What country is funnest to play?

I usually gravitate to whatever country is most “difficult” to play. By Difficult, I mean “Hardest to make the correct desicion”. For this reason, USSR is not difficult under this definition. USSR is limited to deciding on the ration between inf/art, how many mech/tanks, how many planes and if he should try for the middle east.

The two most difficult to play IMO is US and UK.

UK has a lot of places to build and a lot of theaters that should be balanced against one another. However, the troops get to the front very fast.
US has to build now for what the map will look like in 3 turns. That is difficult to predict

That is why I say

US, then UK, then Germany, then Japan

First this thread should be called “What country is the most fun to play?”. No such word as “funnest” but maybe that was the intent. Now, that out of the way, I must agree with Kreuz. USA is by far the most fun. It is also the most challenging which IMHO equals most fun. You have no room for error due to your proximity from the action. You also have the most options further clouding the judgment of most players on the first turn, including myself sometimes. I have tried numerous strategies with the USA and some have been successes, leading to “standard move” and some have been utter failures. We call these “experimental games”. My group isn’t pretentious, no one really cares if they win or lose because in real life the good guys won and that’s enough for us. We pretty much just drink a busload of beer and talk a bunch of smack, or as we call it “game table propaganda”.

Least fun country probably China, the entire turn cycle averages less than 10 minutes in our games. USSR always plays China in our group.

I love playing all the powers in Axis but I think when the opportunity arises or in a Balanced Mod 2.0 I enjoy playing Italy.

I remember one of my league games when I had an economy of 50 for Italy on turn 3. Now that was entertaining to say the least. Most of the time Italy never has the chance to shine because it gets bid out of the war but when the bid falls apart or does not concentrate on Italy it can be a lot of fun playing them.

@seancb:

in real life the good guys won

The more I learn of history the less I believe in the existence of ‘good guys’ at all.

@SubmersedElk:

@seancb:

in real life the good guys won

The more I learn of history the less I believe in the existence of ‘good guys’ at all.

You’re confusing current-world issues with 1940s realities… trust me… there were good guys then… you wouldn’t want the Nazis winning and continuing the deliberate genocide of the Holocaust.  If for one second you doubt the good guys won, you’ve got issues.

Personally I like this little speech (a sermon from an American chaplain to some men from the 101st Airborne) from the movie Battleground, which is set during the Battle of the Bulge:

“Now it’s nearly Christmas, and here we are in beautiful Bastogne enjoying the winter sports. And the $64 question is: “Was this trip necessary?” I’ll try to answer that. Let’s look at the facts. Nobody wanted this war but the Nazis. A great many people tried to deal with them, and a lot of them are dead. Millions have died, for no other reason except that the Nazis wanted them dead. So, in the final showdown, there was nothing left to do except fight. There’s a great lesson in this. Those of us who’ve learned it the hard way aren’t going to forget it. We must never again let any force dedicated to a super-race or a super-idea or super-anything become strong enough to impose itself upon a free world. We must be smart enough and tough enough in the beginning to put out the fire before it starts spreading. My answer to the sixty-four dollar question is yes, this trip was necessary. As the years go by, a lot of people are going to forget. But you won’t. And don’t ever let anybody tell you you were a sucker to fight in the war against fascism.”

I agree that WWII wasn’t a simplistic black-and-white conflict between good guys and bad guys (few if any wars are), and it’s true that WWII – as some people hoped at the time – didn’t usher in an era of global peace and good fellowship (no war ever has), but by the same token I largely agree with the assessment given back in the 1970s by Stephen Ambrose (some of whose credibility has since, I admit, been called into question) when he said that the fundamental outcome of WWII was the crushing of fascism in Italy, Nazism in Germany and militarism in Japan and that “surely justice has never been better served.”

@Wolfshanze:

@SubmersedElk:

@seancb:

in real life the good guys won

The more I learn of history the less I believe in the existence of ‘good guys’ at all.

You’re confusing current-world issues with 1940s realities… trust me… there were good guys then… you wouldn’t want the Nazis winning and continuing the deliberate genocide of the Holocaust.  If for one second you doubt the good guys won, you’ve got issues.

Very true, Wolf.  However, there’s nothing the NAZI’s did that the Soviets didn’t also do, often to even greater extremes (~50 million murdered under Lenin and Stalin; countless neighbours invaded; the largest slave-labour program in human history; etc., etc., etc.).  In fact, the Germans borrowed their model of the concentration camp from the Soviets.

If you think the Soviets were “good guys” then I’m afraid you, sir, also have issues.  It was convenient for the Western democracies to let them do the bulk of the fighting for us, but that’s where it ends.

@StuckTojo:

If you think the Soviets were “good guys” then I’m afraid you, sir, also have issues.  It was convenient for the Western democracies to let them do the bulk of the fighting for us, but that’s where it ends.

The Soviets weren’t nice guys either… but the world is better off that Hitler didn’t win… anyone who doubts that, also has issues.

Getting back to the original topic…

If you think of fun as being actively involved in the game each turn, then the US does not make the top of the list. Germany, Japan, and the UK would definitely be the most fun because their actions are crucial each turn.

The US would not make this list in many games where a J4 attack is used. Please don’t take this as an assertion that the US is not important to the Allied effort – it is simply referring to the US being rather dull and even frustrating in that J4 situation.

Marsh

It can take awhile for the US to get actively involved in the fighting in any version of the game.  However some might judge fun by having the economic muscle to spend the way they like… so it’s not my job to view what someone else deems as fun… some might enjoy the US economic might as their view of “fun”.

Yep, fun is definitely an individual concept.

Marsh

Uk or russia is my favorit nations to play… china is also nice to play, if you play them smart and clever…Russia is fun because you need to play with patient, and with the right buy, and coordination with your allies, you can make them very dangerous … UK is all over the map, and it the link between the pacific map and the european map…

All over i am a allies player, because i really like the fact the have to work hard together to win the game… the axis play more their own game at each side…

I personally enjoy the UK the most.  Not only are they a good, balanced nation, but there are some nerve racking moments as almost all of your territory is pivotal for the Allies.  In our games the UK is probably the hardest to succeed with and has a challenge that comes with it, keeping the Allies in tact.

@Wolfshanze:

@SubmersedElk:

@seancb:

in real life the good guys won

The more I learn of history the less I believe in the existence of ‘good guys’ at all.

You’re confusing current-world issues with 1940s realities… trust me… there were good guys then… you wouldn’t want the Nazis winning and continuing the deliberate genocide of the Holocaust.  If for one second you doubt the good guys won, you’ve got issues.

I’m afraid you misapprehended me. At no point did I even slightly imply the Axis were good guys.

But if you think guys like Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt and Truman were good guys… well, you’ve probably drunk too much government Kool-Aid.

The point I was making is that when it comes to warmaking on a global scale, there are no good guys.

I agree.  All world leaders have their flaws, but only some realize them as such and act around them.  People like Hitler and Stalin did not, I’m afraid.

@SubmersedElk:

The point I was making is that when it comes to warmaking on a global scale, there are no good guys.

Disagree… just because you fight doesn’t make you bad or evil.  When you got Genocidal Nazis taking over countries, rounding up people and killing them, ya… stuffing a flower in the barrel of their Panzer probably won’t stop them… sometimes the good guys have to fight to stop evil.  Back to the point that started this… YES… the Good Guys won WWII.  All current political correctness and rewriting of history to make people feel mushy inside regardless.  The good guys did win.

What if we turn the question around and asked what power you think would be the most fun for a new player?

Marsh

@Marshmallow:

What if we turn the question around and asked what power you think would be the most fun for a new player?

That’s a hard one… because “fun” usually means involvement… lots to do… but the countries with lots to do are also the biggest impact players… so while something like Germany or Japan might be a lot of fun because there’s “lots to do”, its easy to make a bunch of mistakes that will cost you the game playing one of them… conversely, the US and UK can often be considered fun because of either lots of forces worldwide and/or a big budget to buy things… but once again, to a new player, trying to grasp all the amphibious needs of both the UK and US can make for major mistakes if not handled well.  I think the safest countries for new players are either the USSR (just buy infantry and hold on), or the lesser powers (Italy/Anzac, etc)… but then of course, these countries aren’t very fun.

Of course if you’re going to make an omelet, you gotta break some eggs… so toss a new player on something and give it a go.