Big difference between Axis and Allies.

  • Customizer

    Hey Guys, I was trying out an idea for a game of all the Axis being 1 power and all Allies being 1 power. Check out the attached setup pics. I used Italy and ANZAC because I just wanted to play with the new pieces. Basically, Italy = Axis and ANZAC = Allies. However, I noticed a number of errors with this idea pretty quick. Obvously, the reason this game works is because there are so many seperate powers each having their own turn and, even if they are trying to help out their Allies, ultimately making their own moves. I did not realize just how big a difference there was between the Axis and Allies.
    First is income: Allies = 175, Axis = 66. In all games, the Allies start out making more than the Axis, but this differnce is just about insurmountable.
    Second is combat units: The Allies actually start out with more infantry, cruisers and destroyers.
                                          The Axis start out with more artillery, tanks, tac bombers, bombers and submarines.
                                          Both sides are roughly even in Mechs, fighters, CVs, BBs and transports.
                                          In IPC value, Allies = 1310, Axis = 1247
    Third is Facilities: Air Bases: Allies = 16, Axis =4
                               Naval Bases: Allies = 18, Axis = 4
                               Major ICs: Allies = 7, Axis = 4 (I am including the 3 US ICs as Major as there would be no neutral countries in this type of game)
                               Minor ICs: Allies = 8, Axis = 1
                               In IPC value, Allies = 816, Axis = 252
    Now, with this big of a difference, there is no way Italy would win in a game with simply 2 powers. For one thing, ANZAC would never have to build units way over in the US. They could spend 175 IPCs in areas close to the front. Italy would make a few early advances but I believe they would soon be overwhelmed on just about every front.
    So, should I maybe give some of the “ANZAC” territory to Italy to even things out some? I figured NOs were probably out of the question, or perhaps NOs for Italy only. Perhaps some of the “minor” Allied territories should revert to Italy. Also, there would be no capital captures since there are only 2 powers. Each would only have 1 capital. It would have to go by VC captures. So, it would be next to impossible for either to plunder and bankrupt the other. If one did capture the other’s capital, the game would pretty much be over.
    Does anybody else have any ideas about how to even this out? Or is it just a poor idea to begin with?
    1940 2 power Europe.JPG
    1940 2 power Pacific.JPG

  • Make everything like UK Pacific; define specific spheres of potential influence ,diff incomes

    Example Germany ITaly Japan
    US, USSR, UK London, UK Pac, Anzac

    Japan bank gets any territory the axis takes on pacific map.
    Germany gets all on europe except italy’s originals, africa and middle east (inc;uding neutrals), that is for italy

    France gets the 3 main french territories.
    Russia gets all of russia and all originally german territories
    UK London Gets all of africa/middle east/Italy
    USA gets any neutrals/japanese
    ANZAC gets dei,
    There may be some details I left out, but the main idea was to simplify the long parts (combat/non-combat move), although buys are separate it is all on one turn.

    For simplicity throw out a country being able to collect from/ build on a liberated ally whose capital is under control.

  • To even this out:
    Make your first turn as the axis and then take a look again.
    If the axis (Italy) gets the first turn the overall setup will schow a dramatic change:

    Just some things that will happen:

    • France will be occupied (loose France and lots of troops)
    • Navy around UK and in the Med will get smashed
    • Fleets all around the pacific will get lost
    • Lots of allied ground forces will be destroyed

    Just try your first turn and then check out the standings on the board.
    The allies will loose at least Units with an value of about 200IPC or more and the income will be reduced by approximately 30 IPC (or even more) leading to:

    Axis: 96: Allies:145
    Worth of Forces on Bord: Axis ~ 1200 Allies ~ 1100 (without what will be build)

    The allies can produce 29 Units in Europe and Asia while the Axis can produce 42 Units in Europe

  • Yea, keep nations separate for everything except for combat and non combat  moves, they all move at the same time and help each other in attack. Ive done this myself and the opener with Italy and Germany going at the same time is quite fun. This way transporting units can be done in 1 turn and not 2 turns as well. I would keep rules like no tech sharing etc.

  • Customizer


    To even this out:
    Make your first turn as the axis and then take a look again.
    If the axis (Italy) gets the first turn the overall setup will schow a dramatic change:
    The allies can produce 29 Units in Europe and Asia while the Axis can produce 42 Units in Europe

    Hey, you were right here. In the first round, Italy rose from 66 to 94 while ANZAC dropped from 175 to 161. In the second round it got even closer: Italy = 114, ANZAC = 159. The only reason ANZAC didn’t drop further was because they got the DEI, which boosted their income but didn’t detract from Italy’s.
    For the first three rounds, I thought the income difference was too big so I tried out letting Italy get all the traditional Axis NOs (except for the German land unit in Egypt one). However, by the end of Round 3, Italy was close to passing ANZAC so I decided to let ANZAC collect some of the Allied NOs.
    ANZAC gets the Soviet Archangel NO although we obviously ignore the “other allied units on Soviet territory” part. They also get 3 IPCs for each German/Pro Axis neutral territory in Europe. They also get the $5 NOs for the US by controlling Alaska, Aleutians, Hawaii, Johnston and Line Island and for controlling Mexico, SE Mexico, Central America and West Indies. Also, the control Malaya + all ANZAC territories NO.
    So far we are at round 5. Italy is having problems in Europe and Africa, but doing well in China, East Russia and SE Asia. There is kind of a standoff between a large ANZAC fleet around Hawaii and a large Italian fleet around Japan. One buys warships and the other matches so neither is willing to go on the attack just yet.
    Italy rules the Med but has no navy at all in the Atlantic. For the beginning of round 6, it’s Italy at 159 and ANZAC at 179. Still not sure how things will end or how long this game will go. I think the key might be Europe. Italy is kind of on the defensive there. If ANZAC gets a solid foothold there before Italy can spread out too much into Russia, it might be downhill for Italy from then on. However, If Italy can keep knocking ANZAC back off of Europe and keep spreading out deeper into Russia, they may take Moscow. Then it might be downhill for ANZAC.
    Oh yeah, one other rule change I made is that Major ICs do NOT get downgraded when captured. That makes it more critical to retake them at any cost.

  • you could add a capitol rule,

    every time a capitol falls, the other player gets the income of that nation for one turn.

    so when france falls, axis gets 16 IPC from the allied hand.

    you could give the nations options; if you want to have access to the japanese NOs, then you need to separate the japanese economy. I think that is a clever way of doing it.

    you could also keep the nations separated, until at war.

    US troops and income can only be placed in US, and not be moved until at war, at that point you can chose between getting the US NOs, or using the US income wherever you like.

  • Customizer

    Those are some good ideas. I think to make this game balanced, I do need to make some adjustments. Just giving Italy the Axis NOs and ANZAC the Allied NOs doesn’t quite work. It seemed to be working for a while, but once ANZAC got the upper hand, it just gradually got worse and worse for Italy. I know that happens even in some games of regular A&A, but I don’t think there was any hope of Italy turning things around once ANZAC started getting ahead.
    We just finished this game tonight. It took 15 rounds before Italy surrendered. For the first three rounds, Italy really grew and just about closed the gap between them. Rounds 4-8 were somewhat even between the two. If Italy did well on one front, ANZAC was doing well on another front. From Round 9 on, Italy was more and more defensive. ANZAC managed to take Japan and pretty much ruled all the Pacific and Asia within the next 2 rounds. Once all other Italian presence was eliminated, all ANZAC had to do is keep pounding on Europe until something gave way. Between amphibious landings every turn in Western Europe and a flood of tanks, mechs and planes rolling in from Russia, Italy was finding it harder and harder to maintain any kind of border.
    For a while, whenever ANZAC would land somewhere in W Europe, Italy had enough to take it back. There were a few sparks of good for Italy, like when they sacrificed most of their European air force to kill the ANZAC fleet outside of England, including a stack of transports. That delayed ANZAC for a couple of rounds, but soon they were making landings again and Italy couldn’t afford a whole new air force to risk against the navy.
    While playing the game this way makes each round go somewhat faster, it is pretty hard keeping track of all the different fronts. You literally have attacks going on in every point of the map on some turns. It’s a little easier when Germany is dealing with England and Russia, Italy is dealing with the Med and Japan is dealing with China and the Pacific. Still, it is kind of cool to be able to carry out ALL your ideas in the same turn.

Log in to reply

Suggested Topics

  • 8
  • 6
  • 22
  • 11
  • 2
  • 32
  • 29
  • 7
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys