How to achieve balance part 2-> bids

@ckladman Yes, the game tends to favor the allies without objectives, and the axis with. To balance, you could trying giving a bid (additional starting units) to the side that is at a disadvantage, or play with objectives but reduce the payout. (3 ipcs vs 5.)

@taamvan Can you say a bit more about what Japan is doing in your games? It’s true that with a well-executed KGF Germany will be contained to the core territories of France, NW Europe, Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania – but that’s still worth $30 a turn and it takes the Allies a very long time to build and load enough transports to crack it.

Meanwhile, a pure KGF usually leaves Japan free to take India, then the Caucasuses, then Moscow – the Allies can certainly rush a few fighters to Moscow, but sending even one ruins the only practical Russian national objective, and if you build too many then you never get enough Allied ground troops to crack the German turtle – fighters in Moscow can’t reach to support an attack on France.

In my experience, without a bid and with NOs on, the Japanese attack on Moscow is much faster than the American attack on Paris, let alone Berlin. How does the Pacific play out in your games?

@mobius1:

You know, maybe you’re right. My countering Japan strategy is mostly a throwback to the old version. But now it may be a better choice to have Russia go all out against Germany, since I think I have a good chance of pulling it off.

There have been many times that I could have secured Poland if I had enough tanks…

Put some allied (UK/USA) fighters with that stack of forward Russian troops and you should be able to safely get to/hold Eastern Poland.  That territory is a key piece in the theatre of war.  Whoever controls that (Germany/allies) can effectively dead zone 6 territories that it borders.  Also, those allied fighters are not out of play based in EPL.  In conjunction with the a/c strategy that Argothair posted for an allied navy, the ftrs can even hit france.

They can be, goof2658, but Japan has the option of moving two of its carriers over to Tokyo Bay on J1, and up to four fighters can land there after the Pearl Harbor / San Diego J1 attacks. That’s plenty of protection against one bomber.

So, if you want to maximize your attack on Asia, rather than your attack on the US Pacific navy, you can kind of stack up near Tokyo instead of stacking in the Caroline Islands. Depending on how many of your fighters survived, this is often a good idea anyway, because your stack may not be safe in the Carolines.

In my experience, KGF is not surefire in 1941 setup.

If you have a meticulous player for Japan and a player with a good strategy for Germany, The Allies focusing entirely on Germany Leaves Japan free to roll over Asia.

Fast forward to 1944/45 And the Allies circling in on Germany.  Yes, Germany will likely fall, but if Japan has meticulously managed her troops up to this point, Russia will have fallen or be about to fall to hoards of Japanese tanks.

My experience is that in any 1941 game with strong players, something has to be done to slow down Japan before she becomes a juggernaught, and this take away from the KGF.

Of course, this is my opinion only and my group of players is 6 strong leading to a heavy bias due to the low sample number.

Hmm you are probably right bugoo–Karelia and Egypt in the same turn is too risky.  Actually though, I once played a game where I took Karelia, killed the bb, and took Egypt…  However with only 3 figs Karelia is obviously too risky so the better play is probably pursuing the dd/tranny combo with the 2 subs–the bb can be kept out of Finland/Karelia by landing all fighters in Finland…  Re. Karelia, in a ll game it comes down to whether the aa hits.  If no fighter is shot down then sometimes Karelia can be taken without sacrificing a fig…and that is pretty devastating for the Allies.  If a fighter is shot down, then sometimes that’s 2 figs down for the Axis.

Assuming 1941 setup and using NO’s, here are a few minor, simple, yet helpful setup changes to the board.

1.  Exchange the sz4 Russian sub for a Russian destroyer.  In Revised, Russia had an 8 IPC, 2 attack, 2 defense unit which could block ships, so give it back to them.  This both helps Russia and Germany, because if Germany wants to, it can hit it.

2. Exchange the sz56 US transport for a US cruiser.  This seems to make Japan’s opening moves a little more clear and it means that the US cannot immediately take a Pacific island on its first turn which helps Japan, but having a capital ship, helps the US as well.

3. Add 1 Chinese infantry to Yunan.  I know that many people want more than this, but I think that this would force Japan to be more careful with its first turn moves, but I think that Japan could still do just about everything that it wants to.

These changes actually give the Allies 10 IPCs worth of unit/unit upgrades, and with all of the talk about the Axis having the slight advantage, maybe these changes would help.

@Cmdr:

An all out attack on Japan’s worked more often. (Russia holds the front against Germany and stacks up to help with China/holding Japan back while England puts down ICs in Africa/Asia Minor and America blitzes in.)

Maybe this is why Japan is so strong?