Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
How can we rebalance Global 40
-
I like the idea, but it requires three players.
Okay lets simplify my question.
If you were going to bid for allies, what would you bid? And if you played with that bid, what would you buy with those ipc’s and where would they setup.
Whatever you say, we’ll go with it. We’ll make that the starting set up and use it for the next three games.
:-)
The X-dap tournament had a lot of success with a Bomber In Moscow + Bid of 6 to 12.
Consider a UK sub in the Med, and 1 inf in UK? on-top of the European Bomber?
-
Play your first games with the box setup.
it is a pretty balanced game 60/40 - 55/45… The reason bids are usually at around 8-11 are because of the scale (the game starts with like 400 units on the board so it takes a bit to make it perfectly even).
The only reason the axis are the favorite to win are because of the victory conditions. Take away the VC and it is a huge allies win game.
-
What Cow said.
We generally play global domination and we have to dock America’s pre-war income down to 35 ipc’s to make it balanced.
-
I’d go with Gargantua’s XDAP tournament setup, Russia has a heavy bomber added to Moscow and then bid down from 20 to see who takes the Allies each time. Have some agreement before hand about how to spend the bid, one unit per territory added, naval forces added only to sea zones with other units present, etc. Have fun.
-
Hey gargantua, is there a house rules thread on your idea? It would something that my friends would like to try sometime.
It would be really cool to try it out once some solid rules are fleshed out.
-
it’s pretty darned balanced. in fact i’m not sure the allies don’t have the advantage in the current setup. :-P
-
it’s pretty darned balanced. in fact i’m not sure the allies don’t have the advantage in the current setup. :-P
Blasted double negatives! Are you saying the game is balanced or slanted towards allies?
-
slanted toward allies.
-
I like……
Add 1X Strategic Bomber on Moscow
Add 1X British Submarine off India -
honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup. i feel like the allies need nothing.
-
honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup. i feel like the allies need nothing.
however, you MUST play with the 8 VC (europe) and 6 VC (asia) conditions or else the good allied player would win EVERY SINGLE TIME.
-
honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup. i feel like the allies need nothing.
I don’t see how the axis can lose in this setup if the allies receive nothing.
Suggested Topics
