Changes still needed to the game, IMHO


  • I still not seeing the unbalance in alpha +2 that you’re talking about. How exactly are the Allies beating you that you don’t see any way to counter?

    Also, suggesting that the US split their income with the existing Alpha +2 victory conditions doesn’t make any sense to me.

    Think about it: for a forced US income split to give an advantage to the Axis, the US had to have been winning the game by dumping all of its income into one theater, otherwise you wouldn’t need to force a split. Given the “either theater” victory conditions for the Axis in +2, this also means that the Axis, left completely alone by the US in one of the theaters, can’t get the necessary victory cities.

    Really?

    You’re saying that if the US goes all out in the Pacific, your Germany can’t take the necessary Russian cities? That if the US goes for a Europe only strategy, your Japan can’t become a monster?

    As the Axis, you only need to win one of the boards to win the game. You’re claiming that the Axis can’t win one a board without any US involvment at all. I think you need to revisit your Axis strategy.


  • @Dark_Destroyer:

    @Geist:

    Who gave specific examples of Japan not being able to take the DEI or the UK’s circumstances?

    @Cmdr:

    I would love to GET the DEI for a change!  But I think you are missing how easy it is to sack Tokyo now….  Getting DEI is pretty impossible now due to how fast America can move and get ships to bear…

    Obviously from the OP Geist…

    @Geist:

    Too bad Mantlefan doesn’t play online, I bet we could all learn from him…

    Yeah.  You probably could.

    @Geist:

    Who said Russia out produces Germany?

    @Cmdr:

    This is due, probably, to the fact that Russia can easily out produce Germany and thus stop the incursion without assistance.

    Again, the OP made this statement…

    Says another guy who doesn’t play online. Though, I did miss that he was refering to a post two pages back, so my bad there, I was wrong, feel free to start up a forum game as the Axis so you can school me, though, I don’t think it’s going to happen.


  • @Geist:

    Says another guy who doesn’t play online. Though, I did miss that he was refering to a post two pages back, so my bad there, I was wrong, feel free to start up a forum game as the Axis so you can school me, though, I don’t think it’s going to happen.

    And Mantlefan is the troll?  I was just getting you back on track of the OP discussion, something you lost focus on.

    Just because we don’t play online doesn’t mean we don’t know what we’re talking about, or worse players.  Enough with the online elitism.


  • Got it…you’re not willing to throw your nuts on the table and back up your opinions. I suspect there will be some minor tweaks to boost the Axis when all is said and done, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see.

  • '10

    Damn, waddn’t tryin’ to start all that.  I don’t think mantle’s trollin’, leastaways not intentionally.  Just ribbin’ him about sounding like Idi in an earlier thread.

    I agree that Jen’s estimates are…lower than what my experience has been.

    @Pelanderfunk:

    As the Axis, you only need to win one of the boards to win the game. You’re claiming that the Axis can’t win one a board without any US involvment at all. I think you need to revisit your Axis strategy.

    I also agree with this.  As Axis, I’m pretty happy if the U.S. goes all one way.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Wait, Dark Destroyer, we’re talking about Alpha 2, there is no India crush, unless you refer to India crushing Japan.

    Further, you don’t have to TAKE Japan, just sink it’s fleet and kick it off the mainland, that’s super easy now after the repeated nerfs to Japan and buffs to the Allies.

    Questioneer:  Chaning the FIC NO was meant to make it a wasteland.  It stops England/Australia/Japan/America from collecting for the territory and, in effect, permanently bumps Japan’s cash flow by 10 IPC a round. However, you can still invade it if you want it for a strategic or tactical reason.  In essense, invading or not invading FIC becomes profitable for Japan.

    Frank:

    No, IPC are not the end all be all of the game.  It is the lion’s share, however.

    America is not stuck behind two oceans, America only faces Japan with the assistance of Australia, India and China.  That’s the problem!  America SHOULD be required to spend on both halves of the game, that’s precisely the point of them earning double any other nation!

    With CURRENT, American tactics, 40-50 IPC a round is a gift.  If the rules were altered to require 35 IPC be spent in the Atlantic, then no, 40-50 IPC would not be enough.

    As for the UK split, to be honest, I don’t want EITHER England OR America to drop an entire paycheck on one side of the board, but to be perfectly honest, it is worse having America do it than England.  I would say, either both have to split or neither has to split.

    Maxo,

    Thanks.  I agree, Japan does not have an uphill battle, they are facing a shear cliff.  The Allies just have way too much money and are way to diversified to be adequately handled by Japan as it stands.  I agree, limping along until Round 8 is possible, if you want to see how well Germany can do and see if Germany/Italy can get a VC Win, but as it stands now, Japan is not winning any games, at best, it will sap some strength away.  Actually, at best, it prevents American investment into Europe at all.

    KNP:  Exactly, we want it to be HARD to win.  It is better to make it HARD than to make it IMPOSSIBLE and right now, with veteran players of equivalent caliber, it’s impossible for Japan to win without ungodly dice.

    Questioneer-2:  A Hong Kong NO might work.  Perhaps an NO for the Philippines would be better?

    Mantle:  Japan has some of the DEI, but it never gets them all, not anymore.  You have to counter America and that means you don’t have the equipment to get the DEI.  Also, remember, you cannot attack DEI that are under control of England/Australia until America enters the war, or you lose the FIC NO….

    GHR:  Russia easily out produces Germany.  Think on it a moment.  Russia takes scandinavia (simple process) and prevents a German incursion past S. Ukraine (simple process). Germany now has no objectives and very little land.  Russia has Scandinavia and their objectives and, in some games, even have parts of Europe they trade for even more money.  I’ve seen at least two games (one against me, one with two other players) where Russia earned in excess of 60 IPC a round for multiple rounds. (In my game I owned London, but that did not help because I lost all that money to CRD.)

    Eudemonist:  If you expect the worst, you will only be pleasently surprised.

    Geist:  That’s the whole point of this thread, to convince the powers that be that they’re not done yet!  That the axis needs help.  No, Germany and Italy don’t need help, they need strategy and normal dice, Japan needs life support, or in the words of Shadowrun “Doc Wagon”.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    It all boils down to the fact that Japan needs help.  No one is disputing this fact really, what they are disputing is the level of help Japan needs.

    There are a number of options, most of the ones I prefer hurt America in some way, but it’s equally good to buff Japan, I suppose.  Some of the ones that have come up that I like are:

    Split America’s build. 
    Give Japan an NO in Philippines, Hong Kong
    Give Japan 2-3 Armor in China
    Give Japan 1-2 Transports in S. Pacific (so DEI is at least an option again.)

  • '10

    If it is your opinion that Russia and England can overpower Germany and Italy without any help from the Americans (which I strongly disagree with), it seems like Europe must necessarily be imbalanced, does it not?

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    No, I feel it is balanced that England and Russia can counter Germany.  Note, I am not talking that they can take Berlin or Rome, what I am speaking of is preventing Germany from a Victory City Win.  That is all one needs, after all, then American can pump their entire paycheck into the Pacific without worrying about Germany/Italy getting the VCs to win.


  • @Geist:

    What makes it troll like is he comes out and says a bunch of people sucks, even though he has no idea who those people are. Then he refutes a bunch of arguements no one is even making. Who said Russia out produces Germany? Who gave specific examples of Japan not being able to take the DEI or the UK’s circumstances? What was said is that some of us feel the game is tilted towards the Allies (as well as some debate towards what degree people think it is). Too bad Mantlefan doesn’t play online, I bet we could all learn from him…

    No, what makes it NOT trolling is that I am not calling out specific people and saying they suck. I’m talking about the opponents cmdr jennifer has been vaguely describing.
    These ones:
    “Stopping Japan from earning more than 40 IPC a round is child’s play”
    Note that I was not the one bringing up child’s play. In my opinion, Japan would quite literally have to be (either a TOTAL rookie) or a young child to be kept under 40 IPCs for the most relevant turns of the game.
    “I disagree, I rarely, if ever, see any American equipment in the Atlantic outside the equipment that America starts with in the Atlantic. This is due, probably, to the fact that Russia can easily out produce Germany and thus stop the incursion without assistance.”

    As you can see, I AM calling out arguments people are making. Please quit accusing me of trolling. It’s quite valid that the OP’s assertion of Japan needing help is based on false premises. It’s clearly stated that she believes that it’s easy to keep Japan at 40, and the only way that can really be true is if her opponents are quite bad. Why does it matter If I know them personally or not? If Japan can’t get over 40 IPCs it’s either their own darn fault OR they have unbelievably, nauseatingly bad dice.

    I’d honestly consider your actions more trolling than mine. Attacking me for posts you think are coming out of nowhere when it’s quite obvious they were definitely a response to a post, and the only way you could think that they were out of nowhere is if you haven’t been reading the posts in the thread, in which case you probably shouldn’t even be posting in the thread. Please don’t come back with some self-righteous crap about “how dare you tell me where I can and cannot post.” Please just actually read the thread and get on board before wasting everyone’s time with baseless accusations of trolling.
    I don’t really care if you know who the post was addressed to. The poster I was addressing could easily recognize to who I am referring just by remembering what they themselves wrote.

    Maybe Japan does need help. Maybe Cmdr Jennifer’s changes are great ideas. But her reasoning for that help being needed is quite unreasonable and can really only come from having experience with just awful axis strategies.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @mantlefan:

    @Geist:

    Says another guy who doesn’t play online. Though, I did miss that he was refering to a post two pages back, so my bad there, I was wrong, feel free to start up a forum game as the Axis so you can school me, though, I don’t think it’s going to happen.

    This really has nothing to do with seeing who is better, it’s about Cmdr Jenneifers (IMO ludicrous) statement that the allies can afford for USA  to go 100% pacific. I might actually be interested in playing a game where we test that theory.

    At the same time, we could test whether or not it’t child’s play to keep japan below 40 IPCs.

    @Jen. Why are the DEI not an option in alpha+.2?

    The only time I ever see the Japanese get the DEI or any of the strong point NOs is when America dutifully sends stuff to Europe/Africa.  I suspect you play with more “honest” players and less “power” players.  Honest players use America to try and win the war in Europe and in the Pacific by putting some money into the Atlantic.  They generally land troops in Africa or put warships out to help England rebuild a fleet.  Then take what is left and try to contain Japan.  Power players generally put 90% or more of their income into the Pacific, crush Japan like a bug, smack them around a bit, and giggle when the Axis finally conceed because Japan has no chance, never had a chance.

    It is specifically this second group of players we are attempting to rebalance.

    Further, it should be noted that Russia and England do not need help in stopping Germany/Italy from winning.  They have adequate to more than adequate income and firepower to prevent a VC win until Japan has been isolated on it’s little island.  It is rare indeed to see German equipment in Stalingrad, let alone within walking distance of Moscow (adjacent territories.)  It is common to see Japan reduced to Japan, a scattering of islands around Japan and part of China, with no further incursion.  This is why DEI is impossible to attain against a dedicated America.  The earliest you can hope to attain it is Round 4 (since pre-emptively attacking America is even worse than waiting for them to come out later, or at least, that’s how it seems to most and Krieghund’s made mention that the play testers have yet to find a viable pre-emptive Japanese attack strategy) and that’s the same as giving England/Australia those IPC un-opposed.  After they take it, then you have to kill what’s on it and take it, that requires transports.  If you want all 4, then you need at a minimum 4 transports, but realistically, you need ships to defend them, you need planes to support them, you need to get into position, etc, etc, etc…

    Simple fact of the matter is, by round 6 at the latest, a dedicated American objective agianst Japan will have succeeded and Japan will be on a permanently downward slope from that point on.  There’s absolutely nothing you can do about it as Japan.  Germany and Italy don’t have a prayer of getting the VCs needed to win on the Atlantic by round 6, they don’t have a prayer by round 8!  By round 13 they will be next to Stalingrad, maybe have part of the Middle East and Japan will be reduced to a smoldering cinder (Japan and SZ 6 only, maybe not even SZ 6) and America will be landing in N. Africa and preparing D-Day and S. Italy invasions. (After about 8 rounds of play, America no longer has to invest anything into the Pacifc, there is nothing left to kill, all they need is to move what htey have around to collect stragglers and sink anything that wasn’t defending SZ 6.)

    I submit, Mantlefan, that you have played nothing but weak and/or unimaginative players and that is why you find it hard to agree with, what seems like, the majority of the gaming community in that Japan needs a boost or the allies need a nerf to balance the game.  Until you play some of the good players, I recommend reading and keeping your insults to yourself.  If you have something constructive to say, by all means, pipe up.


  • I think you"all should set up a board or two and let the dice do talking.      In the 8 or so games we’ve sat down to everybody seems to think that the money USA gets when it goes to war is big a game changer, as far as the split on the spending only once did I see a USA dump on one side or the other , it was in the Atlantic and Japan had a free realm in its hands. Otherwise we spend some in the east and some in the west with the Lions share going to the west.       What if   The only way to increase your income is to take Territory the USA would have to cross an Ocean.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    @suprise:

    I think you"all should set up a board or two and let the dice do talking.

    Love to set up a board or 17 with various “house” rules to test which option for the Pacific Theater works the best in balancing the game.


  • My group has played 3 games of alpha +2 now and we have all found it pretty balanced.  Some of the arguments (most are descended into chest thumping) make no sense in my opinion.  I’ve never seen Russia out produce Germany until the late game, Japan always does well in the games I’ve played (of course it can’t crush China, India, Russia, ANZAC, and US at once, but it really doesn’t need to…), and when the US in one of our games decided to go all in Pacific, the game ended in disaster since the Japanese refused to engage their navy and simply consolidated and kept building his fleet as the US fleet moved closer, resulting in the US wasting tons of IPC on a naval attack it never even attempted because it never was able to get odds.  Maybe Japan could have 3 or so more infantry on Asia, but it really does not need another NO (when does Japan declare war on the Allies in these games that have gone so badly, it gets money for sitting it out for a while) and definitely not all those planes again for OOB.  The US needs to make the money it does, it has to build at least 2 solid fleets and every land unit costs 3.5 IPC to move and takes about 1-2 turns to get where it needs to go.  I have to agree with the people who have said the Axis opponents must not have been up to par, or maybe they just werent being creative enough.


  • I’m curious as to where the Japanese fleet sat, and why the US couldn’t pick them off and get them to engage. To me that sounds like uninspired US play. I’m playing a similiar game to that now, where the Japanese tried to sit in the Phillipines and from the Carolines the US fleet can hit to many ares, I’ve been able to deny Japan all NO bonuses and even with a horribly unlucky attack I took out a good chunk of the Japanese fleet in Japan and still feel I have the advantage in the game. All you really have to do is deny the Axis one or two victory cities and eventually you’ll steam roll the Axis.

    In Europe the USA has been aiding the Brits with minimal IPC’s invested, and though Germany is starting to threaten Russia a bit more, Russia will not be falling before the Brits are landing in Europe. Once again, I’m not saying the game is unwinable for the Axis, but, I think it is slanted towards the Allies.


  • The Jap fleet sat in 6 and simply got bigger and bigger.  The Americans were based in Hawaii and couldn’t leave it because it would split their fleet that they kept building in 10.  It was pretty uninspired, but that’s my point.  If the US goes all in on one board the Axis should be able to take advantage.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I agree with Geist in-so-much as it was unimaginative American play, probably.

    Dadler, 3 games are not enough to really judge the balance of a game.  Especially this game, since this is the first ever in a long line of global games where KJF isnt only a good strategy, its really the only strategy that makes sense, given just how easy it is.

    Try having your team go full pacific with America.  Couple that with a Russian turtle and English assaults in Africa/Med to stop Italy from getting those NOs.  I think you’ll quickly discover one simple fact:  Russia and England can easily prevent Germany and Italy from getting out of hand.  Yes, you will have to give up some of your land, but since you are not playing to win in Europe, that’s a non-starter anyway.  England and Russia only have one objective:  Prevent an Axis Victory City Win.  Anything else can be yielded in the short term. (Short defined as less than 15 rounds of play.)

    Along with that, you will quick discover that you can roll the Japanese back to Japan in relatively short order, using what remnants of the American fleet you have left to keep them on Japan only.  IF you do not win by VCs now, it shouldn’t take long before you do.

    Hints:  Destroyers are an AWESOME build for America.  America does not need more than 15 submarines.  7 Aircraft Carriers = “I Win Button” for America.  Stage from Hawaii (you can hit Japan, Carolines, Australia.)  Later stage from Philippines (You can hit EVERYTHING, except Hawaii/Alaska).

    Hints:  China can be conservative.

    Hints:  England does not have to wait til round 4 to attack Japan, but Japan pretty much has to wait until round 4 to attack England. (Or you lose the 10 IPC NO, bring America in early and essentially remove your foot with a chainsaw for no apparent reason.)

    That should get your team going in such a way that the Allies win 9 out of 10 games.  Report back what you find.


  • @eudemonist:

    If it is your opinion that Russia and England can overpower Germany and Italy without any help from the Americans (which I strongly disagree with), it seems like Europe must necessarily be imbalanced, does it not?

    I agree, I personally see the European Axis in need of a boost. Italy usually gets shut down either from India moving over troops and amphibious assaulting or South Africa pumping out mechanized infantry, depending on what Germany does. and then once they begin retreating in Africa/middle east is about the time the US comes in to play, and then in another couple turns they have 8 American subs convoying them out of cash. Meanwhile if Germany goes Sea Lion, Russia is probably bearing down on Poland and Romania, and America is gearing up to liberate London. Or if Germany goes all out on Russia than Italy gets shut down even faster, meaning the UK and US are building up transports on Gibraltar or England where they can hit much of Europe.

    Honestly, Japan doesn’t have a chance if US goes all out Pacific, but then it should be a cakewalk for Germany and Italy. All they need is Cairo, London, Leningrad, and Stalingrad. Without US pressure, thats not far fetched.

    @Cmdr:

    I agree with Geist in-so-much as it was unimaginative American play, probably.

    Dadler, 3 games are not enough to really judge the balance of a game.  Especially this game, since this is the first ever in a long line of global games where KJF isnt only a good strategy, its really the only strategy that makes sense, given just how easy it is.

    Try having your team go full pacific with America.  Couple that with a Russian turtle and English assaults in Africa/Med to stop Italy from getting those NOs.  I think you’ll quickly discover one simple fact:  Russia and England can easily prevent Germany and Italy from getting out of hand.  Yes, you will have to give up some of your land, but since you are not playing to win in Europe, that’s a non-starter anyway.  England and Russia only have one objective:  Prevent an Axis Victory City Win.  Anything else can be yielded in the short term. (Short defined as less than 15 rounds of play.)

    Honestly Jennifer, I can’t see a Japanese player not being able to block the US for at least 3 turns once war is on if US goes all-out Pacific. By this time, Japan might only be 10 or so IPCs behind, and while ANZAC and UKP are minor issues, Japan should have pushed through much of China and can probably take the DEI before the Americans attack. While Japan will lose eventually, Germany could take UKE out by turn 3 or 4 and if Russia is all that stands in the way of Italy and Germany, Germany’s transports should be enough to quickly take Leningrad and their army in one or two turns should be pushing through eastern Europe. If Japan actually gets taken, by the time the US shifts to Europe Moscow is probably besieged.

    Now I’m not as experienced as you for sure, but I think Japan has it all right. The Allies cant afford to only fight in one theater.


  • Thanks for the hints but I’ve been playing axis and allies for over 10 years now.  Don’t be condescending because based on my experience I disagree with you.

    _Hints:  Destroyers are an AWESOME build for America.  America does not need more than 15 submarines.  7 Aircraft Carriers = “I Win Button” for America.  Stage from Hawaii (you can hit Japan, Carolines, Australia.)  Later stage from Philippines (You can hit EVERYTHING, except Hawaii/Alaska).  _

    A smart Japanese player will position their fleet to wipe America’s out when it moves out of 10, I know I can and have.  If America has spent that much money on aircraft carriers and air, Germany should have London and be at the gates of Moscow.  Not to mention an Italian Africa.

    Hints:  China can be conservative.

    China should be wiped by round 4 barring bad dice, you can’t do it all as Japan obviously, but killing China going for Russia after usually works well for me.

    Hints:  England does not have to wait til round 4 to attack Japan, but Japan pretty much has to wait until round 4 to attack England. (Or you lose the 10 IPC NO, bring America in early and essentially remove your foot with a chainsaw for no apparent reason.)

    Exactly, so how is China not dead and Russia panicking about Japan’s position on the mainland…


  • Jen:
    I have not seen one game where russia takes scandinavia early, nor understand how russia can afford to when they need every last soldier to hold off the main attack.  Usually I see germ with 8-10 infantry in scandinavia.  You would need your starting airforce plus a similar amount if infantry for an effective attack(assuming germ does not see it coming and does not land airforce there), when germany is barreling down on u with italian can openers and 8-10 arm 7-8 mech,and 18+ rtl and 20+ inf, its very difficult to divide your forces. Also, the allies were nerfed just as much as Japan was in Alpha 2 vs oob if not more, they lost the same amount of air, and US NO’s are easier to mess up.  Also the change in turn order prevents uk/anzac can openers followed by a massive US attack.  Japan should easily be able to destroyer block the main US fleet, while picking off the DEI, locking down india, crippling the chinese resistance, and potentially steal moneys from russia.  It seems that the axis players in your games are not quite as skilled as the allies if axis have it that bad. Maybe balance the teams better.
    I can understand your claim that axis needs a buff or allies need a nerf, but you seem do be exagerating the imbalance a little.

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 20
  • 6
  • 126
  • 12
  • 14
  • 9
  • 33
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

40

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts