How to re-balance the -41 Scenario (team effort!)

I’ve seen the beta of TripleA and a lot of respect to the programmers, but it’s way too buggy to use at the moment for AA50.

As for Mapview and Battlemap, that is personal indeed.  :wink:

2. Tweaking NO’s
   Some thoughts :

• Japan looses 1-3 NO’s before gameplay.
• Italy does not get any NO’s (it feels as they are a tad bit too strong in the OOB setup)

Hey, Perry, isn’t the biggest problem Germany’s NOs? They easily reach 55 IPCs when they get Karelia and that’s way more than those 45 IPCs you were getting in AAR and they you didn’t have Italy to shore up the Med front as you can do now.

I favour playing without NOs altogether if you want to balance the game in the allied favour. I still think the extra VCs will make the game into a more historical game than AAR, so even though some of the effects of NOs such as pushing Japan and Italy south will be lost the overall balance change would be nice and also very much in the KISS mode since you won’t have to change anything at all, just not use an optional rule!

I’d wait on “re-balancing” until more games are played.  One weekend of play does not make a good sample.  Besides Allied strats always trail the Axis strats given that the Allies generally require more coordination.

However, the simplest change would just be to play with no NO’s.

Unfortunately without NOs the USA is way underfunded.

I was thinking of modifing some of the NOs. Here is what I would go with……

Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO. This one makes the Manchuria, Kiangsu, Thailand NO obsolete.

-Gain 5 ipcs if Axis powers control at least 5 of the territories, Kwangtung, East Indies, Borneo, Phillipines, New Guinea, or Solomon Islands 5 instead of 4 will make it a little harder to get

The other No stays the same.

Italy NOs stay the same

USA is too weak production wise

-Gain 15 ipcs if at the end of your turn the value of all American units in Pacific theatre are more than 90 ipcs,not including ICs or AA guns.
(Pacific theatre includes…Alaska, all pacific islands, WUSA and Pacific ocean)If you really think about it the American people would have been furious if we had not fought Japan after PH. If we are not engaging them then morale should be low and no bonus should be given. This would also get America to its ideal ipc level.

-Gain 5 ipcs if Allied powers control Phillipines

The other 2 NOs are deleted. All American NOs focused on Pacific. If you don’t fight in Pacific you get no bonus.

Germany

-gain 5 ipcs if any Axis naval units are in sea zones 1-4 or 6-12  A little harder to get than the France, NWE, Germany, Czech, Bulgaria, Poland NO. That NO is deleted.

Other 2 NOs stay the same

United Kingdom

-Gain 5 ipcs if no Axis naval units in sea zones 1-4 and 6-12. This one deletes the Eastern and western Canada etc etc NO

All others stay the same.

USSR

-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Japanese forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Japan, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Japan will have the same NO.

-gain 5 ipcs if allies control 3 of the following territories Norway, Finland, Poland,Romania, Czech or Balkans modified from 10 ipcs

Other NO stays the same

Just some ideas with the NOs. I really really hate how powerful Japan is. Yes I do believe more games should be played before anything concrete is decided. But seriously does anyone think they can come up with a plan that doesn’t include KGF? Or a plan that can actually defeat Japan? A game that is global is ideal.

One last idea is possibly making a few of the Chinese territories worth 0 ipcs. This would deny Japan a few dollars a round and doesn’t hurt the chinese infantry builds.

Another idea would be to work out a 12 VC victory condition for the Axis, along with a change of NOs to counterbalance the game. In this case, ignoring Japan would be fatal since just Karelia would do if Japan got all their VCs in the Pacific. NO-changes for this possible variant, “Axis tactical victory”, could be:

*Remove German starting terr. bonus
*Remove Japanese starting terr. bonus
*Boost Soviet Arkhangelsk bonus to 10 IPCs
*Boost US homeland bonus to 10 IPCs

@Perry:

Nice tweaks to NO’s. Also, would be interesting to see what people think about bid levels.

I’ll start….50 ipc bid for the allies. All in Pacific region…Siberia(Russian units), India (start with IC, more troops, maybe a cruiser), WUSA(Japan should not be able to hit this first round, a cruiser and destroyer here)

Maybe 65 ipcs

65 is insane. I’d say 12-18: all to Yunnan. That would make China a non-sparring power and the fighter would survive

Just give China 1 Infantry per territory in 41 and keep it 1 for 2 in 42

Burma road ( allied control of Yunnan or Burma) allows the UK player to lend 1 IPC per controlled territory up to a maximum of 4 IPC per turn, so they can buy non-infantry units.

lastly, make the flying tigers replaceable as long as the fighter is paid for by US IPC fund.

How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…

@Flying:

Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO.

What’s the point of giving them to both? Now it’s only better for Japan to attack Russia! Who needs those 5 IPC’s most - Japan or Russia? No, only give Russia a bonus if Japanese units are on its territories, thàt’s the way to make Japan think twice. (edit the Russian 10 IPC one to 5 IPC’s then)

Edit:
As for the bidding: 1 IPC to the Axis 8)

@HolKann:

How about inventing some nice Allied counter strategies to the KRF (kill Russia first) ? They haven’t been all tried yet, have they? So no, I’m not convinced the Axis got a '41 auto win…

@Flying:

Japan is overpowering we need to lessen their NOs
-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Russian forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Russia, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Russia will have the same NO.

What’s the point of giving them to both? Now it’s only better for Japan to attack Russia! Who needs those 5 IPC’s most - Japan or Russia? No, only give Russia a bonus if Japanese units are on its territories, thàt’s the way to make Japan think twice. (edit the Russian 10 IPC one to 5 IPC’s then)

Edit:
As for the bidding: 1 IPC to the Axis 8)

It doesn’t make much sense to get a bonus if all of the eastern territories are occupied by the Japanese. These bonuses are geared toward the morale of a nation. Imagine you are a russian citizen and the japanese are a couple hundred miles outside of moscow and your troops to the east have been routed. Will your morale and spirits be up or down? This bonus would not last long, we agree on that. One country will at some point figure that it is the best interest to attack the other. Russia doesnt have the firepower to attack in the east like japan does. I would love to see a starting armor unit in the east to russia to give them options.

American NO……

-Gain 15 ipcs if at the end of your turn the value of all American units in Pacific theatre are more than 90 ipcs, not including ICs or AA guns.(Pacific theatre includes…Alaska, all pacific islands, WUSA and Pacific ocean)

With the setup as is I cannot see anything other than a KGF strategy. Perhaps something like this would create a global war. If you really think about it the American people would have been furious if we had not fought Japan after PH. If we are not engaging them then morale should be low and no bonus should be given. This would also get America to its ideal ipc level. Maybe other American NOs should be modified or deleted since this is a big one.

The more I think of this the more I like it. If you use this NO you are required to call this game Axis&Allies&Flying Tiger from now on. :-D

@Flying:

USSR

-Gain 5 ipcs if you have not engaged in combat with Japanese forces as attaker or defender at any time during the game. This will simulate the nonaggression treaty with Japan, if either side breaks the treaty then both lose the ipcs. Yes Japan will have the same NO.

I like that because it will also lure the players into a more historical game-play…
… having say that:
The Allies (specially Russia) are the ones who don’t want Japan to attack the USSR*
So giving both sides 5 ipc for doing something that USSR won’t do anyway is just a gift for Russia
And giving 5 ipc to Japan will simply make it stronger (and many players are saying that Japan is strong enough already)

Why not using one of the alternative rules of Revised to represent the Soviet-Japanese non-aggression pact? Just give the USSR 5 infantry for free to be automatically placed at any Soviet territory where Japan crosses the line? (just the first time Japan attacks of course).

• In real life the Germans were also against a Japanese invasion of the USSR. Germany played as a mediator for the non-agression teatrise between the USSR and Japan. Japanese have had their “lower-butt” kicked on many small (and not so small) engagements against Soviet troops at Manchurian borders as to know that attacking the Red Army was a bad idea.

OK, it does seem like the Axis are having a quite big advantage

Am i the only one thinking the axis are at the disadvantage here?

Just played a game (admitidley with 6 players) but the ais was crushed beyond belief…

Am I the only one here who believes that BOTH sides can win without a bid  :?

This is not Revised ppl, it’s a new game, it’s more complex than AAR, and the best strats are not discovered yet.

i’ve played the game twice now (once with NO and once w/out) and I do believe Allies has an advantage.  Before Japan can get to Moscow, the Allies will be breathing down the necks of Germany and Italy.

@Nix:

OK, it does seem like the Axis are having a quite big advantage

Am i the only one thinking the axis are at the disadvantage here?

Just played a game (admitidley with 6 players) but the ais was crushed beyond belief…

KGIF?

@shohoku201:

i’ve played the game twice now (once with NO and once w/out) and I do believe Allies has an advantage.  Before Japan can get to Moscow, the Allies will be breathing down the necks of Germany and Italy.

KGIF, how predictable. I thought this game was created to get action in Pacific?

When are we gonna stop dicking around and admit this game is the same ole broken record and come up with ideas that make this a global conflict? I tried but no one is listening.

/Flying tiger

Once we’ve played the game for a few months I’m sure we’ll be trying out some ideas if the Axis seem to be kicked in the butt by a KGF strat in a big majority of games. People right now I think are trying to play the game and optimizing strategies. In particular we should expect quick offensives by the Germans and Italians before American invasions take place, so that Russia can be made to collapse. On the other spectrum we could see Japan attacking Alaska from turn 2 and on so that USA can’t throw all at Europe.

I don’t think we need difficult changes though like changing major things, the simplest thing would be to just give the Axis a 12 VC victory condition which would mean the Pacific couldn’t be ignored. But again, we should try the game out more first!