China as a new sub-player

@italiansarecoming:

hmm we are all just guessing here until it comes we will not know for sure this is just great

Makes the moment you get it that much more sweet!

In AA50 1941, I would agree with those who point out, the rules, as we understand them, is to allow the Chinese to distract the Japanese and not become a full viable playing power.

item:China can not be ignored or they become a problem.  They should not be so powerful as to be conquering other territory.  Along with, Burma, Hongkong and China, they distract-burn the resources of the Japanese, limiting/slowing the japanese India push.  It buys UK and extra round.  Thats all UK really needs to get the India IC up and running.  The main confrontation will still be India.  Uk has slightly better odds, in this setup, of making that IC viable.  And as someone pointed out, the extra Chinese territories, will slow down a tank push from Japan to Moscow.  It looks like a slight change from AAR, with good balance IMHO.  I believe those who want China to be more viable are on the balance beam, too much, too little.  Only game time under our belts will tell the truth of Larry’s balancing act.

item:a big item, no one mentions much, the US pacific carrier is now safe for US to base a pacific fleet.  Now with two Japanese carriers, this close to the West Coast, US is forced to spend/defend resources in the Pacific.

In Revised, Indian IC was viable and in fact very powerful if well played

Now, we get a sparring China killed utterly in round 1, so India IC is not viable. Australia IC could work but maybe not with so many Japanese trannies

Bidding for China: at least 4 inf to save the fig, maybe 5, China still need some guys in frontier after Japan 1  :-P

Just a quick comment: we are now playing our second ABattlemap AA50 game with the supposed -41 setup from GENCON. We will be posting a complete report later on. We noticed this, correct me if I’m wrong Perry;

1. China falls, but slowly. In both games Japan made an Indian push and the China ftr survived turn 1, only to be killed later on.
2. There is no quick push by Japan vs. Russia through China or Siberia. IPC-wise a bad move, you need that third bonus so Australia or India is more important. Also due to the fact that Japan doesn’t have that many land units and it takes quite some time to get them in combat as you first want to grab those juicy islands. And if your units are already on transports, going at India is much quicker than landing them and marching them in-land.
3. India can be defended but only by a heavy Russian deployment. This is not as bad as you think because Russia is quite strong ín the early game.
4. UK is strong, it can build an IC and quickly get a strong invasion navy in Europe. This is due to the high IPC-value at-start and the slow way in which Japan eliminates UK areas.
5. Russia looks weak but can quickly rebuild a sizable army. The danger is turn 2 when Caucasus is vulnerable but this can be protected by setting up a counter-attack force in Moscow. Karelia on the other hand needs UK help, and in this case losing the Arkhangelsk bonus due to the presence of UK units on Russian soil is probably much better than Germany getting an extra bonus and to build in Leningrad.
6. In the Pacific, Australia is the easiest pick, being out of reach from the US navy at the West coast. Wake, Midway and Solomons are more dangerous since US may attack with navy and air force and it’s hard to defend several of these islands as Japan, so USA can get its island bonus a lot of the time. In both games we have ended up with a naval arms race b/w Japan and USA both with around 50 IPCs / turn. Hard to say how the balance works out, to be continued! At least USA can quickly get a sizable fleet by building a CV and a BB for example, much better than the AAR inept US naval position!
7. Germany is in a precarious position in that infantry is very slow to the front with the extra Eastern Europe areas. Tanks and aircraft are more effective weapons but not against a retreating Russian foe. SBR, as predicted, is dangerous. Kriegsmarine is wiped out quickly, but we have yet to try a CV build on turn 1. That said, Germany can build quite a lot of tanks that really tests Russian defences- the Russian player will depend on good US and UK play to later in the game be given the chance to go to the strategic offensive. The first turns protecting and retaking KAR+CAU is what you will be doing as the Russian player.
8. Italy is slow to build-up but can be dangerous in a few turns. Either an extra attack force in the Black Sea or to disrupt the UK and US naval build-up. We have yet to see an anti-Italian strategy however, it feels a bit like Italy can be hit easily and quickly be relegated to a second-class power once the navy and NOs are lost.
   8 ) Africa is a back-water. Once you get Egypt and Transjordan, the question is if it’s worth it. In the second game, a South African IC was built, but it is very slow to get into action, let’s see how it works out in the long run.

Overall, lots of fun, slightly stronger play for the Axis than AAR and definitely not a broken game!!

@Lynxes:

Overall, lots of fun, slightly stronger play for the Axis than AAR and definitely not a broken game!!

I’m sorry, but it is FAR to early to make any solid conclusions of the broken~ness of the game.

Also, I noticed you are playing the OPTIONAL rules: National Objectives are optional.

Are you playing with Tech as well?

Yes, we are playing with both Tech and NO’s.
Of course its far too early, but we wouldn’t spend hours and hours on this site, if it wasn’t because we think it is fun to speculate, and to draw premature conclusions.  :-)

As for premature conclusions, here are a bunch more of them!  :mrgreen:

I agree on most issues you bring up Lynxes.
I’ve got a few observations that I’d like to share, however:

1. Germany is not that vulnerable to SBR. Actually, German main vulnerability is that it is limited to only 10 builds per turn! It got more IPC than production slots to spend it on…At least in Round 2-4. This would be especially true in a No-Tech game. Both our games were tech game with 5 IPC/turn spent into research.  With that money not spent on research, Germany could find it difficult to spend that cash. Sure it can build 10 tanks per turn, but it’s not really cost-effective to have Tanks-only stacks. You need a cheap Infantry shield also!

2. Italy is not weak! UK need to spend cash & units to defend KAR. They must wait until Rd3, 4 or 5 before landing in Africa (at least if US goes Pacific). That means that Italy will buy units for a total value of 60-100 IPC before having to face serious opposition. Even so however, it would prolly not be much of match, once a beefed up Royal Navy enters the Med.  :|

3. As for US, I can’t really decide actually. The Pacific looks rather difficult to enter. However, a mere build-up of forces in WCO, might divert Japanese cash & units to an arms race in Pacific. That in turn will lead to little/no Jap pressure on Russia. And in a drawn out battle between UK/Rus and Ger/Ita, I think the Allies will prevail…The other way for US, is to go to Europe. That is the KGF way. Can’t really comment on that.

4. Research: I truly love the research system! For the first time in A&A history, a research system that isn’t seriously flawed. I can actually see Leagues and Tournaments be played as Tech games now!
   Edit Xpt for Heavy Bombers of course  :-) Those are as crazy as a bucket full of frogs, as usual  8-)

Perry, I think we should try to be reasonable when it comes to Germany here. The German troops have been slow in the coming to the Eastern front and those IPCs of Germany has to be matched vs. higher Russian and UK production. We haven’t played long enough to assess the dangers of SBR just yet.

All in all, building a stronger navy might be a viable strat for Germany now that there are 3 areas from Berlin to Leningrad and not 2, a quicker way to get troops east. A strat for the next game maybe?

Hmmm, I do realize something about SBR now.
The per/turn cap of damage, that an IC can sustain, is 2xProdvalue of the IC.
That means that Germany can suffer up to 20 SBR dmg points per turn.
Correct?

yes exactly. If Germany repairs 10 IPC worth of SBR, it still cannot place new units in Germany.

I found that sending men in the baltic sea in AAE was a faster way to send troops out to the front which it did also i some how took leningrad on 1st turn and he was pissed because men in russia and belorussia had a choice and they had to retreat and keep a few men there. So making a bit of a navy for germany can be profitable if the russian rolls are “5’s”