Order of Play

@FatHappyCat:

Every game I played so far there always seems to be a standard opening, ie russia to west russia, kill egyptian fighter, kill chinese fighter, etc. Without having play tested do you think that the game would be different if the order of play was changed? The one absolute game breaker I can think of is only if GE plays before RU, but barring that suppose US or UK played first or even JP? I wonder if it would break the monotomy of the opening game. This will probably hurt the axis more than anything but still does anyone think it’s fiesable?

It is a matter of game design. The moves you described are standard since the Classic/Revised editions because they are optimal for Axis first turn due to the initial unit disposition and turn order, allowing to kill Allied units and help close the initial Allied advantage.

If you change the order of play then the game most likely will become unbalanced. Like you said, if Germany plays before Russia then it will be able to conquer Karelia, Caucasus and Archangel and inflict serious casualties on the Russians. For all effects the game should be over soon since Russia will have no defense against Germany. Another example is the US playing before Japan, since it can sink the Japanese transport on SZ 59 and attack the fleet at SZ60 (killing both Japanese transports) or even the SZ50 one. Or the UK playing before Germany and sinking the SZ14 fleet right away.

But if the initial attacks are almost scripted a few variations are possible. The West Russia attack is a must for Russia but it can choose between the 2nd target being Ukraine, Belorussia or Norway. If it attacks Norway and kills the German fighter then it will prevent Germany from sinking the UK fleet on SZ2, thus changing Germany’s initial round. If it masses all its infantry on Buryatia then it will be limiting Japan’s options. And as the countries play the strategic situation starts to change, due to choices and dice.

If you want to try something different have all countries skip the combat phase on turn 1. They can produce/place units and do non-combat moves (and surface ships can still block movement). It will change the tactical situation completely, although with time you’ll learn the optimal moves for each country.

Or you can try the 1941 scenario on my signature. The order of play is Germany/UK/Japan/US/Russia with a different setup, based on AA50.

@Hobbes:

@FatHappyCat:

Every game I played so far there always seems to be a standard opening, ie russia to west russia, kill egyptian fighter, kill chinese fighter, etc. Without having play tested do you think that the game would be different if the order of play was changed? The one absolute game breaker I can think of is only if GE plays before RU, but barring that suppose US or UK played first or even JP? I wonder if it would break the monotomy of the opening game. This will probably hurt the axis more than anything but still does anyone think it’s fiesable?

It is a matter of game design. The moves you described are standard since the Classic/Revised editions because they are optimal for Axis first turn due to the initial unit disposition and turn order, allowing to kill Allied units and help close the initial Allied advantage.

If you change the order of play then the game most likely will become unbalanced. Like you said, if Germany plays before Russia then it will be able to conquer Karelia, Caucasus and Archangel and inflict serious casualties on the Russians. For all effects the game should be over soon since Russia will have no defense against Germany. Another example is the US playing before Japan, since it can sink the Japanese transport on SZ 59 and attack the fleet at SZ60 (killing both Japanese transports) or even the SZ50 one. Or the UK playing before Germany and sinking the SZ14 fleet right away.

But if the initial attacks are almost scripted a few variations are possible. The West Russia attack is a must for Russia but it can choose between the 2nd target being Ukraine, Belorussia or Norway. If it attacks Norway and kills the German fighter then it will prevent Germany from sinking the UK fleet on SZ2, thus changing Germany’s initial round. If it masses all its infantry on Buryatia then it will be limiting Japan’s options. And as the countries play the strategic situation starts to change, due to choices and dice.

If you want to try something different have all countries skip the combat phase on turn 1. They can produce/place units and do non-combat moves (and surface ships can still block movement). It will change the tactical situation completely, although with time you’ll learn the optimal moves for each country.

Or you can try the 1941 scenario on my signature. The order of play is Germany/UK/Japan/US/Russia with a different setup, based on AA50.

Speaking of your 1941 scenario, I think you had Germany start with 2 less ipc’s than its income in territory

@calvinhobbesliker:

Speaking of your 1941 scenario, I think you had Germany start with 2 less ipc’s than its income in territory

Already fixed it. Thanks again for the notice :)

Long ago, with the original A&A and my usual opponent back then, we tried a totally random order of play, determined each turn with a die roll. We had also combined the pieces from Fortress America, mechanized inf, airmobile in helicopters, assorted other rules to accomodate the additional pieces, but it seemed to work for us. Just a thought….