• Hi all, I have played a few games with A3.

    With little commitment, Russia can make big bucks in Africa with the 4 Italian territories and in Iraq with with their NO bonus for the Pro-axis/Axis territories.

    Pretty much the only way to prevent this (when UK is focusing on Italy of course, otherwise Italy could stop Russia), is for Germany to rush moscow.

    Now that’s is not NECESSARILY bad, but at the same time, it makes games kinda one dimensional. Sealion is definitely dead, and I think that’s a bad thing for the variety of games.

    Not to discount anyone’s hard work, but I think Alpha 2 was the best version of the 4 or so we have of global so far.

    Does anyone else notice the issues I notice with Russia, or are there other counters I am missing? With sealion such a bad idea now, it’s darn near impossible for italy to get momentum.

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    I’m reading your mail.

    They just need to leave it to Pro-Axis / Axis territories in Europe.

  • I am fine with the current setup because I think that russia needs every advantage it can get if germany goes super aggressive on you.

  • TripleA

    germany stomps russia out of the game no matter what the allies do within 7 rounds usually, unless he does sea lion. So usually as the allies you try to shut japan down as fast as possible and maybe from japan seazone->china->russia you can fly fighters in.

    Still takes 4 rounds from russia to get to egypt by tank blitz and london is a stone skip away but after 7 rounds you can fortress up just fine.

  • Every game i have considered taking Mid-East territories with Russia, and every game i took it withe UK, who can use it much better.
    Also, when Russia falls (unavoidable since Germany goes Russia each time anyway), the income of those territories won’t be lost after Moscow is lost.

    Also, Russia can only got here once it’s at war, right? So even in case of a sea-lion (where Germany would probably wait to attack Stalin) they can’t leave Russian soil…

    Would those IPC’s make the difference for Moscow? I don’t know. But i’m not too convinced.

    As for Iraq, whenever possible i like to leave it for USA (only happened once, in a Europe OOB)

  • I guess I am just not satisfied with rushing Russia as being the only real option for Germany in Alpha 3.

    My moves as russia are tank and mech to Turkestan, leave 2 inf in cauc. As soon as Germany DOW’s, tank and mech to persia (through east persia that UK has taken), and the next turn Iraq. That’s already an extra inf and art for russia for 4 turns or so.

    the 4 more territories in Africa (I almost always do tobruk) are not to farfetched for russia to get 2 or 3. by round 5, depending on when Germany invaded. Most italian players won’t sit in east africa or libya and make the UK come get them, they will go for the IPC grab while they can. I don’t think it’s a good thing that to avoid having a russian bear, the italian player must sit and force brits to take him out.

    Anyways, like I said, it seems the “solution” is to just rush russia before these bonuses can have a real effect. That makes for pretty boring games in my opinion, and isn’t really a solution at at all.

    Anyways, with 2nd ed. coming out, likely to be with the A3 rules, it looks like anyone wishing to play that will be in for a barbarossa-only game that gets very predictable very fast.

    “Also, when Russia falls (unavoidable since Germany goes Russia each time anyway),”

    To me, the above quote is the problem (not the person that said it, just the fact that it is probably true). I just don’t think this NO was thought out very well. Sealion was dead enough with all the other changes, this was not necessary and can make for some pretty absurd situations (my opponent went sealion and I am making 19 IPC from 4 IPC worth of territory, and if USA were interested in comitting more to defend transports in the med, I would have 6 more with Sardinia and Sicily.)

  • TripleA

    sea lion is still very common despite all the changes. all germany needs is a little bit of luck on g1 to all of a sudden have that option available.

  • @vonLettowVorbeck1914:

    “Also, when Russia falls (unavoidable since Germany goes Russia each time anyway),”

    To me, the above quote is the problem (not the person that said it, just the fact that it is probably true). I just don’t think this NO was thought out very well. Sealion was dead enough with all the other changes, this was not necessary and can make for some pretty absurd situations (my opponent went sealion and I am making 19 IPC from 4 IPC worth of territory, and if USA were interested in comitting more to defend transports in the med, I would have 6 more with Sardinia and Sicily.)

    Did every axis/pro-axis give bonus? Not only the ones with an IPC value?, i kinda forgot that.

  • Customizer

    We house-ruled the Russian NO. They only get the 3 IPCs from Axis territories and Pro-Axis Neutral territories within mainland Europe. This also includes any Pro-Allied and Strict Neutrals (including Turkey) that the Axis conquer first. In other words, if Germany or Italy attack and conquer Turkey, Russia can take it back and get the 3 IPC bonus but if Russia attacks Turkey while they are still Neutral, Russia does NOT get the bonus.
    This does NOT include Sicily, Sardinia, Crete, Eire, any of the Middle-East countries or African countries.
    We also dabbled with lowering the bonus to 2 IPCs per territory thinking that 3 IPCs just gave Russia too much money, but we went back to 3 ICPs because in most of our games, it’s pretty hard for Russia to actually take territories outside their border. Usually Germany is pushing them too hard.

  • Moderator 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 '12

    @Special Forces. Yes to all Pro-Axis, including the ones worth no IPCs.

  • First of Russian dont automaticly fall round 7, Anzac/British/US fighters reach Russia by then and so do 18inf. (basic allied strategy…)
    Any Russian players that dont only buy inf,art (or only inf worst case senario) want to die, so they dont count.

    Still Russia is underpowerd and out of position to stop Germany (and thats boring). I like Cows suggestion adding a Russian bomber in Moscow and editing the russian NO to be only for Europe and not for africa/middeleast.
    Bid is about 4-10 now, but that bid usually goes to UK units to remove Italy from the game.

  • Usually its round 6 when russia falls not 7

  • Moderator 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 '12

    Do people still bid? We find Global well balanced now.
    As for Italy, have not got going since Alpha 3, but that is fine as, sadly, i have got used to it.
    And we were poor!

  • usually the bid is 4-10 for dice allies, and 12-15 for low luck allies

  • TripleA

    If I am bidding I refuse to take allies for less than 8 for dice games.

  • Then ill bid 7 in our next game Cow, but I assume your not going crazy Pearl Harbour this time.  😄

  • TripleA

    ? I do Japan DOW1 the way my strategy guide says to do… unless you leave a bunch of russians for me to kill, I’ll DOW J2 if I can pick up a bunch of ruskies to kill on J1.

    I do not know where you get this crazy pearl harbor thing from. Once in awhile for casual games, I do pearl harbor to new south wales. It has been awhile since I did something other than standard J1 openers.

    Germany is the country I screw around with now.

  • Its just that I kicked you so badly with US because you did pearl harbour last time 😜

  • TripleA

    yeah i realized what i got to do when i do that strat, it has to be geared toward new south wales instead of india.

  • I think London defense was boosted too much in Alpha 3.9 (Sea lion should remain viable in the right circumstances). We generally remove one inf, and one AA gun from UK to make them build ground units there. I will say that I like the new Royal Navy arrangement around England. It should still be a challenge for the Germans to pull off Sea lion, and keep on pace if/when they do.

    As for the Russian bomber, we tried that once (seemed like they should have one). How it turned out was it ended up on England paired with the Russian sub to take out German blocker ships (sz 110) for the Western allies to attack Norway. This hardly seemed historical, so we haven’t given Russia a bomber since.

    The Italian NO? Yeah we have house ruled it a couple ways too. Always only mainland Europe & Mid East (no African safari, or island hopping w/US or UK transports). We have allowed for the pro allied and strict neutrals if axis take them (or activate them) as mentioned in other posts. Normally 2 IPC for neutrals (depending on which ones are allowed), 3 IPCs for orig Ger/Ita.

    We have also looked at splitting the Russian lend lease NO. Awarding 3 IPCs for the way it is in the rules, and 3 IPCs for a Mid east route. Allied control of of sz 80m, NW Persia, Persia, and Caucasus (sometimes also include Stalingrad). One game Italy got whacked early, so w/o much axis involvement in the Mid East it just seemed like a give-me for the southern route, and Russia also getting paid for those neutrals was a cash cow for them (balance). Just saying watch what you put in the game. By all means experiment, but balance is thrown off quite easily…

  • TripleA

    The axis are still a solid favorite to win, even with an 8-12 bid for allies I’d still prefer the axis. Russia making a bigger income is how it is supposed to be after doing sea lion, the allies need something going for them with uk gone like that.

  • The Russians being able to maintain, and expand in a Sea lion game yes. That’s why we have also included both the pro allied and strict neutrals if the Russians liberate them from the Axis. What is happening though even in games that are Barbarossa is the Russians are replacing lost income taken by the Germans & Japanese with a small forces in N Africa. The Western allies are leaving some of these territories for them in some cases which just seems wrong IMO. If the Russians were in danger of loosing Moscow, they surly wouldn’t be sending forces away from the “Motherland”, it would be all hands on deck.

  • TripleA

    historically russians did do stuff in the middleeast/africa… I don’t see why they should not get a bonus, besides it is only 14 ipc a turn, which is not a big deal. look at germany’s income without even advancing on russia… it is stupid.

  • 14 IPC is a HUGE deal, are you trying to make a joke? 4 more land units PER TURN doesn’t make a big difference?

  • I look at it as Russia getting the NO for Persia and Iraq represents the middle east lend lease route.  Finland and Eastern Europe states also make historical sense.  The gamey part is when Russian mobile units drive down into Africa.  For the game, it does give Italy a good reason to strive for Egypt even if they already have Gibraltar/Greece/South France, perhaps timing a landing in Egypt/Transjordan on the turn when the Russians are there so they can kill them.  Still the African safari feels fake.  It would be better if the NO included the phrase “….in mainland Europe or the Middle East”.

    The NO works great in a sealion game, because Russia becomes almost unbreakable if they get Finland, Poland, Hungary, Rumania for a turn or 2, and doesn’t try to hold them but spends all that money on infantry and saves what they don’t spend for later on.  In that case it’s up to Japan to do something tricky in the Pacific or go hardcore to Stalingrad with Italy somehow kept strong enough to hold Egypt (not easy).

Suggested Topics

  • 19
  • 2
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 7
  • 32
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys