1942 Fairness


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Okay, so I have been informed that the game is skewed in favor the the axis to the tune of about 4-7 IPCs.  The question is, do you think a 5 player game (as I feel it is intended) would negate the need for any bid to even it out?  Reason I suspect it might is that all 3 axis nations won’t be on the same page, no matter how well they plan.

    What do you think?



  • No, I think that multiplayer only makes things worse for allies (I have much experience with FTF 4 players games). Axis can operate without much coordination if Germany makes the Baltic navy strat and Japan makes the India crush. And allies will suffer, as always, due coordination issues

    Take in mind that in my FTF games we boost China a bit and still we struggle with allies. And we have a very crappy dude that almost always play with germans, go figure

    Dardanelles closed and no tech is the better solution to balance the game without modding the game or bidding (assuming that we all want a game with NOs)


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have to admit, I really enjoy the idea of closed dardenelles.  I like tech, but life is SOOOO much easier for Russia if Italy cannot attack them directly.

    Perhaps, I guess, 1 allied player vs 3 axis players would also balance things.



  • Play 1942 WITHOUT the National Advantages.

    That alone is a huge difference in the game.  The Axis start with practically all of their NO’s already.


    RE: closing the dardenelles straight.

    We use a middle ground between wide open and totally closed:
    SZ16 is open, but access via the sea is only allowed to bulgaria (not ukraine or caucasus)



  • @axis_roll:

    Play 1942 WITHOUT the National Advantages.

    That alone is a huge difference in the game.  The Axis start with practically all of their NO’s already.


    RE: closing the dardenelles straight.

    We use a middle ground between wide open and totally closed:
    SZ16 is open, but access via the sea is only allowed to bulgaria (not ukraine or caucasus)

    does that mean that only bulg can be invaded from SZ16?


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    I suppose the idea is that only troops that can land belong to the country of the COLOR of the map territory being invaded?  Germany can invade Bulgaria, but England and America cannot; but England and America can invade Caucasus/Ukraine but Germany and Italy cannot?


  • '10

    @Cmdr:

    I suppose the idea is that only troops that can land belong to the country of the COLOR of the map territory being invaded?  Germany can invade Bulgaria, but England and America cannot; but England and America can invade Caucasus/Ukraine but Germany and Italy cannot?

    I think the idea stems from the fact that the sea zones were either drawn incorrectly or overlooked in this region. The dardanelles are closed to all ships in both directions and allied amphibs to bulgaria in the small section of z16 west of the Dards are allowed


  • '16 '15 '10

    @Cmdr:

    I suppose the idea is that only troops that can land belong to the country of the COLOR of the map territory being invaded?  Germany can invade Bulgaria, but England and America cannot; but England and America can invade Caucasus/Ukraine but Germany and Italy cannot?

    It doesn’t make any sense historically EXCEPT in the sense that Germans could ship stuff to Bulgaria relatively efficiently via rail.

    Dard’s closed doesn’t have much effect on many Axis strats but I suppose it helps Russia keep control of Cauc in the early turns and that can be a big deal.



  • @Zhukov44:

    @Cmdr:

    I suppose the idea is that only troops that can land belong to the country of the COLOR of the map territory being invaded?  Germany can invade Bulgaria, but England and America cannot; but England and America can invade Caucasus/Ukraine but Germany and Italy cannot?

    It doesn’t make any sense historically EXCEPT in the sense that Germans could ship stuff to Bulgaria relatively efficiently via rail.

    Dard’s closed doesn’t have much effect on many Axis strats but I suppose it helps Russia keep control of Cauc in the early turns and that can be a big deal.

    Ptooey on ‘historical’ accuracy.  At this point, rules tweaks are to make the game more strategic, IMHO.

    The ‘middle-rule’ allows another SZ for the italian navy, opens up the option of Germany to assist in the Med navy battle by building ships from a Bulgarian IC, while still helping the allies by guarding the caucasus attack via the sea.



  • @Cmdr:

    I have to admit, I really enjoy the idea of closed dardenelles.  I like tech, but life is SOOOO much easier for Russia if Italy cannot attack them directly.

    Perhaps, I guess, 1 allied player vs 3 axis players would also balance things.

    I also like closed Dardenelles, but my group will never agree to it.  Allies have to make up for it by landing in France turn 1.  Yes, Italy retakes it, but it keeps Italy away from Russia, and with NOs, UK trades 3-6 IPCs for 11.

    Imo, # of players makes no difference.  At least wit the people I play with, both Axis and Allies work very well together.  I’ve seen Italy do amazing things.  UK lands in Poland, Italy retakes Poland.


Log in to reply
 

20th Anniversary Give Away

In January 2000 this site came to life and now we're celebrating our 20th Anniversary with a prize giveaway of 30+ prizes. See this link for the list of prizes and winners.
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys
T-shirts, Hats, and More

Suggested Topics

  • 62
  • 34
  • 3
  • 6
  • 18
  • 55
  • 6
  • 12
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

42
Online

14.8k
Users

35.5k
Topics

1.4m
Posts