Alpha +3.0.beta project

Witt

Morning. Italy, my native country!
Obviously, it is easy to comment on your changes, but could prove premature without knowing all the nations’ changes to better perceive if overall balance has been overturned. despite this, I realise you wanted accuracy over balance.
I could agree with you over the Bomber, but would rather see a swap for a Tac as Italy developed into a nation with a reputation for good Torpedo Bombers. The one real strategic bomber was never developed in any sort of number.

I am not sure giving another Mech is that accurate either. Italy’s African forces were very static, hence their poor showing in the vast and quick moving desert campaign.

Subs, I agree with you. Italy was very famous and adept with the mini sub. Not sure about placing one off East Africa. Do you know of some stationed there?

Thank you once again for your time and efforts. I am interested.

bracconebaldo

First of all…Thank you! I’ll try to save both balance and historical forces

About submarines…yes we had some of them in AOI bases

In North Africa i’m not sure about mech inf too…maybe it’s better to
add a normal infantry instead!

Heavy bomber: giving a tactical means that Italy will have a better
defensive piece than strategical bomber for this reason i simply decide
To cut off the original bomb…what about to add 1 tactical and a fighter
Instead of 2 fighters and the bomber?

Now i’m thinking about add some new NO maybe
As always…give me inputs!

:-D

Witt

About submarines…yes we had some of them in AOI bases.
Ok. Thanks.

Italy should really not have any Mech, but one gives some variety.
The only mech units would have been intrinsic to the one(good) armoured Division, the Ariete.

Planes up to you. I think having two Fts helps combat UK’s Taranto on T1, so might be necessary. See what others think.

NOs: I think fewer!
A rampart second Roman Empire annoys me, it is so ridiculous a notion.
We Italians are peace loving, pasta eaters and football watchers, with no time to spare for warfare.

bracconebaldo

Italy’s setup modified!

Next: Atlantic UK!

United Kingdom Europe side of the map (starting income: 28) modified setup
United Kingdom: 2 Infantry, 1 Mechanized Infantry, 4 AA, 2 Fighters, 1 Strategic Bomber, Air Base, Naval Base, Major IC
Normandy: 1 infantry
France: 1 infantry, 1 Tank
Scotland: 2 Infantry, 1 AA, 1 Fighter, Air Base
Iceland: Air Base
Quebec: 1 Infantry, 1 Tank, Minor IC
Ontario: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery
New Brunswick Nova Scotia: Naval Base
Gibraltar: 1 Fighter, Naval Base
Malta: 1 Infantry, 1 AA, 1 Fighter
Alexandria: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank
Egypt: 1 Infantry, 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Artillery, Naval Base
Anglo-Egyptian Sudan: 1 Infantry
Union of South Africa: 2 Infantry, Naval Base, Minor IC
West India: 1 Infantry
Sea Zone 71: 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 91: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 98: 1 Transport, 1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser, 1 Aircraft Carrier (Carrying 1 Tactical Bomber)
Sea Zone 106: 1 Transport, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 109: 1 Transport, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 110: 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, 1 transport
Sea Zone 111: 1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship

When the United Kingdom Is at War in Europe

5 IPCs if the United Kingdom controls all of its original territories in its European economy
2 IPCs if there are no German Submarines in North Atlantic (SZs 101-110)
3 IPCs one per game if UK destroyes French’s navy in SZ 94

BluGerman

This is in response to both Italy changes and Atlantic UK changes

Italy: I like it historically, but balance wise i am scared. Italy is really the only minor power in the game that can grow into a great power (specifically by taking Egypt and border European nations) and I am scared taking away strat bomber and tanks will limit its ability to become a major power. But hey, i haven’t played Italy with this setup so i may just be crazy :p (and the extra subs will probably counteract this anyways)

Atlantic UK: Love it…. absolutely love it… maybe not the inf in normand-… nope… France is gonna fall anyways so another inf in Normandy wouldn’t really do much, so dare I say your changes are PERFECT… That UK NO is SSSOOOO needed to add on to the lame ass UK NO OOB and It made my day when i saw it in your changes…

Fantastic Job and I can’t wait to see more :)

bracconebaldo

You’re right.

I’m working on it…for now the project it’s still under testing! I’ve already correct something (removed the 3° UK NO [too easy to obtain] and balanced the forces in north africa).

For now i go on, we’ll see at least what we did :)

Keep on supporting!

GERMANY (starting income 30IPCs) modified setup
Germany: 11 Infantry, 3 Artillery, 3 AA, 1 Tactical Bomber, 2 Strategic Bombers, Major IC
Western Germany: 3 Infantry, 4 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Artillery, 3 AA, 2 Fighters, 3 Tactical bombers, Air Base, Naval Base, Major IC
Denmark: 2 Infantry
Norway: 3 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Holland/Belgium: 4 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 3 tanks, 1 Fighter, 1 Mechanized Infantry
Greater Southern Germany: 6 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 3 tanks
Slovakia/Hungary: 2 Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter
Romania: 2 Infantry, 1 Tank
Poland: 3 Infantry, 1 Tank, 1 Tactical Bomber
Sea Zone 90: 1 Sub
Sea Zone 103: 1 Sub
Sea Zone 108: 1 Sub
Sea Zone 113: 1 Battleship
Sea Zone 114: 1 Transport, 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 117: 1 Sub
Sea Zone 118: 1 Sub
Sea Zone 124: 1 Sub
When Germany Is Not at War with the Soviet Union:
• 5 IPCs representing wheat and oil from the Soviet Union.

When Germany Is at War with the Soviet Union:
• 5 IPCs per territory if Germany controls Novgorod (Leningrad), Volgograd (Stalingrad), and/or Russia (Moscow).
• 5 IPCs if an Axis power controls Caucasus.

When Germany Is at War with the United Kingdom and France:
• 5 IPCs if Germany controls both Denmark and Norway while Sweden is not either pro-Allies or Allied-controlled.
• 2 IPCs per territory if Germany controls Iraq, Persia, and/or Northwest Persia.
• 2 IPCs if there is at least one German Sub in North Atlantic (SZ 101-110)

BluGerman

@ShadowHAwk:

@BluGerman:

Also Subs are pretty easy to kill it is not like they can hide like in the real war

actually subs are perfect at hiding. If there is no destroyer in the area the sub cant even be attacked at all by anything (given of course that you were smart enough to opt to submerge your subs)

gamerman01

You’re not there yet, but I have supportable opinions about some things on the Pacific board

The battleship in Z37 is presumably to represent the Prince of Wales (and the Monitor or whatever, if memory serves) but those capital ships were not sent to Malaya/Singapore until 1941 (again, if I remember the research I did awhile back correctly).

Australia is absurdly over-powered and arguably should not be a separate playable power. Not sure if 2 infantry in Egypt is actually enough, though. From what I read, Australia had more of a presence in North Africa than Australia itself. Anyway, 3 fighters for ANZ (compare this to Germany or Italy or really any power on the Europe board) is ABSURD.

Chinese fighter is also…… a joke. Flying tigers didn’t exist until 1942. I thought this game started in 1940.
3 aircraft for India is no doubt too much also. Basically Pacific powers have too much compared to Europe powers, even after the “aircraft reduction” plan Larry did after the laughable disparity that was OOB. Japan had like 25 planes and Germany about 6 or something - it was stupid. Anyway, the disparity is still there.
Major complex in India is ridiculous as well.
Somebody suggested a mid-level complex that builds 5 be introduced to the game (costs 20 to build), and this would be ideal for India. Problem with Minors and Majors is there’s no in-between. Big difference between 3 and 10 units…

gamerman01

You can’t change the title of the thread, but I think you should go ahead and consider it Alpha 4 :-)
Or “player’s edition”.
You’re doing great work (putting a lot of thought into things) from what I’ve seen.

If it helps you at all, peruse some of the brainstorming ideas I’ve had (and this reflects some input from others, so far), available here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhOB4pSke42ydGh6d2NwRDJRRzBteEsyU1EtNGhXVUE#gid=2
There are different tabs at the bottom (I have ideas for NO’s as well, for example)

I will probably be incorporating some of your starting setup ideas - maybe you would like some of my ideas too, who knows

Makes sense to share ideas and help each other develop a better G40.

bracconebaldo

Why not! Thank you…sharing ideas id the best way TO improve a project!

bracconebaldo

Tested this sunday…it worked as good as we didn’t expected…this setup looked balanced at a first sight, clearly it needs to be fixed a little more (i’ve already done some adjustment).

During the game me and my friends had some ideas about Vichy:

If France falls, and if Souther France it’s still under France control, Vichy joins axis on 3th turn: all his existing troops, naval unit and territories are controlled during the France turn by the German Player; Its capitol territory is Southern France and it receive a starting IPCs equal to the total on territories still under France control; A japan invasion of French Indochina Burma do not affect relations between the two powers.

What do you think? Axis players are both free to invade France entirely or let it playable as ally minor power, using his forces!

bracconebaldo

UK Pacific (starting IPCs 17)
India: 6 infantry; 1 artillery; 3 AAA; 1 fighter; 0 tactical bomber; air base; naval base; MiC; 1 Mechanized infantry
Burma: 2 infantry; 1 fighter
Kwangtung; 2 infantry; naval base; 1 AAA
Malaya: 3 infantry; naval base
West India: 1 infantry
SZ 37: Battleship
Sz 39: 1 destroyer; 1 Cruiser; 1 transport
When Pacific Uk is in War with Japan
• 3 IPCs if UK controls Malaya
• 2 IPCs if UK control Kwangtung

China (starting IPCs 12)
Szechwan: 6 infantry; 1 fighter
Hunan: 2 infantry
Yunnan: 4 infantry
Kweichow: 2 infantry
Shensi: 2 infantry
Suiyuyan: 2 infantry
• 5 IPCs for Burma Road

Suggestions??

bracconebaldo

Soviet Union (starting IPCs 37)
Karelia: 2 Infantry
Archangel: 1 Infantry
Russia: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 tank, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber, 2 AA Guns, 1 Airbase, 1 Major IC
Volgograd: 1 tank, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Minor IC
Caucasus: 2 Infantry
Bessarabia: 2 Infantry
Western Ukraine: 1 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Eastern Poland: 2 Infantry
Baltic States: 3 Infantry
Belarus: 1 Infantry
Novgorod: 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Fighter, 2 AA Gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Minor IC
Vyborg: 3 Infantry
Ukraine: 3 Infantry, 1 Minor IC
Amur: 6 Infantry
Sakha: 6 Infantry, 2 AA guns
Buryatia: 6 Infantry
Sea Zone 115: 1 Cruiser 1 submarine
Sea Zone 127: 1 Sub
NO: unchanged

Japan

Japan: 6 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 1 Tank, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers, 1 Bomber, 3 AA Guns, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC
Manchuria: 6 Infantry, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers
Palau Island: 1 Infantry
Kiangsi: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Formosa: 1 Fighter
Shantung: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Kwangsi: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Iwo Jima: 1 Infantry
Jehol: 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Caroline Islands: 2 Infantry, 1 AA gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base
Siam: 2 Infantry
Okinawa: 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Kiangsu: 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber.
Korea: 4 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Sea Zone 6: 1 Sub, 2 Destroyers, 2 Carriers each with 1 Tac & 1 Ftr., 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 19: 1 Sub, 1 Battleship, 1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 33: 1 Destroyer, 1 Carrier w/ 1 Tac & 1 Ftr.
Sea Zone 20: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
When Japan is not at War with Us
• 10 IPCs

When Japan is at war with Uk/Anzac
• 3 IPCs if Japan controls Sumatra and Borneo
• 3 IPCs if Japan controls Java and Celebes
• 5 IPCs if Japan controls India and/or New South Wales

When Japan is at war with Us
• 5 IPCs if Japan controls Guam, Midway, Wake and Carolines
• 3 IPCs if Japan controls Hawaii
• 5 IPCs if Japan controls West Us

That’s all folks (for now)! ^^

Soon i’ll post Anzac and Us

gamerman01

Some of those changes look similar to my ideas - did you look at mine and agree, or was it coincidence and “great minds thinking alike”? Just wondering :-)

Anyway, at a glance I like your changes overall. Good idea to break up NO for money islands into 2. Offset? by breaking up UK’s - they will collect more now than before also, since they will sometimes have Singapore and not Hong Kong (of course)

Reducing air and infantry forces in Pacific (for any/all powers) is appropriate, in my opinion (as you have done)

bracconebaldo

Of course i did :-) some of your ideas were similar TO
mine…some other are interesting

However i divided the bonuses because i find it unfair…both
For uk and japan…i’ve also reduced those regarding anzac
We can speak.about it when i’ll post us and anzac

bracconebaldo

ANZAC (Starting income 10 IPCs)

New South Wales: 2 infantry, 2 AAA, naval base, minor IC
Queensland: 2 infantry, 1 artillery, 1 fighter, air base, naval base
New Zealand: 1 infantry, 1 fighters, air base, naval base
Malaya: 1 infantry
SZ 62: 1 transport, 1 destroyer
SZ 63: 1 cruiser
• 5 IPCs if at war with Japan, the Allies control Malaya, and ANZAC controls all its original territories
• 3 IPCs if at war with Japan and if the Allies (not the Dutch) control Dutch New Guinea, New Britain, New Guinea, and the Solomons

US Pacific (starting IPCs 52)
Western United States: 2 infantry, 1 mechanized infantry, 1 artillery, 2 AAA, 1 fighter, 1 Tactical bomber, air base, naval base, major IC
Hawaiian Islands: 2 infantry, 1 fighters, air base, naval base
Midway: air base
Wake Island: air base
Guam: air base
Philippines: 2 infantry, 1 fighter, air base, naval base, 1 AAA
SZ 10: 1 transport, 1 destroyer, 1 cruiser, 1 aircraft carrier (carrying 1 fighter and 1 tactical bomber), 1 battleship
SZ 26: 1 transport, 1 submarine, 1 destroyer, 1 cruiser
SZ 35: 1 submarine, 1 destroyer
• 10 IPCs if at war and control of Western, Central and Eastern USA
• 5 IPCs if at war and control of Mexico, South Mexico, Central America and West Indies
• 5 IPCs if at war and control of Alaska, Aleutians, Hawaii, Johnston, and Line Islands
• 3 IPCs if at war and control of Philippines

Witt

As Gamerman says, Pacific map has too much Air.
Reducing Anzac and UK makes sense, but then the all powerful Japan must be stunted too.
How about removing one FT and one Tac from both Japan and Manchuria?
Possibly the Allied net gain would see them hold better on this map.
I would also like to see the US get an extra 5IPCs for holding the continental US NO. Consider making it 15, not 10. They have to make more than Japan!

Should Russia swap 6 Inf in the East for 1 Tk and 3 Mech, so they can return to Moscow?
I know people who can too easily capture Moscow on G5; this would make it harder.

Anyone going to give this set up a go on AAA?

bracconebaldo

Against Japanese i’ve added AAA placed in every allies-controlled territories near Japan and reduced its ground forces against China, made stronger the UK with a new NO system…i’m not sure to reduce Japan power…i want a balanced game not a pro-allies gaming :wink:

Russia…uhm, i’m studying the possibility to add some troops between Urali and Sakha, to represent Siberian troops, but i still don’t know if these will consist in only infantries (max 2) or other stuff (2 mech)!

I’ve tried this setup sunday with my friends…this is the “b” version of the starting +3.5 alpha :)

Anyone who wants to test it and report ideas is really welcome!

Witt

Thank you for responding to my observations.
Glad you could try it out too.

bracconebaldo

You’re always welcome!

I’ll try this setup again this sunday! The only way to test it, is to play it…

Alpha +3.0.beta project

Featured Topics

T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

Alpha 3, sealion dead? I dont think so.

OOB, Alpha 1, 2, 3

Alpha+ 3: Amur rule - questions, agreements and strategies

Okay, help me please. Alpha 1? 2? +2? What the…

Alpha+.1 Proposed Changes Playtesting

Alpha + .1 setup charts and National objectives tracker

Suggestions on Escorts/Interceptors Alpha+

Experience with Alpha Plus so Far

28

17.4k

39.9k

1.7m