short answer? The game favors the allies. You have to spread too thin as axis to defend everything the allies can do. you have to hope that the allied players miss your weakest points.
18 russian infantry needs to be looked at. we’re toying with as a house rule putting 9 groups of 2 infantry down throughout eastern russia, a return to the old AA setups. That stack of 18 causes huge issues for the few japanese ground units there, yes they can easily be wiped out on J1, but that slows the japs down wayyy too much. Of course i’m talking OOB setup, because 1) I don’t recognize the alpha setups until there is an official rulebook reprint and 2) I don’t want to spend 1/2 my life waiting on LH’s forums.
short answer? The game favors the allies. You have to spread too thin as axis to defend everything the allies can do. you have to hope that the allied players miss your weakest points.
18 russian infantry needs to be looked at. we’re toying with as a house rule putting 9 groups of 2 infantry down throughout eastern russia, a return to the old AA setups. That stack of 18 causes huge issues for the few japanese ground units there, yes they can easily be wiped out on J1, but that slows the japs down wayyy too much. Of course i’m talking OOB setup, because 1) I don’t recognize the alpha setups until there is an official rulebook reprint and 2) I don’t want to spend 1/2 my life waiting on LH’s forums.
You seem to be on the same page as me on this one. I think the game favors the Allies. I like Alpha set up but I think the axis need a little more power to go with it in Europe. Maybe a bigger starting German Airforce to buy them time and force allies to build more fleet? The best I have been able to do with Axis was make it hard for the allies to win the game by building large amounts of inf and art. That being said it did not really put me into position to win the game and get the victory cities I need.
@ Maher
I agree. You can draw the conclusion based upon our game results that Frank and I are just terrible players too unskilled to play Axis effectively. You may even be right, I dunno. But even setting skill aside, I think it’s a bit ridiculous that the Allies are sitting on close to a 90% win ratio in our games. It’s to the point where I’m afraid to involve anyone but myself on the Axis side in games with over 2 players because I’m worried they’ll make that one early mistake that’ll cost the Axis the game. Your margin of error is razor-thin, and in a couple situations early on the dice by themselves can cost you the game straight-up. Not making any mistakes over the course of a 20+ hr game can be pretty taxing on even the best of players.
Axis wins happen as follows:
Passive UK player that lets IT actually get to insane IPCs
American player who buys too many BBs and B17s
UK player that builds a navy a piece at a time
Russian player that bites off more than it can chew by buying too many tanks, or Turtles too much with a reliance on fighters.In other words, if you play against an inexperienced player, you have a shot as Axis. Otherwise, this is nothing more than a choose your own adventure book. They want you to read it, so you never really die.
And yet Gamerman01 and Badspeller have beaten Me and SgtBlitz. I am not as good a player as gamerman01, but I think I am only slightly behind the other two. The allies certainly did not do any of those.
UK never let Italy go South of Egypt. US bought a variety of troops.
UK building navy one piece at a time? If by piece, you mean one ship per turn, no one did that. Russia bought 3 tanks and the rest mech for the early turns when the front was far away and more inf, art later turns as germany got closer to Moscow.
But of course, Maher, you probably think I’m inexperienced because I’m only 16 years old
Frank:
We’ve played 5 full games, rotating who has what sides etc. So it’s not just a stuck in the rut way of thinking or anything. Calvin describes a very passive Russia with regard to the siberian 18.
It’s the same thinking that doomed the OOB setup for pacific. People are afraid to use planes as soakers, so there’s no way Japan will attack with 1 inf
and 2 planes….
Even if I lose 18 infantry as russia (57 IPCs) what is that going to cost Japan? Time, Ground units that can’t be replaced quickly.
@calvin
I think you are inexperience because by your own admission you have only played 1 side of the game so far.
Frank:
We’ve played 5 full games, rotating who has what sides etc. So it’s not just a stuck in the rut way of thinking or anything. Calvin describes a very passive Russia with regard to the siberian 18.
It’s the same thinking that doomed the OOB setup for pacific. People are afraid to use planes as soakers, so there’s no way Japan will attack with 1 inf
and 2 planes….Even if I lose 18 infantry as russia (57 IPCs) what is that going to cost Japan? Time, Ground units that can’t be replaced quickly.
It usually costs Japan 6-7 inf and one turn. In return, those inf can never be used to defend China or Moscow and Japan has an empty Siberia in front of it
@calvin
I think you are inexperience because by your own admission you have only played 1 side of the game so far.
That is a valid criticism. However, gamerman, a much better player than me, has employed excellent axis strategies. Although he agrees that the game is tilted towards the allies, I doubt he thinks it is broken.
I really wish we could get some brainpower going to AAA so we could all play more games, faster, with different opponents. I’d love to be wrong about this, but when you look at the ticky tack BS that is building with each release of the AA franchises, I’m losing all faith in LH and co.
I really wish we could get some brainpower going to AAA so we could all play more games, faster, with different opponents. I’d love to be wrong about this, but when you look at the ticky tack BS that is building with each release of the AA franchises, I’m losing all faith in LH and co.
Huh? We already play many games quickly with many people on the online forums
It usually costs Japan 6-7 inf and one turn. In return, those inf can never be used to defend China or Moscow and Japan has an empty Siberia in front of it
1 Turn is QUITE a big deal IMO
No matter how smart the 20 playtesters of WOTC are, the collective brainpower of a couple hundred players each playing an average of a few games will always trump the playtesters’ experience.
Huh? We already play many games quickly with many people on the online forums
Well there are quite a few AA players that have wives/kids/jobs that can’t spend the time doing PBEM. in the time it takes to reset the global board, I could have played 2 turns on AAA.
It usually costs Japan 6-7 inf and one turn. In return, those inf can never be used to defend China or Moscow and Japan has an empty Siberia in front of it
1 Turn is QUITE a big deal IMO
Not when Japan is only at war with China and Russia. And it gains many turns later in the game when Germany doesn’t have to worry about 18 inf beefing Moscow on turn 7 or 8
No matter how smart the 20 playtesters of WOTC are, the collective brainpower of a couple hundred players each playing an average of a few games will always trump the playtesters’ experience.
exactly my point of why I wish AAA worked. to balance this game as best as possible before too many people lose interest.
Huh? We already play many games quickly with many people on the online forums
Well there are quite a few AA players that have wives/kids/jobs that can’t spend the time doing PBEM. in the time it takes to reset the global board, I could have played 2 turns on AAA.
And how is that problem solved by the creators of the game? They’re actually making many of us(just those who enjoy doing so, mind you) examine and explore a plethora of strategies and how to fix any imbalance. That is a silver lining to the fact that the game may be imbalanced.
No matter how smart the 20 playtesters of WOTC are, the collective brainpower of a couple hundred players each playing an average of a few games will always trump the playtesters’ experience.
exactly my point of why I wish AAA worked. to balance this game as best as possible before too many people lose interest.
Wait, you’re talking about TripleA, right?
However, I’m intrigued by ozeta’s “reestablish the railroad” strat for the 18 siberian inf.
Yes, I’m talking about TripleA when I say AAA.
Didn’t say it was WOTCs fault that we have lives? Except in that we paid for something that is broken. If I wanted to MAKE a game, I would have done so. I BOUGHT one.
Sigh, I broke my own rules for talking to you on the forums, once again you and your 4000 posts will merely default to your basic ideas, that LH and WOTC are our gods, and we must do their bidding, and I also forgot that my group has been playing AA since before you were born. This isn’t an attack on you, just again you have a different viewpoint from mine about freetime. I do not lock myself in my room with a 12pk of pepsi and play with myself to see what I can do to fix the game. We get 8 hours off from the wifes/kids/responsibilities of the world and would like to crack a beer and see if we can usher in the 1000 year reich. Not see how many more planes we need to add to the German setup to make it fun.
We get 8 hours off from the wifes/kids/responsibilities of the world and would like to crack a beer and see if we can usher in the 1000 year reich. Not see how many more planes we need to add to the German setup to make it fun.
QFT. I’m a temporarily unemployed college student who does have a good bit of free time to spare, hence the 20something games I’ve played so far. However even I have a difficult time justifying the amount of time it would take for my group to balance this game purely on our own, and I absolutely love AA. This is why I wish the community could move past denying the clearly unbalanced (i still hesitate to use broken, although I’m leaning in the direction) nature of the game and start working together to figure out what needs to be changed. The alpha setup just makes me want to facepalm having played it now.
In any AA version I have playex if the less experienced folks are playing the Axis they just dont see the Allied weaknesses.
To this point we are mostly inexperienced at this game. Germany has its hands full in the Atlantic. Japan has time in the Pacific.
Find some ways to win initiative with Japan. Mostly with Japan i find i can split my nave two thirds off Japan one third Malaya and go afyer India wholesale.
What are the Americans going to do? Take the Carolines with Australia and sit there building a navy? They’ll be able to trap your transports in airbase protected Japan and far away Malaya but timed right you will be cranking out ten inf a round in Malaya and four or so from Japan to Korea.
Sealion or the threat of it paralyzes the British for the first three turns. They must build land units in England and I believe Taranto unbalances the math against them.
Italy gets Egypt then heads for India or Stalingrad before the British from South Africa can get there.
The Axis have to stretch the board quickly. I favor earlier attacks. America’s ipcs are far away. India and the UK need every buck they can scrounge. Japan can make much better use of twelve or more DEI dollars than the US gets from their bonus
