@nebnworb yea they get the bit in their mouth and they can run all over the place. Little annoying things that if they don’t react and you can support, can really be irritating. Of course they can kinda do the same thing, depending on USA strategy : )
Alpha+2 Allies struggle to win, crazy alternative discovered: Surrender London!
-
@Idi:
Tried what? UK suicide……
Well, lets call it: “Operation: Open House”. Have you tried something similar? Worse case scenario, you’ll become an exiled leader :)
By the way, Mr. Amin (300,000 deaths caused), how is Uganda these days? I understand you successor: Milton OBOTE (1980-85) (100,000 deaths caused) was in turn thrown out by Yoweri MUSEVENI in 1986. I here there is Egyptian styled unrest these days.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ug.html
Were all friends here so you can call me Idi….
-
I’ll call you buddy, if I can have half as many badges and medals for my jacket. You have to recognize style when you see it.
-
Yeah, Operation: Open House was my first pick, too.
-
Personally, after thinking about it.
I think you should call it Operation: Pants Down.
-
Personally, after thinking about it.
I think you should call it Operation: Pants Down.
Hey G I’ll go ya one better>>>>>>>>>>>>How about OPERATION: “PANTS DOWN SPANKING”
-
One time in a mage knight tournament, by opponent, upon seeing the piece I drew in the random draw replied: “Pants around my ankles”.
- Mage knight was one of the early tactical miniature games with a fantasy theme. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mage_Knight
That year I won 4 of the 4 random draw tournaments I played in. (I generally chose weak pieces that could move in formation, while others looked for strong pieces that once they were eliminated, left them vulnerable.)
- Mage knight was one of the early tactical miniature games with a fantasy theme. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mage_Knight
-
Hey James I tried out your strategy as Germany with your builds and it is very sound. You might be on to something about the English retreat. Another alternative might be for Russia to build up a strong navy in the Baltic while Germany throws everything at UK. I haven’t tried this yet. Wondering if anyone has. This might get Germany at least thinking twice about leaving everything engaged in the west.
-
The bad thing about a Russian Navy, is that you are kept neutral 4 turns….Also, Germany outproduces you, and if they are building 3 ships a turn in the plan I mentioned, I doubt you will want to try it…who knows.
-
James what is your opinion of the game. You obviously have played it a lot more than I have. It seems to me you have figured out a No Brainer strategy for Germany.Do you feel the game needs to be tweaked again. Maybe alpha +3. I am no fool when it comes to this game unfortunately I can’t play but 3 or 4 times a year due to family constraints. I get the feeling you would wipe the floor with me and in my play group I almost never lose. Just curious what you think is it time for alpha 3. Thanks for the response.
-
Well, I’m sure there are players here that would do the same to me. Actually, I am not sure if there are balance issues, as I haven’t put as much effort into the allies as I need to. I see serious concerns, but it is too early to be sure. I think, as long as everyone is fine playing global, alpha +2 or Out of box rules should be fine if your other players have not “figured” out an optimum strategy. I am not sure what I would recommend for balance issues. There are some great players here that have play-tested alpha +2 and see it as balanced.
I’ll let you know how this UK plan works for allies, when I get time to test it in detail. A fix may be as simple as having the UK start the round. Remember, Germany does not need to take London to shut down their effectiveness.
-
This strategy would make the US enter the war early, giving the allies +30 IPCs per turn, but they’re also losing UK London’s IPCs for as long as Germany holds it. And there’s the money Germany gets upon seizing London. So in terms of pure IPCs it isn’t necessarily a win for the allies, especially because it also would stop most forms of reinforcement to Egypt (except from UK Pacific).
-
I tried your strategy with your German builds in a game against myself James and Germany does take UK rather easily. The AA gun is one of the only thing that scares me. I am just concerned that the game will become too scripted the more you play it. It appears it already has for you as the Axis. I got to admit I never would think about having UK abadon england but otherwise she has no chance.
-
This strategy would make the US enter the war early, giving the allies +30 IPCs per turn, but they’re also losing UK London’s IPCs for as long as Germany holds it. And there’s the money Germany gets upon seizing London. So in terms of pure IPCs it isn’t necessarily a win for the allies, especially because it also would stop most forms of reinforcement to Egypt (except from UK Pacific).
Its true, UK will lose income, but lets also consider the income Italy will lose, and the impact on Italy of having a good size US transport fleet off Gibraltar by turn 3. Lets also consider the impact on the axis of having to defend London and Italy so early….
I’ll let you know how the play tests come along. I realize the proposal to surrender a capital will take some serious scrutiny before it becomes an “option” in the allies play book. That is where the feedback from others trying this would be helpful.
-
In our group we play w a exiled capital rule. When a capital is lost the conquering power gets the ipc but the captured power can still collect income at half the rate. We are almost always 5 players and as sealion seldom fails we added this rule to make the game fun for all five players. W this rule abandoning london is a viable option, either in GB1 or GB2 (depending on initial builds and moves by Germany and Japan). We also enjoy long games and by applying this rule we avoid either side automatically loosing to a lucky attack on moscow, japan or germany. It also makes it possible to build up some sort of free french force. So far we have not had any problem with balance by adding this rule.
-
JamesAleman, I’m curious if you had an opportunity to play as Axis using your Sea Lion via Scotland strategy versus Allies who places 90-100% of USA income into the Pacific theater. This has been much discussed in recent weeks by Cmdr Jennifer.
-
Surrender isnt part of our vocabulary, correct me if I’m wrong in alpha2 when London falls that brings the US into the war, so why not fight or just give it away I game for the battles (Kursk) = big tank battles between Germany and Russia or (truk Lagoon) big naval battles between Japan and USA or the Battle of Britain/Sealion. and I like to win , to add or change the rules can be fun but this game was not designed to be redesigned by all of us, It’s a step up from the Anniversary edition. If because the Axis won the last 4 games means the Allies cant win , then I think you may be missing some thing but I dont think so from what I can tell the people on the forum are skilled, experienced players. There are a bunch of people who think the game is unbalanced with the Allies being the one with the upper hand. This subject might get ya to think that it is balanced the other way. In 25+ yrs I’ve seen where one side will get a bunch of wins only to be offset by the other, overall I would say that the score is about 50/50 we play on average 2 games a weekend. How did Hitler say it……fight to the last man I think Stalin said it to… Keep gaming and post the results.
Suggested Topics
