How can we rebalance Global 40



  • Hi guys. My friend and I are about to start a series of three games over the summer (playing on a board, not AAA. We’ve been playing various versions of A and A for years, but have only played two games of Global 40 (3.9). Both games were won by Axis.
    What concerns me is the number of people on these forums saying that the game is biased in favour of Axis.
    So. Before we start our mini series, I need some ideas to rebalance our games.

    1. Obviously, one method is the bid system. However, the problem for us is we won’t be bidding each time, we’ll just alternate playing Axis or Allies. So we need a number. How much do all you much more experienced players think is a fair bid to give to Allies.
    2. Another option I’ve read, is to remove the VC’s. I actually like this, because we’re not in any rush, and it’s more realistic, but I wouldn’t want to risk biasing the game in the allies favour instead. Does anyone have an opinion on whether playing for Global domination gives an advantage to either side.
    3. Anything else? Changing deployment slightly? Going back to old AA guns? Battleships for 18 ipc?I don’t mind tinkering around with the game before we start, but we need to get it right first time because we’re fiercly competitive and once we set the conditions, we’ll be committed to that change for the whole summer. Remember, we’re not asking people to suggest that the game be changed for everyone else, or cause any forum rows. We’re very good mates and will both be playing both sides.

    I know that this is a topic that will make people yawn as it’s been argued to death. I don’t want to spark a ten page debate.
    I guess what I’m trying to say, is that what we need is some wise old A and A wizard to say" Right you two. This is what you should do to balance the game. You will both abide by this and will not argue about it. " And then we will be like “Okay. You’ve played gazillions more games than we have, so putting an (extra sub in SZ98/bomber in Russia etc) is just what we’ll do”.
    :?


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Change the game into “Axis, Allies, and Comintern”

    Russia gets it’s own victory conditions, and permission to negotiate with the allies or the axis as required for peace/war/etc.

    Suddenly the setup needs no balance at all, as 3 powers vying to dictate their will onto the board - creates a balance of it’s own.

    Invariably, the same results of WWII occur, BUT - now you have some balancing factors!

    I would set the bar for “Russian” victory at how many IPC’s they earn, and/or control of certain territories - like Mongolia, Berlin, Finland, Poland, perhaps turkey or the middle east as options.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    And don’t forget… that means if things are getting ugly… the Allies might fight the communists with a Broken Germany in the middle!!!



  • Omg Gargantua.  That’s ingenious!  Not sure if it will actually solve the balance issue though, it would be funny to see allies pounding away at Russia if it gets too close to winning.  Those games would take forever though.

    Could Russia Ally with anyside and actually still win?



  • I like the idea, but it requires three players.

    Okay lets simplify my question.

    If you were going to bid for allies, what would you bid? And if you played with that bid, what would you buy with those ipc’s and where would they setup.

    Whatever you say, we’ll go with it. We’ll make that the starting set up and use it for the next three games.

    🙂



  • For normal bidding conditions, allies should have around a 14 bid or higher (ya, axis are that op).

    If you don’t like that, try a reverse bid, where you take off axis units instead of adding allied units.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    @nicolaswilliams:

    I like the idea, but it requires three players.

    Okay lets simplify my question.

    If you were going to bid for allies, what would you bid? And if you played with that bid, what would you buy with those ipc’s and where would they setup.

    Whatever you say, we’ll go with it. We’ll make that the starting set up and use it for the next three games.

    🙂

    The X-dap tournament had a lot of success with a Bomber In Moscow + Bid of 6 to 12.

    Consider a UK sub in the Med, and 1 inf in UK?  on-top of the European Bomber?


  • TripleA

    Play your first games with the box setup.

    it is a pretty balanced game 60/40 - 55/45… The reason bids are usually at around 8-11 are because of the scale (the game starts with like 400 units on the board so it takes a bit to make it perfectly even).

    The only reason the axis are the favorite to win are because of the victory conditions. Take away the VC and it is a huge allies win game.



  • What Cow said.

    We generally play global domination and we have to dock America’s pre-war income down to 35 ipc’s to make it balanced.



  • @Cow:

    The only reason the axis are the favorite to win are because of the victory conditions. Take away the VC and it is a huge allies win game.

    Can the axis actualy win without VC’s? As you can let 1 of the axis get completely crazy ( preferably japan ) and crush 1 board first. Then just turn around and as you will have 2x the income and the other axis cannot expand that much more it becomes just a mather of time.


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016

    I’d go with Gargantua’s XDAP tournament setup, Russia has a heavy bomber added to Moscow and then bid down from 20 to see who takes the Allies each time.  Have some agreement before hand about how to spend the bid, one unit per territory added, naval forces added only to sea zones with other units present, etc.  Have fun.


  • '13

    Hey gargantua, is there a house rules thread on your idea? It would something that my friends would like to try sometime.

    It would be really cool to try it out once some solid rules are fleshed out.


  • '12

    it’s pretty darned balanced.  in fact i’m not sure the allies don’t have the advantage in the current setup.  😛



  • @Boldfresh:

    it’s pretty darned balanced.  in fact i’m not sure the allies don’t have the advantage in the current setup.   😛

    Blasted double negatives!  Are you saying the game is balanced or slanted towards allies?


  • '12

    slanted toward allies.



  • I like……

    Add 1X Strategic Bomber on Moscow
    Add 1X British Submarine off India


  • '12

    honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup.  i feel like the allies need nothing.


  • '12

    @Boldfresh:

    honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup.  i feel like the allies need nothing.

    however, you MUST play with the 8 VC (europe) and 6 VC (asia) conditions or else the good allied player would win EVERY SINGLE TIME.



  • @Boldfresh:

    honestly, i think this game is awesome with it’s CURRENT setup.  i feel like the allies need nothing.

    I don’t see how the axis can lose in this setup if the allies receive nothing.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 51
  • 8
  • 20
  • 2
  • 8
  • 6
  • 2
  • 20
I Will Never Grow Up Games

34
Online

13.4k
Users

33.8k
Topics

1.3m
Posts