G40 Classic

@aequitas-et-veritas said in New to G40...will not playing w/NOs break the game?:

@taamvan said in New to G40...will not playing w/NOs break the game?:

we are omitting that shutting off US NOs means they are at minimum income all game. A different game for sure…but probably not an Allied advantage

I agree on that.
The US needs any IPC they can get!
I played a few games with minimum income for the Allies. You will unlikely win. The Allies depend on the NO’s, so does the Axis powers.
You may experiment with diffrent NO’s or change them, but shutting them off is not a good idea Imo.

We play with NOs off except USA +30 when at war. It works great for us. Give it a try.

Yeah, I have to admit that I have done that in the case of existing carriers. I say I will move the carrier to a certain spot so planes involved in a battle close by can land. Then the planes get killed (which I figured they would) so I leave my carrier where it is or move it to a “better” place.

I’m curious which statements here are differing from what you’ve seen in the league? Do you feel that this NO is playing differently or is more relevant in the league?

I suppose its important to realize that any statements you read here on the boards are largely anecdotal. It comes down to how much of what you read accords with your own experience. And of course results will differ depending on what conditions you typically play with. For example, I noticed just now you mentioned the Russian bomber in another thread. In G40, and in other prior A&A games, many people have used additional Russian aircraft as an expedient alternative to the open pre-placement bid. An Extra Russian fighter in AA50 for example, or a Bomber in G40. In G40 specifically, that option is preferable to me, than an open bid for UK. Its the sort of set up change you really have to force though, because given the option most people would take that same bid amount and instead throw down 4 infantry or 3 art units in separate territories to spread the advantage, or a pair of subs to break a naval battle. Anyway, the point being that if you are using a Russian bomber in your games regularly, then chances our you’ll be seeing different results from people who try other balancing options. Beyond this, there is also the No Tech aspect, or things like whether or not players are using standard dice rules or low luck rules. All this stuff can skew the results in a given set of games, or provide somewhat different play-balance results from the games of people who play other ways.

I will say this about G40, if you play standard dice, there is a fairly substantial swing potential on sz 110 and sz 111, not to mention with casualties in France. This can be a pretty big deal for an opening battle that sets the stage for the whole game. The results there can be a lot more consequential than say Classic/Revised when a transport hit, or a destroyer dudded out was in the opening round. The old German battleship headache comes to mind. Or take for example how in Revised the swing on the W. Russia battle could really effect the whole game in a massive way, such that some players would just quit outright in the opening round, if the dice didn’t go their way. Something similar can occur here (though perhaps not quite as extreme) with sz 110 and 111. If the Luftwaffe trades well in those battles it can be a huge boon for Axis. If they trade poorly it can be a small nightmare for G. Low Luck can control for that to a certain extent, but what you gain in consistency by using LL during the opening round, you lose out on in dynamism during the endgame. This is why I tend to prefer dice since they are so unpredictable for the endgame, though I appreciate the place for LL and understand why so many are fond of it. Still even a small bid disrupting either of those battles, or the battles in the med, can take it from a risky swing to a clear and obvious choice, especially under LL conditions.

So all that is just to say that the conventions in your playgroup, the typical bid, what sort of rules you option in or out, can really affect the patterns that emerge.

You’ll probably have noticed as well, that because A&A uses a very fixed set up and involves a number of scripted first round battles, that players often use a technique that you might call mirroring. Where players tend to model their strategies and opening moves, on things that they’ve seen stronger opponents do. Adopting the strategies that beat you last time, we might call it. This happens a lot after a board first comes out, or especially with players who are new to the game. So what happens is a kind of gameplay evolution, that selects for the best opening plays and weeds out the poorer ones over time. So right after a new board comes out everyone is excited, since the playing field is leveled, and nobody really knows how to exploit the map. Very quickly though, players start adopting standard buys and standard openings, until at some point (after a year say) someone hits on a strategy that is very dominant, which never remains secret very long. Soon variations in it get more popular, until eventually it becomes a scripted move (something everyone does.) Its usually at this point, if the advantage is clearly going one way, to one side over the other, that people start seriously examining bid solutions.

Whats interesting about all this, is that if you are playing with someone who is inexperienced, and does something totally batshit crazy, that you wouldn’t expect anyone to do ever, sometimes that sort of game can actually get entertaining as well as challenging. Since you really don’t know how to predict the erratic behavior of the newb. These games can be fun, since they force all sorts of weird decisions on you. Like wow, he built that? I guess I have to go destroy it now, and do something I wouldn’t usually do haha.

I agree though, from an archival standpoint, its nice to have a league and a way to track what sorts of things are happening in games (what sort of bids are being used for example, and what opening moves.) The overall tally Axis wins to Allied wins. But even there, the nature of the dice can be pretty nuts in providing different experiences.

All this is just to clarify something that it might have been worth saying at the outset. When I talk about game “Balance” or “Balance by Sides” what I am really referring to is the ‘feeling’ or ‘sense’ among both players that the starting conditions provide a roughly even shot for either to prevail. There’s no way to be really absolute about this, since as soon as you roll the dice in a single round of combat, you shoot off into so many different variables that its probably impossible to say anything with certainty… eg. whether a bad roll somewhere can be recovered by an amazing one somewhere else, later on. So really what we a striving for is the sweet spot, where the feeling of balance is the same for both players at the outset. Where one person isn’t constantly grumbling about how the odds are totally stacked against them from the get go, or how if they don’t win battle X, “its basically all over!” I’m not sure how much you could learn from seeing my games in an after action, since I’m perhaps not as cut throat as others, and I like to experiment a lot (often with game mechanics.) I don’t mind losses and haven’t bothered to keep a running tally on anything.

If I’m in the lobby and I have more time to play, I also almost never concede defeat, at least until I see the deep endgame ;) Since that’s the one that fascinates me most in A&A games! The deep endgame, for those unfamiliar with how I use the term in A&A, is how things play after capitals have already fallen. So in Classic or Revised or 1942.2 the Deep Endgame is when you are down to just 4 nations. In AA50 when you are down to 5 etc. Another way to think about it is the gameplay when W. Allies can take over Russian land directly because the capital has fallen.

Pretty good at grinding it out, since even a losing game can be entertaining, and it teaches you about the production spread and the importance of the center ;) But now I’m just rambling.

Is it the general premise of this thread (that Russia’s NOs are too weak, and virtually pointless) that you find problematic? Or the proposed solution as a bid alternative? I guess I’m just a little confused where you think we’re running off track. Most of the results posted in that league forum for g40 games (at least for the last several months) show Allies being bid out consistently, often at above +10 ipc. So I feel that it supports the general position of game unbalance in favor of Axis. I’m not sure what bearing any of those games would have on my proposed solution right now, since those games are virtually all using pre-placement bids. What I have suggested here is a standard income modification for an NO as an alternative to what people are currently doing, which is bidding pre-placement. Does that make more sense from the perspective of a bid replacement/balance perspective?

@der-kuenstler

I agree!

12 interesting battles (a German land unit represent a division and a Soviet land unit two divisions, a Soviet tank corps is actually a division, and all naval battles include the actual numbers of ships fought):

Battle Of Prokhoshova: One of the biggest tank to tank battles of the war, it was one of the biggest and most publicised German successes in the Battle Of Kursk, which was fought in summer 1943.

Soviet units (on the attack): 3 tanks, 2 infantry, 1 fighter, 1 artillery

German units (on the defence): 3 tanks, 1 tactical bomber, 2 fighters

First Naval Battle Of Guandacanal: The First Naval Battle Of Guandacanal was a final Japanese attempt to win the Guandacanal campaign. Set at night, both sides had a hard time spotting each other, resulting in many near collisions and playing well into the Japanese advantage of night fighting. Despite this, one Japanese battleship was sunk, the first of the war.

Japanese units (on the attack): 2 battleships, 1 cruiser, 11 destroyers

American units (on the defence): 5 cruisers, 8 destroyers

Formosa Air Battle: After the losses at the Battle Of The Philippine Sea, Japan had enough aircraft and ships for one final, decisive battle. Whilst this would culminate in a the Battle Of Leyte Gulf, Japan was unsure where the Allies would attack. As a result, when the Allies began launching carrier based air raids on Formosa, Japan used up the last reserves in this air battle, ensuring that when the Allies landed in the Philippines later that year, Japan would have little air cover or opposition.

Japanese units (on the attack): 7 fighters, 7 tactical bombers

American units (on the defence): 6 battleships, 15 cruisers, 57 destroyers, 10 aircraft carriers, 11 fighters, 11 tactical bombers

Battle Of Moscow: After pushing though Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Estonia, Lativa, besieging Leningrad, and entering Russia and conquering Smolensk, the German army stood near Moscow. With the striking power of three panzer armies, the Soviets mobilised all reserves and Siberian divisions to defend the capital-in the end, the bitter cold was too much for the Germans and the Soviets launched a massive offensive, undoing most German gains during the battle.

German forces (on the attack): 47 infantry, 9 mechanised infantry, 14 tanks, 3 fighters, 2 tactical bombers, 24 artillery

Soviet forces (on the defence): 43 infantry, 6 mechanised infantry, 3 tanks, 3 fighters, 1 tactical bomber, 14 artillery

Battle Of Okinawa: As the Allies closed in on Japan and defeated the garrison on Iwo Jima, the final obstacle to the mainland was Okinawa. The last big battle of the war, Japan was determined to make a final last stand on the island, and exert their most supreme efforts short of the home islands.

Note: Each American and Japanese division is a single piece, whilst every transport unit equals 70 transports, a destroyer unit equals 8 destroyers, and ships bigger than a destroyer will be represented individually. Naval ships (such as minelayers and submarine chasers) that are not represented as units in the game shall be excluded.

American forces (on the attack): 20 battleships, 38 cruisers, 21 destroyers, 24 aircraft carriers, 6 transports for the naval battle, 7 infantry, 4 artillery, 1 anti aircraft artillery for the land battle

24 fighters and 24 tactical bombers are available to use on land or at sea.

Japanese forces (on the defence): 1 battleship, 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer, 2 kamikazes for the naval battle, 2 infantry, 1 artillery for the land battle

Battle Of Denmark Strait: In 1941, several months before Operation Barborossa, Bismarck, a powerful battleship during World War 2, was completed, and the ship and the cruiser Prinz Eugen on a massive raid to attack merchant ships. Alarmed, the British sent two powerful capital ships to the Bismarck and Prinz Eugen’s route though the Denmark Strait, the gap between Scotland and Greenland. In the ensuring battle, Bismarck sunk the symbol of British naval supremacy and power, the Hood ad over 1400 lives with it. The resulting grief and anger empowered the British to deploy every available ship to hunt it down and destroy it. Despite success, to this day, the Bismarck still haunts the nightmares of the Royal Navy.

German units (on the attack): 1 battleship, 1 cruiser

British units (on the defence): 1 battleship, 1 damaged battleship

Second Battle Of El Alamein: As Rommel entered Egypt, it seemed as great riches for Germany and Italy were at hand. To Rommel, to his men, and even to Hitler and Mussolini, the key to winning the war was provided-Alexandria, Cairo, the Suez Canal, the British Empire itself. But after being stoped at the First Battle Of El Alamein and the Battle Of Alam El Hafa, Rommel was forced to dig in as British strength grew rapidly from American aid. The massive British counteroffensive that followed pushed Rommel across Egypt, Libya, into Tunisia, and, following the American Operation Torch, all hope for the Axis in Africa was lost.

Note: All units here represent one regiment.

British units (on the attack): 23 tanks, 32 infantry, 11 mechanised infantry, 53 artillery, 8 fighters, 6 tactical bombers

German units (on the defence): 2 tanks, 6 artillery, 5 mechanised infantry, 4 infantry, 6 fighters, 2 tactical bombers, 1 anti aircraft artillery

Italian units (on the defence): 16 infantry, 16 artillery, 5 mechanised infantry, 2 tanks, 6 fighters, 2 tactical bombers

Battle Of Alam El Hafa: After the succesful Battle Of Gazala and the failed First Battle Of El Alamien, Rommel knew that massive Allied reinforcements were on the way, which the Axis could not match with losses in supply ships. In an attempt break though into Egypt before the inevitable British counteroffensive, Rommel launched the final Axis offensive in the Western Desert campaign and in Egypt. However, Allied air superiority, and more importantly, Ultra, forced Rommel to withdraw. From now on, the Axis could only defend in Egypt, with the only hope being a breakthrough in the Middle East from the Caucasus, which never materialised. A close battle, without Ultra, Rommel could have raced on to the Suez Canal, thus prolonging the war. One of the most important uses of Ultra indeed.

Each unit represents a division.

German units (on the attack): 4 tanks, 1 mechanised infantry, 5 infantry, 4 fighters, 2 tactical bombers

British units (on the defence): 2 infantry, 2 tanks, 6 fighters, 4 tactical bombers

Operation Crusader: After Rommel’s devastating advance across Libya to the Egyptian border, he was unable to capture the important port of Tobruk. Despite massive attacks, Tobruk held on, making Rommel unable to invade Egypt. With the time gained, the British launched a massive attack, which was successful. Despite being able to catch the British armoured units in the flank by driving back to the Egyptian border, and destroying more tanks than he lost, Rommel was forced to withdraw across Libya, setting the stage for a massive build up on both sides for the next, phase of enormous attacks at Gazala and El Alamein.

Note: All units here represent one regiment.

British units (on the attack): 13 tanks, 12 artillery, 24 infantry, 5 mechanised infantry, 8 fighters, 4 tactical bombers

German units (on the defence): 2 tank, 6 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 mechanised infantry, 2 fighters

Italian units (on the defence): 10 artillery, 14 infantry, 3 mechanised infantry, 2 fighters, 2 tactical bombers, 3 tanks

A German or Italian (can’t decide) mechanised infantry unit will also be part of the Axis.

Battle Of Crete: After the fall of Greece, British and Greek forces hoped to hold Crete as an excellent naval base as well as a launching point to bomb the Romanian oil fields. Several air fields have finished or nearly finished construction, although RAF units were not permanently present. Hitler, worried about the bombing of the crucial Romanian oil fields, and the Luftwaffe hoping to regain prestige after the defeat in the Battle if Britain, ordered an airborne invasion of Crete as the Axis have gained air, but not naval superiority, with an amphibious option out of the question. The goal was to capture the biggest air field on the islands, which would allow transport aircraft to land reinforcements. The attacks was not meant to interfere with Operation Barborossa, although the loss of many paratroopers forced Germany to abandon air drops behind the Soviet front line. The biggest and last major attack of the Fallchirmjager, the high casualties incurred convinced Hitler that the Fallchirmjager were no long effective, ordering them to fight as normal infantry, whilst the Allies were impressed with the German victory and started forming paratroopers as well as air field defence units.

Note: All units here represent one regiment.

German units (on the attack): 4 strategic bombers, 4 fighters, 2 tactical bombers, 8 infantry, 1 artillery

British units (on the defence): 3 artillery, 17 infantry, 1 mechanised infantry, 2 anti aircraft artillery

Siege Of Sevastapool: After the devastating intitial shock of Operation Baborossa, Germany and Romania advanced into the Crimea to prevent the Soviet from bombing the Romanian oil fields, destroying much Soviet resistance. However, the Soviets had heavily fortified Sevastopol and used the Black Sea fleet to transfer the Separate Coastal Army from the Siege Of Odessa for the defence of the city, formed several additional brigades of infantry, and provided gunfire support. The result was a siege that lasted for more than 9 months, with Axis air superiority making up for the lack of infantry on the German side and the many World War 1 era artillery pieces used. Due to the long siege, many enormous artillery pieces, designed for destroying the Maginot Line, most notably the largest artillery piece ever, Schwere Gustav, were able to be brought up to the front line and used, although they had limited effect due to the lack of ammunition. Despite the success, the delay the siege caused and the absence of the German Eleventh Army helped contribute to the Soviet victory against Operation Case Blue. In a rare call for help, Germany asked for their Italian allies for several motor torpedo boats, due to the Italians having wide expertise on this matter, using them in both World War 1 and 2, to assist air operation in preventing the Soviets from evacuating the city. Two interesting vehicles used in the attack were the Goliath tracked mine, a remote controlled vehicle aimed at blowing up and destroying the Soviet fortifications, and the Stug 3, an infantry support vehicle aimed at also destroying the fortifications at Sevastapool, although later in the war was also an effective tank destroyer.

German units (on the attack): 10 infantry, 1 tank, 4 artillery, 4 fighters, 2 tactical bombers

Soviet units (on the defence): 4 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 fighter, 1 tactical bomber

Operation Bodenplatte: As the German momentum in the Battle Of The Bulge slowed, Hitler, with the weather clearing, ordered a massive air offensive against the Allies to gain local air superiority to regain the speed necessary for victory. Although the Allies lost many aircraft destroyed on the ground, the losses were replaced within a week, and few pilots were lost. Meanwhile, large amounts of German squadron leaders, many of which were veterans, were killed, who could not be replaced, and aircraft losses were also quite high, which could not be easily replaced with the Soviets destroying enormous amounts of aircraft in the east. In the end, not even temporary air superiority was achieved, and the Luftwaffe was destroyed beyond repair, not accomplishing or doing anything significant for the rest of 1945.

German units (on the attack):

American units (on the defence):

British units (on the defence):

Note: I am unable to find information on the amount of Allied aircraft present in the attack. Can you help me with this please? Thank you!

I recommend playing domination.

Only 10% believe allies have an advantage, maybe I am not so crazy after all for thinking axis advantage.

@Cow:

The egypt minor is for convoying sz 97 in the long run and taking italy out of the game.

That can change when Germany (if) takes Moscow and turns towards Egypt.  In my most recent game, Germany ended up taking Moscow and redirected the prior round’s purchase of Armor towards Egypt along with a Ukr Arm purchase Germany had something like 9 tanks sitting in Ukraine ready to blitz ahead of whatever survived Moscow.

UK went on the defensive at this point, but Italy was already convoyed to death with minimal effort.  It really goes to show how important sinking the Italian fleet is if Germany is going to Moscow first when Italy is stuck from round 6-7 on being able to only put 1 or 2 Inf out a round at best.

What if they bypass your Armada by sailing North around Scotland and hit London from from Sz 109. What do you have in London at this point…. 2 Brits and a Frenchman.

So essentially, just two combat units  :wink:  Haha, sorry, but I just couldn’t resist taking advantage of such an obvious opportunity to take a stab at the French  :-D