Can Russia survive? (Alpha +3)

Nice work Knp.

Here is my suggestion to Russian NO’s.

Soviet Union
When the Soviet Union Is at War in Europe:

• 5 IPCs if Archangel is controlled by the Soviet Union, London is controlled by UK and there are no units belonging to other Allied powers present in any territories originally controlled by the Soviet Union. Axis warships in z125 convoy this NO. Theme: National prestige and access to Allied Lend-Lease material.
• 3 IPCs for each original German or pro-Axis neutral territory that the Soviet Union controls. Theme: Propaganda value and spread of Communism.
•      2 IPC for each Soviet controlled victory city. Theme: Cities of great strategic importance.
• 10 IPCs (one time only) the first time the Soviet Union controls Germany (Berlin). Theme: National prestige.

When the Soviet Union Is at War in Pacific:
•      3 IPC if Soviet controlls Korea. Theme: Stated national objective to retake Port Arthur.

Now game will be very close to balanced as Soviet will earn much more IPC. If UK falls however Soviet cant expet any Lend-Lease in the north ofc. It also opens up for attacks on Japan and Iraq, but excludes strange adventures into africa. Defending the key cities will be very important. Germany will have quick progress early in the war but can no longer expect to totaly steamroll Soviet as their wartime production is significantly higher.

Honestly, what would have helped Russia is an immunity to invasion by Japan unless Russia first declares war on Japan.  (Russia would be treated as neutral territories on the Pacific map which means American, British and ANZAC troops could not stage through Red territories until Russia DOWs Japan.)

That would assure the Russians of 13 IPC and they would not have to leave a blocking wall behind - so they could walk those far eastern units to the German front if need be, or they would have the choice to leave them and use them against Japan.  And it really does not hurt Japan much that I am seeing, any Russian incursion is usually at the end to push the Germans over the top for the win, or at least that is what I am SEEING in the games  have looked at so far.

I have something to offer on this topic, however, even though I love you like a sister Jen, the last time we collaborated on house rules together during the Delta+1 project… I was committed to a mental hospital.

Bah, I am NOT that hard to work with!  I just get flustered when things are set in stone and then someone pulverized the stone, cuts a new piece and writes down new rules. lol

Seriously though, I have been working on delta rules off and on since I was stuck in the hospital for a few months and figured I would finish them up (first draft) and post them, then ask for community input on those instead of leaving it open ended.  Just figured it would work better to fix something someone sees as a problem than invite problems.

Granted we did great until Mr. M showed up and then everything went to hell fast.  :P

LOL… I would love to read that draft just to see how close, or far apart everyone really was.

Some things have changed and probably still will.  Like the Russian NOs and Japan rules.  And I bet a lot of the changes will be reverted or changed yet again once it is published for peer review. lol.  No one’s perfect, but I don’t really want to post anything until I get quite a few more 2nd edition games online under my belt.

@Cmdr:

Honestly, what would have helped Russia is an immunity to invasion by Japan unless Russia first declares war on Japan.  (Russia would be treated as neutral territories on the Pacific map which means American, British and ANZAC troops could not stage through Red territories until Russia DOWs Japan.)

That would assure the Russians of 13 IPC and they would not have to leave a blocking wall behind - so they could walk those far eastern units to the German front if need be, or they would have the choice to leave them and use them against Japan.  And it really does not hurt Japan much that I am seeing, any Russian incursion is usually at the end to push the Germans over the top for the win, or at least that is what I am SEEING in the games  have looked at so far.

Interesting side note: That was one thing that made Hitler really ticked off at the Japanese. He wanted them to attack Russia and tie down those divisions but they didn’t. Thus, the Russian offensives in winter of 41,42. Also, I think he didn’t really want America brought into the conflict, but was bound by the tri-partite pact once Japan attacked the US.

My belief is that Hitler did want America in the war because we were supplying war materials to his enemies.  I just feel that he may have been far happier if America’s overt involvement had not come until after London fell when it may have been possible to get the United States to surrender or at least enter into a no contest agreement.

Of course, I cannot read minds and even if I could, “Unkle” Adolf’s mind has been dead for at least 30 years before I was born, so it would probably have said nothing but <<drool>> lol.  (I use the term Uncle in the same manner as we referred to Stalin by the way, not in a good way!)</drool>

@Cmdr:

Of course, I cannot read minds and even if I could, “Unkle” Adolf’s mind has been dead for at least 30 years before I was born, so it would probably have said nothing but <<drool>> lol.  (I use the term Uncle in the same manner as we referred to Stalin by the way, not in a good way!)</drool>

Oh yes, I understand. It’s not “He’s Uncle Adolf, everyone loves him!” but more like your mom telling you “Don’t go over to Uncle Adolf’s house without an adult!”

Taking away the NOs from everyone might work too, I am just worried it’s too drastic.

Granted, anything that stops the Americans from earning 1000 IPC a round isn’t ALL bad.  But ANZAC, India, USA and Italy make a lot of money from NOs and I just wonder how drastic a shift it would be if that income was removed.  Yes you would take some from Japan too, but my ponderance is that Japan could lose 10-15 IPC a round if it means the US loses 30 IPC, ANZAC 5 IPC, India 5 IPC.

Yes, it would make the situation in Russia better, but does this mean that Japan is going to need a bid?  (Not saying it does mean that, asking the question!)

Only the US needs the NO bonus. In other A&A games they trail behind the 2  Axis powers when they should be richer.
I love the NOs in Global, like I did in Anniversary, but the Axis’ income is  increased too much by them.

I never quibbled that America needed NOs.  I think NOs keep the Americans honest.  My beef with the American NO is that it’s darn near impossible to take the big one from them and if you do manage to take it, why are the allies still playing?

I would have made an NO for the US that none of the continental Australian territories nor East/West India are captured by Axis forces and taken the continental NO away.  Maybe add in that Brazil is allied or pro-allied.  This puts the NO in jeopardy instead of just assuming you’ll have it for the entire game as free income.

I think the US should be super rich when it joins the war. The problem it shpuld  face is crossing the oceans in sufficient numbers and in time.
Oh and not collecting the 52 income while not interested in joining a world war!
But then I am funny about that.

Fine, no American NO for continental safety.

+1 IPC for Midway total value 1 IPC
+1 IPC for Wake Island total value 1 IPC
+1 IPC for Aleutian Islands total value 1 IPC
+4 IPC for Alaska total value 6 IPC
+3 IPC for Hawaiian Islands total value now 4 IPC

These are areas that Japan can realistically invade, but are still easy enough for America to liberate or prevent from falling.  It gives the United States the money prior to being at war and heavily rewards the Japanese for invading American soil which should draw firepower off Russia, China, Australia and India (basically Japan is rewarded for the DEI and for attacking America giving them a choice.)

Sorry if I confused you Jen. I meant  I thought US should not get 52 a turn whilst at peace.
When war breaks out, then give them a bigger NO.
In Pacific they started with 17, then got a 40 NO for being at war. I liked that.
It does not work as well when you play Europe as they have Central US on that map, adding 10 to the already richer East Coast.
I would like to see a poor US accelerate to a super rich one in a few turns.
But I have said I am weird like that. I came to this forum 18 months ago with this same gripe. It does not grow old for me!

I know balancing these games must be  a nightmare.
Being on the receiving end of a well played Axis player in a game with Garg,  I have come to see the Allies do have it hard and I feel the Axis NOs are the difference.

I don’t care what America earns, we could even house rule that all US territories that are NOT in the comprised of one or more United States states (but including any captured by America) are worth double once the US is at war.  Just make it so that the axis has an easier chance of capturing that income.

So a US limited to the 50 United States and no more should collect only 45 IPC and no more.  20 EUS, 12 CUS, 10 WUS, 2 Alaska, 1 Hawaii.

However, Formosa is worth 2 IPC to the United States.  Even captured allied territories like Morocco or French Indo-China might be, would be worth double for the US.

Why not start America at 32 for the first round, 42 for the second, then come up to 52 plus NO’s on the third and following rounds. Would sort of emulate a slow ramping up of wartime production.