Here’s the Armies vs Navies idea I came up with!
G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread
-
@Mursilis said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
BM china can be a bit too strong.
This is probably the part of where you’re coming from where I have a problem.
Why’s the testing burden on the mod squad? Have you play tested your proposal?
-
Yeah they can be if yunnan somehow doesn’t fall. But most games it does so it isn’t an issue. In fact why even have the NO bonus for china at all since the burma road usually is out of commission by turn 2 and since it’s closed they have no access to artillery which makes the whole NO rule useless, does it not? You could give the chinese 30 IPCs by having the Burma road but again, it usually is closed off in turn 2 so it isn’t an issue. I know with 30 IPC’s that would be a game changer, but the point stands. It is not open enough to get the bonus cash and get artillery units.
That is beside the point though. And yes I’m going to test this rule in my next game which i’m probably going to start in the next few days.
My suggestion can be amended or tested. Now they have more people than just little old me, im sure. The idea might be sound.
Of course if India falls then the Chinese can’t get any extra IPC’s since the air dropped supplies will be coming from India.
If it does work out simon then this would make you very very happy I would assume. IF at the very least my whole idea is not accepted then letting artillery be purchased if szechwan is not controlled by the japanese might be enough. But my whole concept might fix your issue with the rule and add some extra options for the chinese(Artillery).
-
@Mursilis i’m not sure i understand the goal of the proposed rule modification. it seems like the rationale keeps shifting between “China is too strong” and “China isn’t strong enough”
-
There’s two aspects to the Burma Road rule:
- If it’s open at the start of the turn you get artillery if you want
- If it’s open at the end of China’s turn you get the NO.
Reducing the NO from 6 to 3 reduces the incentive to trade Yunnan for China - versus doing something else. Perhaps this actually increases strategic depth, because China becomes less of a one dimensional power.
You’re normally doing reasonably well as allies to get the NO for two turns in the whole game if the axis J1. Perhaps this is part of the reason it was reduced to 3, to reduce the incentive to J1.
I tend to like the incentive for the allies to go hard after the Burma Road. I’m guessing some feel that this is a weakness or it wouldn’t have been changed against balance.
-
I’m sorry about that. I might be mistaken from my games but it just seems to me that as long as japan hits yunnan and shuts down the road then china gets 3 ipc’s for a turn, never has a chance to get artillery and then the idea of the guerrillas makes perfect sense and works out perfectly. Now the only problem for me comes to the point that if japan loses control of the road they have all those units sitting there that they can’t move or else a chinese infantry will be spawned.
So looking at the board and seeing 6 units of japanese troops that I can’t use or i’m going to have a chinese infantry to deal with and lose a territory instantly seems a bit strong. I feel that china is too weak at the beginning of the game and can be too strong and the end of the game. The current balance change for china doesn’t help improve their tactical standpoint at all. If you look at every other change that was made you can see it adds money to a power through more NO’s.
Anzac is a great example of a wonderful change that when you look at it from a numbers standpoint looks bad, “Hey, I’m going from getting 10 ipc’s to 9, why would this be better if i’m getting less money?” But when you look at it from the actual game play point of view, you see that they are instead getting a guaranteed 3 ipc NO boost while still being able to get the other money. And since Malaya is usually in allied hands for a while instead of having that 5 ipc boost per turn you get 6.
If you look at the vichy rule this is obviously there to help out italy from being killed immediately.
There are a lot of great changes in the mod but I feel that the china one is somewhat lacking.
I think if you simply give china an extra chance to put that artillery down on the field it might help china’s early game while not making the late game overpowered.
Perhaps having the burma road open would be 4 ipc’s and if only szechwan, burma, and india are open china gets +2 ipc’s and can still buy artillery. If yunnan and szechwan are closed than the guerrilla rule kicks in. This might be a better balance so that the chinese can fight early game, but if they lose too much territory, then the guerillas kick in to either regain some territory or just annoy japan.
-
@Mursilis I think I misunderstood you in the first place. Your idea is a fully open Burma road gives China +4 and a partially open road gives +2 or +3. In all cases China are allowed artillary and Japan is not restricted to the garrison rule. Once the road is fully closed, the garrison rule kicks in.
This is fairly easy and by far much less complicated than Vichy, why not? I think i like this!
What if India and Burma only are Japan controlled? This means +3 for China?
-
I’m thinking if india falls then no artillery is allowed BUT the guerrilla rule will kick in and the +1 ipc per territory (szechwan, yunnan, burma) would still apply. If burma and india are captured then china would get +2, no access to artillery AND guerrilla chinese units would spawn. I’m still working out a bit of the specifics to make it as clear as possible and as realistic as possible.
However another take to this would be as long as India OR Burma is open/allied controlled(if india falls and china can retain control of burma) artillery would be available. As long as China has access to recruit artillery then guerrillas will not spawn. I like the second option more, personally.
A third option would be that the chinese have access to artillery as long as one section of the burma road is open and each territory(india, burma, szechwan, yunnan) gives +1 as a NO. And if the whole road was closed then the guerrillas would spawn. This one I like as well and is the easiest to implement.
I think options 2 and 3 would work out best.
I don’t want to make it too difficult, but I think it would work in a more balanced way.
-
So me and my friend and playing with the new rules. We are about to do turn 2 with china. On the first round I built 3 arty and stacked everyone in szechwan. We will see what happens.
The rules we decided on are as follows:
Each territory that contains the burma road is worth a NO of 1 IPC.
As long as either India OR Burma are allied controlled then China can build artillery units even if szechwan and yunnan are axis controlled.
If the Burma Road is completely axis controlled(All four territories) then chinese guerrillas will spawn in japanese territories with no land units present.Any other questions, comments, or concerns just let me know.
UPDATE
Well I actually have fun with china for the first time. China get’s the upfront cost of an extra infantry or artillery instead of causing Japan to slow down by leaving a unit in each territory. I’m definitely enjoying these chinese rules over OOB or even BM. China actually has some choices now from being aggresive or defensive.
If you guys want to mod it into a AAA game that would be helpful. Although this thread seems to have died again. First game was a big success.
-
I have a few other changes for the mod.
Russia:
If Japan declares war on Russia and they are at war with the european axis then they get +1 IPC in the supply zones(down from 2)
USA:
Modify the morroco/north african bonus from 5 to 3 ipcs.
Modify the holland, southern france, normandy from 5 to 3 ipcs.Italy:
If Italy controls all of its original territories it gets +3 ipcs. (very important for Italy)
-
^ But why?
-
@Mursilis said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
Russia:
If Japan declares war on Russia and they are at war with the european axis then they get +1 IPC in the supply zones(down from 2)Then we’re back to the situation where game economics almost always favor an early JAP dow of Russia (or, at least, fail to deter it). An ahistorical outcome. The boost needs to be +2 for there to be a possible net benefit to Russia. That is, if the boost is only +1, simply blocking sz 5 with a sub, or taking Amur, completely negates Russia’s benefit, and Russia is back to facing a two-front war with no extra help…
As far as your other two changes, you seem to be operating under the assumption that Allies need to be nerfed. Game statistics don’t bear out that conclusion at all.
-
I don’t know why you have such a thing for historical outcomes, @regularkid . Exactly how would it be fun if the war unfolded substantially how it happened in 1939-45?
-
@simon33 said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
I don’t know why you have such a thing for historical outcomes, @regularkid . Exactly how would it be fun if the war unfolded substantially how it happened in 1939-45?
hahah. Simon, I never said historical “outcomes.” The point of the game is to be able to change history, under reasonably historical conditions.
In regular Global, Russia and Japan will often declare war in round 1, just for sh*ts. There is literally no reason not to. So the game starts on an ahistorical footing, and there are no real in game consequences for that. I suppose reasonable minds can differ, but I find that bothersome.
-
@regularkid actually, i did say “ahistorical outcome.” inartful wording on my part. heh
-
With the extra money that america can get plus, if japan declares war on russia, it is quite easy to see how the allies can gain an advantage. Later on in the game usually the subs are clear from the atlantic and the US has control of the british channel and gibraltar/north africa. Playing america correctly dictates whether the allies win or not.
Russia will usually get the +3 ipc’s for not having other allied nations in their territories. Also persia is usually open so that’s another plus 2. So they get a guaranteed 5 ipc’s every turn almost. This extra money allows Russia to do the mech/tank purchases it needs to beat germany into the ground. If you couple this extra income with the extra income that the US get’s as well as well as EurUK it can be hard for germany and italy to make a great impact. There is really no reason to attack russia as the Japanese since you will be giving them so much money.
I don’t see how going from +2 to +3 in each seazone is going to shut the whole game down. Perhaps if you put in the +3 ipcs to italy it can remain at +4.
The italy change will allow them to have that extra money to rebuild it’s navy or help push into russia. I still feel that italy is too weak especially if they have some bad luck or the allies stop vichy france from occuring. Italy has to move into iraq early on. So if italy somehow has a bad start, they are just stuck in italy essentially.
The china change is awesome, definitely put that in.
From what i’ve read there are a lot of people who actually play with an axis bid and others who just don’t know how to play america/russia properly.
Don’t be so afraid to change some of the numbers on your balance mod. Or you can have two versions to see if one is better than the other.
My china change actually helps balance out china and makes them more fun to play.
The pacific is perfect. The changes for ANZAC and PacUK are perfect! Try my china mod out. Again why would japan ever declare war on Russia if they know that the +2 is going to shoot up to +4. Maybe you can change it to as soon as european axis is at war with russia the lend-lease kicks in instead of round 3.
-
@Mursilis said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
Don’t be so afraid to change some of the numbers on your balance mod.
I’m not afraid to. I just don’t see a reason to. The mod is reasonably balanced. The fact that after literally hundreds of games, there is no consensus as to who has the advantage is a testament to that fact. And the changes you’re proposing sound like a step backwards tbh.
-
@regularkid said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
@Mursilis said in G40 Balance Mod - Feedback Thread:
Russia:
If Japan declares war on Russia and they are at war with the european axis then they get +1 IPC in the supply zones(down from 2)Then we’re back to the situation where game economics almost always favor an early JAP dow of Russia (or, at least, fail to deter it). An ahistorical outcome. The boost needs to be +2 for there to be a possible net benefit to Russia. That is, if the boost is only +1, simply blocking sz 5 with a sub, or taking Amur, completely negates Russia’s benefit, and Russia is back to facing a two-front war with no extra help…
As far as your other two changes, you seem to be operating under the assumption that Allies need to be nerfed. Game statistics don’t bear out that conclusion at all.
I just have to throw in my two cents again. BM has done 0 -zero- in order to enhance playability for Russia. yes, you trow in some ekstra money, but Russia does not have a saying in how much of this they get. In my opinion Russia is much more fun to play under the original rule set
-
@oysteilo I don’t completely agree. Yes, it isn’t as good as the extra fighter and tank, but the extra money makes it possible for USSR to fight when OOB they would be running or dying.
-
@oysteilo, assuming the typical case of a G3 DOW (with a German sub in sz 1), Russia’s income is 7 PUs higher in BM than in vanilla. And this income differential typically lasts multiple rounds. I don’t really understand what you mean by “but Russia does not have a saying in how much of this they get.” They get all of it.
-
I think he’s saying that USSR can’t really open their own lend lease lanes. It’s really up to the other allies to prevent their closure.
Suggested Topics
