@Cmdr:
Perhaps you need to teach the allies to not all pounce on Germany. Most times that results in an Axis victory. Instead, America should be primarily focused on Japan which gives the allies a chance to win.
I certainly agree, after playing a few games, AA50 turns out completely different than Revised in the pacific, whith NOs on.
Thats not the real problem though, even if it’s obvious that a non-pacific US strat is inferior in AA50 with NOs, as KJF is not the most effective strat in AAR, this is not the whole answer to the axis bias.
And its not so much about KJF vs KGF or KIF, regardless of NOs on or off, it’s important to go after the money, and with NOs, there’s a gold mine in the pacific 8-)
For Telamon, thank you and yes I agree that National Objectives (or NOs as you call them) are fun and new and make for interesting game play. Yes, without National Objectives the game changes, and it would impact the flow of the game, I totally agree with you. Pretty much all of the rules or bidding changes people are suggesting in this thread will change the flow of the game in potentially unforseen ways. But Larry has provided us with a lot of “optional” rules for the game, even 2 different setups (41/42) which used in various combinations provide a number of different games all in one box.
However the cover of the box says “1941” and optional rules are optional so I offer that the 1941 setup with zero optional rules must be used as the definitive game or “standard” or default to which all variations are compared.
I get the feeling that people out there have been using the optional National Objectives more often than not, and glancing at your After Action reports, which is the closest thing I can find to statistics here, that seems to be the case – please correct me if I’m wrong. For whatever reason this is I’m not totally sure, but my guess is because National Objectives are fun and new and add spice to the game, which is fine, but they’re optional and in my mind that means not part of the standard game.
So again the question is asked, the standard/default game, 1941 with no optional rules and therefore without National Objectives does the default game favor the Allies? I’m curious what you all think?
And if you find that 1941 without National Objectives favors the Allies and with National Objectives favors the Axis, can’t it be said that this optional rule just might have intentionally been created by Larry as the balance for the game? Used on a “sliding scale” of National Objectives this is the bid system you may be looking for!
I think the problem lies with the objectives themselves and there difficulty. Getting all objectives as axis should be done by the end of turn 2, yet allied ones are much more difficult. This is compounded by axis owning enough areas that even without NOs they are almost at the same income as the allies, combined with the ease for the axis to get units to the locations that matter compared to the allies and the increased firepower of bombers due to the cost. Why is it that axis NOs are so easy to get, and the allied ones are so difficult? I do not understand that, at all. Instead of a bid why not just change the NOs a little.
Germany: They should need both Karelia and Caucasus for there NO.
Japan: They should need 2 of the 3 with India, Australia, and Hawaii.
Russia: 2 of the territories instead of all 3 for the 10 IPC NO, reduce the NO to 5 IPC as well.
I think that alone would fix the problem instead of a bid. The big problem I see with a bid is with how crazy turn 1 is to begin with, how much different is the game if the US puts a sub somewhere in the pacific, or UK puts more units in Africa, or a sub in the Atlantic.
The other thing I wonder is if LL is to blame. With dice one would expect at least one axis attack on round 1 to go terribly wrong allowing for the allies to exploit that with the small margins they have. Like the attack on the UK BB, or Egypt, or the Russian front, or Pearl Harbor, etc. I don’t like that idea though because of the randomness f it. Or perhaps tech is supposed to be the answer as the allies can buy tech turn 1 if they choose where as the axis are hard pressed to afford it. That would not be good either though, esp as the axis can seriously outspend the allies starting as early as turn 2 or 3.
Has anyone noticed a difference with Tech on or using Dice aside from random freak things in later rounds in key battles?
i think that without the natioinal objectives, germany would have a tough time trying to take russia and hold off the u.k. at the same time, for the 42’ scenario no national objectives might be more reasonable, or collecting national objectives at every second turn,
if germany goes too far toward russia, the u.k. can build up relatively uncontested to the west, and if germany fails to defend against that threat, the u.k. can usually get to france or northwest europe, which means that germany has to
re-group and fall back from the eastern front,
unless japan is advancing toward russia, germany can not attack russia and keep out the u.k. at the same time,
that is where italy can make a difference, if italy concentrates their effort toward the middle east and africa, that would eat into the u.k. I.P.C. count and free up the german and japanese formations to more advanced attacking tactics, japan would have more I.P.C. to build a pacific fleet, and germany could look toward attacking the u.k. the u.k. would need defense from the u.s. and would have to wait until the u.s. would build a atlantic fleet to get to france, which in turn would draw I.P.C away from a u.s. pacific fleet,
there is nowhere that i can see from the 41’ scenario set-up that the allies need a bid,
i do not think that the axis need a bid, the strategies to use when playing the axis may be less obvious and more planning may be needed, although with some good advances at the opening rounds, the allies advantage of more time and resources to expend strategy wise can be turned around
@Chi:
So again the question is asked, the standard/default game, 1941 with no optional rules and therefore without National Objectives does the default game favor the Allies? I’m curious what you all think?
Most players here agree that w/o optional rules allies have advantage in -41, and with NOs 41 is favored to axis.
I think you can win against me if you play axis and I’m allies in 41 w/o optional rules. I lost a couple of games with this setting.
With NOs on, I don’t think you will win against me anymore than you will win against me or other decent players if you are axis in Revised playing w/o bids.
