How long is one turn?

Thank you sir! Figured as much, just couldn’t find it definitively stated anywhere.

@Obergruppenfuhrer:

“The race for quality has no finish line- so technically, it’s more like a death march.”

That’s hilarious LT!!

I got all of these quotes from here:    http://despair.com/

They have a line of “demotivators.”  The creator modeled them after the successories you see in fancy offices.  He says that true motivation comes from within so only companies with a band-aid fix it approach and disposable income use them.  (like large US car companies and banks  :lol:)

True, the Allies can’t do “anything” or make outragegous attacks or make strange buys, but you can get away with a lot of bad habits if there is no bid to worry about.

I find that often when all of the players are experienced, one of two things happen:

it is very close for a very long time, and the game may go longer than 10 rounds by round 4 (or so) it is realized by both players that the game will likely go one way (or another) and one might as well save “playing it out to its most likely conclusion”.

fair enough. Let’s say you pull the armor back, and toss fighters in? Or one arm, one ftr?
Also it’s not just the german ftr but also it’s armor(s). Plus stalling it for 2 turns (by forcing it to pull back instead of allowing it to build up).

I’m not sure I follow, how does hitting EEuro hurt Germany more than attacking Ukr. It has 1 more armor anyway, and you have more guys to throw in. Further against a good PE bid you’d likely be creating a deadzone in Karelia even with armor there, or I could stack Cauc to force you from Karelia on R2. Either way I don’t see why attacking EEuro is going to hurt Germany more than hitting Ukr would.

Depending on the bid of course, but interesting is

sub vs sub in AZO

2 ftr vs trn, sub in BAL
8/3 vs Ukr

and maybe 5/1 vs Man (only w/1 inf Kwa bid or less)
ncm the trn to NOR and Germany has a tough task.

Yes very much depending on the bid if you ask me. IMO no Africa bid should ever happen unless you are prepared to bid 2 guys into Manch. I assume an Africa bid as against a PE bid this would be extremely risky, and create a potential deadzone out of Karelia. So yes I’d say this would work against only the very worst of bids.

That’s the only reason I’d risk all my tanks in E Euro. At least I know I’ll have another round to build before an invasion. I don’t like it, but in an unRR, no bid game (ie playing by the printed rules) I could see the tactical advantage to taking Manch, E. Euro, Baltic Sea and the sea zone to the west of France with Russia followed by a Kwang attack by the UK.

But herein lies the problem in a no bid no RR game why would Russia need to ever worry about Karelia. I would also question why Russia would need to attack Manchuria as in a no bid game the Allies start with such an impressive advantage they don’t need to do much to win.

Do you have Iron Blitz? If so try the 1939a scenario as the Axis. It should give you a bit more of a challenge.

We’re playing with restricted first turn (USSR can’t attack first turn) and higher IPC allottment to every nation except (you guessed it) Russia.

This is the root of your problem. If your group feels that the Axis is underpowered, then your group should use bidding to determine the Axis player, and how many extra IPCs they get. Search the internet, and this board for more information about bidding.

Generally, RR is enough to balance the game for middle-experience players. Bidding is needed only when experience grows to the point where the axis can not win anymore than 10-20% of the time.

I would probably suggest going against building an IC in Yakrut for Japan. It’s much more economical to just buy two transports instead. Usually when I set up an IC (India or Burma, maybe for both), it’s to produce ARM and not inf. I think that 6 ARM should be more than enough (if you factor in supporting inf) per Japan once it hits critical mass.