We’ll see. I’m just super afraid it’ll increase American morale if I attacked first. Worth a shot though as morale never undermined most campaigns on either side.
[House Rules] Axis get too much money
-
Something that I fooled around with for a bit, is giving the US the 30 IPC Pacific bonus for going to war. They get it straight away and it only works for one time. Along with a 5 IPC Bonus for being at war with the Axis. (Happens per turn)
Another thing I do at times is that I add a US infantry to Midway, Guam, and Wake Islands. I also add French Infantry and French Artillery to Indochina. Creates a minor road block for the Japanese, so they cant just walk in and take it.
It is designed as a balanced game, if the Axis win all the time, you need to learn to play the Allies correct, not change the set up or income
I would like to point out that it is virtually impossible to have the Allies win in a timely manner using OOB. The only realistic way for the allies to win is to have the Axis Surrender. For that to happen, 1 of 2 things would have to happen.
1. The Axis Player Blundered way too much
2. The Allies played, really, really wellTo respond to the first post, I think the Axis have enough money, I just think the Allies need a bit more. You dont want to hand them the game, but throw them a bone, to help them out.
-
I win 20 strait games on triple a lobby plus 10 on the forum… Mostly as the axis against bids of 12-21… Meanwhile some guy says oob is balanced and the allies should win 50%. Yeah ok.
-
Try starting USA off with more infantry. Russian bomber. More Africa Corp for UK. Or any mixture if not doing a bid
-
Or simply try a BM3 game (Balanced Mod.).
You should be fine as Allies. -
After many games, I agree. There is simply too much money in the middle of the board, and after key roadblocks are down, the Axis go to 70/80 income. This creates a game where there is a “flop” to the point where, if the axis achieve their milestones (india, Moscow, also Egypt in some games), the income is tipped too far in Axis favor.
Leningrad NO = this is a gimme space, it should be 3$
Caucasus NO = this is a good incentive but its piling on, should be 3$
Volgograd NO = piling on…if they have this they are about to win the game…3$ max.
Moscow NO = why are we giving them 5 extra dollars for doing what basically ends the game…piling on…0$
India NO = Japan doesn’t need incentives to take this the factory is the incentive = 0$last G42 game Japan was pulling down 83$ and 88$ paydays with bonuses, once its larger than the US KJF wont work anymore.
-
Don’t reduce the Leningrad NO, reverse it so that the USSR get it for holding Leningrad. That way it becomes much less of a gimme. I don’t mind the Moscow/India/Caucasus NOs so much.
It seems the Axis get NOs for doing everything they failed to do in the war, with a few exceptions. I don’t think this is best basis.
-
Don’t reduce the Leningrad NO, reverse it so that the USSR get it for holding Leningrad. That way it becomes much less of a gimme. I don’t mind the Moscow/India/Caucasus NOs so much.
It seems the Axis get NOs for doing everything they failed to do in the war, with a few exceptions. I don’t think this is best basis.
I’d still be interested in exploring some of Taamvan’s ideas. Most of those territories are still 2 IPCs each. Rostov, Caucasus, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow and other territories nearby add up to about 11-12 IPCs. Maybe reduced to a 2-3 IPC bonus for the NOs money. What he’s saying is that if Germany sacks Moscow, than obviously Stalingrad and Caucasus usually follow. If Japan is still economically in the game, not destroyed by the US Navy, then the Axis have reached that economic threshold which is near to the point that cannot be overcome.
-
Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.
-
I would like to counter and throw 2 destroyers in Washington instead, and keep your Battleship off Hawaii.
-
We all have our balancing setup ideas, but what I’ve noticed (thanks to Cow, YG, ABH) is that it is the BOARD that is part of the problem, and the NOs, because the Allies have to go to great lengths to inject power into the middle of the board where all the goodies are, whereas the Axis can do it in most games even if they DONT take their key objectives (india, Moscow).
Even when im losing and failing as the Axis, I just divert to the cash instead of the capitals. I may still lose, but the Allies are working so hard to defeat me and take my money (Greece, Normandy, a few spice islands) whereas I’m tearing Russia apart even in death and going back up to 60/70 cash which starts to turn the tide again.
-
Isnt that the reason why “Middle Earth” almost unbeatable, unless you do a Sea Lion? It helps a lot of areas. (India, Egypt, Moscow, etc…). Its where its placed. There are a lot of 2’s in that area, along with 4 VC’s, 2 of which are capitals. Whats that old saying about the middle of the board wins the game? That applies here as well.
Curious, what exactly do you think needs to be changed with the national objectives. Add some, take some? You dont want to hand the game outright to one side.
-
there is no locktight strategy in G40 for the Allies. There is for the Axis.
There is no reasonable VC for the Allies (kill 2/3 axis)
There is for the Axis.
I agree, that the game should be more balanced, but finding consensus on that is difficult. My primary goal right now is to reduce the Point of Imbalance (turns 6-8?) where the game tips in the favor of the Axis too readily.
-
I would agree with that. No airtight strategy exists for the Allies. The best way to play is to do reactionary play because the Axis have control of the game at the very beggining.
-
@Young:
Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.
Have you ever play tested that?
I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.
-
@Young:
Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.
Have you ever play tested that?
I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.
Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.
-
@Young:
Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.
Have you ever play tested that?
I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.
Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.
If you are giving the US a Battleship in Hawaii, then you are effecting the Japanese turn if they decide to go after the Hawaiian Fleet. That could manipulate them to go for it now. I usually find Japan goes for it Battleship or not.
-
@Young:
Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.
Have you ever play tested that?
I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.
Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.
Yes. I’m aware.
-
The best way I’ve found to balance the G40 setup is to eliminate the Victory City conditions and play until either total annihilation or surrender. In my current game Japan has held all of the standard VCs as well as Calcutta, Moscow, Sydney and now Honolulu for many turns. The Allies are still looking good to win tho. US/UK/FRA have just wiped out Germany and are heavily threatening Japan’s front in and around Moscow. We are on round 13 and the allies are just now pushing back and look poised to win, when OOB rules would have called this for the Axis many turns ago.
And yes, this also means we pulled of a Gasp KGF.
-
but you didn’t, because Japan won. ;)
-
House rules is house rules lol
Suggested Topics
