I feel nothing should be changed at all, frankly. Japan is overmatched by the US, to be sure, but to about the same degree that Russia/ UK are by Germany/ Italy. That’s the part of your argument that doesn’t jive with my experience of the game.
C
Latest posts made by chompers
-
RE: Changes still needed to the game, IMHOposted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
-
RE: Changes still needed to the game, IMHOposted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
12-15 IPC’s, not 18. And I’m not even convinced it’s necessary, that’s just what my gut is telling me. The US, as the primary force of the Allied side, needs to be unrestricted in it’s ability to deploy on either front as necessary in response to whatever the Axis’s opening moves are. To me, restricting that is a far more drastic change than an extra 4 inf for Japan, whose presence would only really be felt if the US was spending heavily in the Pacific anyway, as otherwise they would just be making an overwhelming Japanese starting advantage in Asia slightly more overwhelming.
-
RE: Changes still needed to the game, IMHOposted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
Yes, I do agree that some minor changes might be needed, but I think you would agree there’s a pretty large disparity between our suggestions. IMHO the scale of some of the changes you’ve suggested are pretty game-breaking. I’d like to add that I believe your analysis of the Pacific theater to be pretty spot-on, but I think you’re underestimating the detrimental effect of zero US investment early in Europe. Frankly, if you (as the axis player) could go into every game in your group knowing that the US was going to dump 80-100% in the Pacific early on, what would hold you back from a G2 Barbarossa with the intent to have the Russians penned into Moscow by turn 6 or 7? You’re a 60-70 point Germany by then, with the ability to sit in Bryansk thumbing your nose at a primarily defensive oriented Russian stack while trickling enough units via the Leningrad and Ukraine minors to (at worst) maintain parity with the Russians or ( more likely) gradually begin to outnumber them as a small group of mobile German units do doughnuts in the interior of Russia gobbling up the rest of its provinces. Heck, I’d see no reason as Japan to not head on down and blow up India J3 or J4 depending on whether the Allied player blocked effectively after a J1 Hainan naval base build, and then follow that up by heading straight for Cairo 2 turns later, dispatching its surviving air to either suicide on Moscow when the time is right or sit in Europe watching the coast (I shudder to think how much more effective this would be if the Japs got their OOB planes back). It could even churn out a batch of tanks or 3 from India to help with Moscow or Cairo, respectively. The US needs to spend in both theaters simply in order to keep the Axis players honest, and prevent them from teaming up in their theater of choice.
My 2 cents.
-
RE: Changes still needed to the game, IMHOposted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
Not seeing what the OP’s talking about after a good 30 games of alpha .2. The time it takes for the US to marginalize Japan with 100% Pacific builds roughly coincides with the time it takes Germany to pressure Russia back into turtling in Moscow, and with no US involvement whatsoever in the Atlantic there is no excuse for the Italians not to be sitting in Cairo around that time too, at which point the EuroAxis is poised to win the game. I’m not even sold on the fact that the US push the Japs back to their homeland within any sort of reasonable time frame at all if the Japs deny the US the decisive naval battle they’re looking for as long as possible while using its starting land and air to pick off the minor allies one at a time. I will agree that things get very dicey for Japan in the face of a full court press from the Allies possibly including UK/ANZAC turn 1 DOW’s plus simultaneous pressure from the Russian inf and whatever forces the Chinese can mount, but Japan starts off with an incredible amount of mobile firepower which can neutralize several of these threats if used wisely (i.e always with land to soak up hits). Yeah Japan will never come close to its 6 VC’s and is ultimately doomed, but that doesn’t mean it rolls over and dies T6. It has been my experience so far that the game’s ever so slightly tilted towards the Allies, but nowhere near to the degree that the suggested changes are in any way justified. A smattering of extra land units in Asia are all that are really needed, 12-15 IPC’s in total IMHO, and Europe is near perfect.
-
RE: Lessons Learned Global 1940posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
I have found early German investment on deterrence against US and UK naval interference in Europe to pay huge dividends as the game moves into its middle stages. With the G1 CV 2 TRN purchase followed by a minimum of 1 sub every single turn (we’ve taken to calling these insurance or safety subs in our group) and a focus on preserving the Luftwaffe, Germany can have a substantial fleet of subs ready to take hits for Luftwaffe when its inevitably called upon to strike the US and/or rebuilt UK fleets. Having Italian air ready to blow up any destroyer blocks by the Allies to prevent your sub force from converging on Gibraltar is pretty key. This will normally result in one of two things happening: either the US will force the issue early intending to sacrifice its fleet in order to whittle down the Luftwaffe, or they will spend an extra handful of turns to make sure that any attack on their invasion fleet would be suicidal. Either way, the US is forced to spend more points on fleet cover for its transports and less on men, which will allow Germany and Italy more time to push into Russia and more time to prepare adequate defenses in Europe all for the cost of 6-12 IPC’s per turn.
-
RE: Any thoughts on the Minor IC in Southern Ukraine?posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
My thoughts are it was very considerate of the Russians to build that Minor for Germany.
-
RE: Is Germany strong enough in Alpha?posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
One step ahead of you. More units for Germany, less for Russia, weaker US NO, and no more Anzac capturing the Carolines for the US, or UK/US threatening Berlin via seizing Denmark to open the straight. Let me know if I missed anything major, I’m gonna go beat my head against the wall for a bit.
edit Russian Minor IC in Ukraine…interesting, and at least he removed the German initial Barbarossa territory grab N.O. Overall though, seems to have strengthened the Axis slightly while weakening the Allies slightly. I guess he went with what made the majority of players happy, can’t say I blame him.
-
RE: Is Germany strong enough in Alpha?posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
That’s been the basic order of purchases for the US just about every game we’ve played of the newest Alpha setup, and it works beautifully at slowing down and/or containing Japan. It’s a kickass setup to really bring some pain to Japan and I’m a huge fan of it. But it’s nowhere near ready on the Atlantic side to do much of anything but die, and then the US will need to spend its next two turns or so worth of IPC’s to get its Atlantic fleet to the point where it can survive a German attack, and then another turn or two in order to have sufficient transports and men to begin dropping into Europe. Which brings me back to my earlier statements, it’s very tough for the US to exert any real pressure on Germany before its gobbled up enough of Russia that it can turn around and begin fending off Allied landings while trickling enough reinforcements to Barbarossa via Leningrad and Stalingrad to eventually take Moscow as well. Once again, why does Germany need even more help? This is just stacking the odds further and further in its favor. I would like to draw attention again to the fact that these games were played without the +3 IPC bonus per territory gained in the initial Barbarossa turn, and yet Larry is looking at adding even more to Germany. If anything, its Japan that ultimately needs the help.
Honestly the only way I’ve found for the US to make a real and lasting impact on the European side after a string of purchases like those you described was through helping the UK retake and hold Cairo while protecting London.
-
RE: Is Germany strong enough in Alpha?posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
The US doesn’t have a huge income edge if its splitting its IPC’s between theaters. And you’re ignoring the simple fact that Germany can easily put the Russian player in a position where they have to chose to either fall back a territory or be destroyed, at which point the Germans move one space forward and await the next wave of reinforcements one space behind before moving ahead again. Yes, you can threaten the German stack more by investing in units like planes and tanks or (my personal preference) artillery, but the Germans will always have more than you do as long as they stay mostly stacked up and don’t overextend themselves. Believe me, its not that our Russian players are turning tail and running back to Moscow the moment the Germans show up, nor are they churning out 90-100% inf builds and awaiting the inevitable. Every inch of Russia is fought for, but eventually when faced with the choice of making a stand and dying, or pulling back a space toward your capital to reinforce, the choice (IMHO) is an obvious one.
-
RE: Is Germany strong enough in Alpha?posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
I don’t buy that. With regards to Europe, we rarely see Germany losing more than 1 or 2 planex on the UK fleet kills unless the UK player scrambles, at which point he’s inviting sea lion as his fighters are dead. Germany generally comes out of its France battle with its infantry screen dead but all other units pretty much intact, as they can still send in a couple spare tac bombers. It’s usually left in a pretty good position to pursue Barbarrosa in whatever fashion it deems fitting.
My main point I’ve been trying to raise was that the US can’t get away with starting much of a fleet at all in the Atlantic early because its crucial for them to spend in the Pacific early on before Japan gets out of control. All the other allies in the area are mere speed bumps, and if there’s no US navy (that’s close to par with Japan’s) already making its way past Hawaii by the time Japan takes the DEI and begins to kill of the minor Pacific allies, things are going to go downhill really fast. Japan can force the US to spend heavily on fleet to be a threat by spending heavily on fleet in its own right. In short, I have yet to see the US be able to effectively stall Germany without letting Japan off the hook. Why does Germany need even more offensive power?
I get that some of you are better players than me, really. I’m not gonna argue that. But from where our group see things, the Axis are winning the majority of the time no matter who plays what side. Doesn’t that speak to some sort of inherent disadvantage for the Allies? Or do we just magically become “incompetent” when we switch from playing Axis to Allies?
Suggested Topics
