be quicker on the front. And then thats it. Leaves all German and French factories. Italy with its income can conveniently move to Ankara and still easily match a UK fleet in the Med.

27 German units are free to defend France, I dont see that they are missed in the East. Even holding the status quo gives Germany a huge income advantage.

US: Ok, if a fleet is in order, multiple serious landings can be ruled out. One can be done. Slow.

UK: Have to build ships at a huge rate to keep up. How many units do I have to land to withstand 27 units in round 6 and still have a competitive warship navy as well?

I am perfectly aware that a winning Allies player, and a losing Axis player, will see this differently, and I am willing to play longer to better judge this, but my opinion stands: For two equal players, I dont know any other map more slanted towards one side.

Well first off, I didn’t make the map, the designers are Sieg and EB, who are german and dutch i think.

I will say however that this map/game has been out since around 2004, and it is VERY competitive.  By competitive, I mean there are yearly tournaments regularly attracting 32 people just for this map, without any payout or awards.  Of all the maps on TripleA, this one is the most popular, and I see it playing about as much as the other most popular map: A&A 50th Anniversary (ww2v3).

The map is VERY balanced, because it has been continuously tweaked and balanced over 8 years of playtesting and seriously hard playing.  When people bid to play one side or the other, 99% of the time the bids are between -2 and 2, with no clear preference for a specific side.
The balance is actually as follow:
For very new players, complete beginners: Allies have an advantage (mostly because Axis do not know any good opening moves)
For intermediate players: Axis have an advantage after they figure out some good opening moves
For expert, advanced players: Both sides are equal

If you have any questions about good, or specific, strategies that the Allies can use to win against a decent Axis player, I would suggest talking to “ice”, as he is probably one of the top 10 or top 5 players for this map.

@ alexgreat:
What about a little bet? I offer you a starting bid of 10 PU Axis advantage. As you are so sure this game isnt balanced, we should increase your fun by raising the stake to 10$ for the winner.

As veqryn says: this is the most balanced map of the whole community.

The problem is, it is big and will take a moment to understand. I will try to give you a slight impression on it.

When Germany takes France, France normally has to evade (only newbie German players take to few units that Germany can’t take Paris). Ok, it evades to Le Havre, joins forces with UK expedition force. UK needs 5 to 7 transports in the Channel for that.
Ok, what choice does Germany have? It can commit a larger portion of it’s units to the West. Problem - Finnland also needs support. Oh, and you will need units in Russia to advance. The problem gets even bigger, because you will have to build infantry early, otherwise they wont be in the East when you need them. Another possibility? Of course - building a German fleet and defeat the British Royal navy. Have fun. Maybe you will succeed, but ships and fighters are expensive … and you will miss that money in the East.
Sounds like advantage for Allies now? I am not done. Comminting all British forces (or most forces) in the Channel and France means the Middle East gets weak - and Italy strong.

I could go on and on like this. NWO is about trading strengthes for weaknesses. All the time. And you will alwas curse your decision when you take a look at your weak spots. And different to the smaller maps, there are really a lot decisions to be made.

Pug

So all the experts say this map is best and totally balanced. This has weight and I am very fine with it. So it just needs a dozen or so games to see it, and much more time for every move. I am very fine with that as well, could easily be true.

I still have never seen a map I was more uncomfortable with than this one from game one on, win or lose. Is this an acceptable wording? With a small kid and a job I’d like to have some fun without brooding hours over one move. I simply cannot claim that “a moment” is enough for me to be more competitive.

So, in summary, I will rest my case as pro-players see this game balanced for pro-play. I have no reason to doubt that. And I retreat to a statement like this: NWO is, for me, no fun, as compared to all the other maps I tried so far on Triple A.

@pug6000: Thx for involvement and insights. I dont doubt that you would win (as I said, good or bad play still has the biggest influence on oucome, and your accumulated experience would outweigh a bid higher than 10). Why you would offer me “more fun”, however, is beyond me. You respond to a paragraph that clearly, whatever your own opinion, shows that I dont have fun at all. Not with Allies, not with Axis. Think I did not say that Axis players have more fun, btw.
@Veq: I wounded your pride as developer, apparently, otherwise you would not have posted a PM here. I never intended to.

@alexgreat:

@pug6000: Thx for involvement and insights. I dont doubt that you would win (as I said, good or bad play still has the biggest influence on oucome, and your accumulated experience would outweigh a bid higher than 10). Why you would offer me “more fun”, however, is beyond me. You respond to a paragraph that clearly, whatever your own opinion, shows that I dont have fun at all. Not with Allies, not with Axis. Think I did not say that Axis players have more fun, btw.

My appologies. Sometimes I cant resist with some irony. Your message was a bit extreme so I responded similar. But I still offer you a game with discusssion and with a starting bid of 10 PU to your advantage. The main point would be to discuss the pros and cons of the different options. Maybe that’s also interesting for other players new to NWO.

I think what you experience is the main difference between big and small maps. I love big maps and avoid small maps as long as I can. My opponent at NWO also “complained” about the amount of planning involved in this map while I really enjoy it. And if one is not used to it in that amount, one will not enjoy such a map, at least at first.

Pug

I can understand the urge to use irony, in general.

I’d love to be able to immerse myself into games, and so I did when I studied, but simply cannot do so now. Excellent challenges can be had with other maps as well, thankfully, because players here are so good.

It might not be possible to create large maps without the appearance of imbalance (because they inherently need more time to be mastered), I dont know, but somehow I dont think so.

@alexgreat:

@Veq: I wounded your pride as developer, apparently, otherwise you would not have posted a PM here. I never intended to.

No actually, when you said to forward it to Tom, I figured it would just be easier to copy it here and respond here. 
The main reason I wanted to respond here was because I felt anyone should be able to read my comments on the balance of the game, since it seemed to be part of an ongoing conversation rather then a ‘pm’.  There was nothing in the message that was really private, so I didn’t think it would be a problem to respond here. 
Sorry if that caused any misunderstanding, it was certainly not meant in any bad way.

if i may be so free as to post my oppinion as an nwo regular,

if ur stugeling with allied play you should really go back to the basics, meaning look at old revised. how did allies get so strong? gangbang germany with everything they got?

wel nwo is not much different, if you try to advance on every side of the map ull be beaten in most of them, instead focus on 1 or 2 importand positions and gangbang those, example if ur having trouble with russia, gangbang germany in the west with brit AND usa, soon ull see russia come back because germany cant put 100 ipc in that direction nomore.

i could go a thousend pages for strategys and all about nwo, but if you have specific questions im happy to asnwer them, simply for my love to nwo and i wanna share it with as much people as possible

ice

I might come back to your invite

TripleA Turn Summary for game: New World Order, version: 1.8.7

Game History

Round :6

Combat Move - British
            3 Armours, 3 Infantry and 3 Transports moved from sz15 to sz34
            3 Armours and 3 Infantry moved from sz34 to C.Ortegal

Purchase Units - British
            British buy 3 Carriers, 1 S.Sub, 3 Submarines and 1 Transport; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;

Combat - British
            Battle in C.Ortegal
                British attack with 3 Armours and 3 Infantry
                Neutral defend with 1 Bunker and 2 Infantry
                    British roll dice for 3 Armours and 3 Infantry in C.Ortegal, round 1 :  1/6 hits
                Units damaged: 1 Bunker owned by the Neutral
                    Neutral roll dice for 1 Bunker and 2 Infantry in C.Ortegal, round 1 :  1/3 hits
                    1 Infantry owned by the British lost in C.Ortegal
                    British roll dice for 3 Armours and 2 Infantry in C.Ortegal, round 2 :  3/5 hits
                    Neutral roll dice for 1 Bunker and 2 Infantry in C.Ortegal, round 2 :  1/3 hits
                    1 Bunker owned by the Neutral , 2 Infantry owned by the Neutral and 1 Infantry owned by the British lost in C.Ortegal
                British win, taking C.Ortegal from Neutral with 3 Armours and 1 Infantry remaining. Battle score for attacker is 6
                Casualties for Neutral: 1 Bunker and 2 Infantry
                Casualties for British: 2 Infantry

Non Combat Move - British
            1 Battleship, 2 Carriers, 1 Cruiser, 3 Destroyers, 3 EarlyFighters, 1 Fighter, 13 Submarines, 2 T.Boats and 1 Transport moved from sz29 to sz30
            1 Transport moved from sz31 to sz30
            1 Transport moved from sz31 to sz30
            1 Transport moved from sz31 to sz30
            1 Transport moved from sz31 to sz30
            1 Destroyer moved from sz56 to sz58
            1 Destroyer moved from sz56 to sz53
            2 Carriers, 1 Cruiser, 2 Destroyers, 4 EarlyFighters, 12 Submarines and 2 Transports moved from sz56 to sz48
            1 Armour moved from W.Egypt to El Allamain
            2 Armours, 1 Artillery and 8 Infantry moved from W.Egypt to N.Egypt
            1 Armour moved from N.Egypt to Cairo
            1 Armour moved from N.Egypt to Cairo
            1 AAGun moved from Saudi Arabia to E.Egypt
            1 Infantry moved from Denizli to S.Turkey
            1 Armour moved from Syria to Iran
            1 Armour moved from Syria to Iran
            1 Armour moved from Syria to Iran
            1 EarlyFighter moved from sz30 to S.Hempton
            1 Fighter moved from S.Hempton to sz30
            1 EarlyFighter moved from sz30 to S.Hempton
            1 Fighter moved from S.Hempton to sz30
            1 EarlyFighter moved from Dover to S.Hempton
            1 EarlyFighter moved from Dover to S.Hempton
            2 AAGuns and 4 Infantry moved from Manchester to London
            1 Infantry moved from York to London
            2 Armours, 1 Artillery and 5 Infantry moved from Wales to S.Hempton
            1 Bomber moved from Dover to S.Hempton
            1 Artillery moved from Dover to Norwich
            1 Artillery moved from Dover to Norwich
            1 Artillery moved from Dover to Norwich

Place Units - British
            3 Carriers placed in sz30
                4 EarlyFighters moved from S.Hempton to sz30
            1 Transport placed in sz1
            1 S.Sub and 3 Submarines placed in sz56

Turn Complete - British
            British collect 81 PUs; end with 81 PUs total

djensen/aa.org has run out of space

don’t worry, the file cap size is 1.5mb, which most games will never ever ever reach

send a private message to djensen asking him to free up space and/or post in the website section about it

and in the mean time, email the savegame to your opponent so he can keep playing

TripleA Turn Summary for game: New World Order, version: 1.8.7

Game History

Round :6

Combat Move - Americans

Purchase Units - Americans
            Americans buy 7 Armours, 1 Bomber, 2 Elites, 1 Fighter and 8 Infantry; Remaining resources: 0 PUs;

Combat - Americans

Non Combat Move - Americans
            1 Fighter moved from Canarians to Portugal
            1 Armour, 3 Bigarmours, 1 Elite and 2 Infantry moved from Portugal to Madrid
            1 Artillery, 1 Destroyer, 3 Infantry, 2 S.Subs, 1 Submarine and 2 Transports moved from sz5 to sz36
            1 Infantry moved from sz36 to Portugal
            1 Infantry moved from sz36 to Portugal
            1 Infantry moved from sz36 to Portugal
            1 Artillery moved from sz36 to Portugal
            1 Fighter moved from Portugal to sz36
            1 S.Sub moved from sz3 to sz14
            1 S.Sub moved from sz3 to sz14
            1 Armour moved from S.U.S to sz3
            1 Elite moved from S.U.S to sz3
            1 Armour, 1 Elite and 1 Transport moved from sz3 to sz12
            5 Transports moved from sz12 to sz3
            1 Fighter moved from S.U.S to Canarians
            1 Fighter moved from S.U.S to Canarians

Place Units - Americans
            5 Armours placed in Madrid
            2 Armours and 1 Fighter placed in Portugal
            1 Bomber, 2 Elites and 8 Infantry placed in S.U.S

Turn Complete - Americans
            Americans collect 81 PUs; end with 81 PUs total