Thank you. I should of
Pursued the posts more and would of saw that.
Thank you though.
| In my opinion there are too much german submarines on board at the start of the game.
There are 11 german subs, which can all attack the british navy in the second impulse of turn one, because you can drive through the danish channel in first impulse, when Danmark is still neutral.
Especially the 4 subs in Baltic Sea are too much.
In 1939 there were only 57 germans subs built, but in the game there are 11 subs vs Italien navy had 100 subs in 1939, but in the game there are “only” 5 subs.
| Ships in 1939 UK France Germany USA
| Carrier 8 2 0 6
| Battleships 15 9 0 15
| (Schlachtkreuzer) 3 0 2 0
| (Panzerschiffe) 0 0 3 0
| Heavy Cruisers 15 7 2 18
| Light Cruisers 49 12 6 19
| Destroyer 201 71 22 k. A.
| Subs 38 76 57 90 |
Or give the British navy more destroyers (or stronger navy) at the beginnig of the game to get a chance to survive.
German subs are also a litte bit too havy in combination of 5 IPC cost and an attack value of 5, if they operate in Wolfpacks.
In my opinion the german subs (and also the tanks) should cost 6 IPC`s.
Would be fine to get any feedback! |
In are game the country that controls Denmark can only move there ships through the channel. Otherwise nobody can move through it.
thanks for answering, your houserule is an option, but there should be an official clarification, because of in the 6.1 rules you can see:
“The straights are open to all countries as long as Denmark remains neutral.”
So in first impulse of Germanys turn 1 you can move with your german Baltic fleet into North Sea and overtake Denmark in second impulse.
I agree it’s a problem. Germanys $5 sub’s don’t help.
The problem with $5 units that are so powerful like this, is it defeats the reason to build anything else.
And Germany starts with 11, that get to move and attack twice!!
It wouldn’t be so bad if the eastern front was balanced
But with Russia getting destroyed like a wet paper bag each game…
Played this weekend. We used the rules discussed in the earlier post. Russia had them in or if in Stalingrad and one infantry per IC per tjrn . Germany had one much per major IC per turn and all else was the same.
It took Germany until turn nine to get Leningrad and moskow. The allies decided to equable most of the game and it cost them as they were not cooperating. Calcutta fell before Moskow and the US player sat on his hands until it was too late.
The alternate russia rules helped quite a bit. If the other allied players do their part things could be a lot rougher for Germany.
Not sure if anyone else tried it out, but the playgroup I belong to would like to keep these changes.
the German Navy is very strong. But thats not the biggest problem (remeber in other AA versions Germany had not enough subs, so i think in this version more subs for Germany as it is is a good idea). The real problem is the eastern front. Italy is very strong and can support Germany very well (UK can do nothing really against the italien Navy). Also the 5 $ tanks are too cheap for Germany. There is no way Russia can hold this pressure.
The German navy is strong and tanks and subs are cheap. However, our games are balanced with wins going approximately 50% for either team. Maybe Russia falls every game, but the Allies somehow manage to eke out a win about 50% of the time. That suggests to me that the game is balanced. Looking forward to the Global 1936 game!!! :lol:
As you have aptly pointed out during our games, My record is 100% victory. And we usually flip sides each time we play lol…
I’m not saying it’s just me, it could be James for all I know! But there are other contributing factors to consider. Like the fact the rules seem to be different every time we play! LOL.
I still think out of the gate Germany is unbeatable. The only reason they lost the last game, was because some new strategies were tried (Naval Germany), and Japan (who was remarkable) had never even played this version of the game before!
We’re at the point now where people have played enough games, that the “strategic systems” start to develop. Things like your infamous Leningrad/Madrid combo. Yes - there is still a bit to work your head around, with rule changes etc, but my observations are telling me that once the Axis have their strategic systems in place, they will not be stoppable.
Consider Italy for example. The first few times we played it there was considerable learning curve, and mistakes made. Now it’s like a well tuned machine that nabs Cairo everytime.
I was trying to advocate this (axis being overpowered in certain ways) in my earlier post/thread. I’m experiencing an Axis win pretty much every time as well. My suggestion to curb this was to take the blitzkrieg/2nd impulse rule right out of the game. I’ve only been able to play test this against an unskilled allied player once in the past few months, seeing as I don’t have the chance to play much, so I don’t know if that’s a viable option or not…
Regardless, changes need to be made. Other people have done the math in other posts as well on this subject. We’ll see what happens.
A revision 7.0 is in the works
That’s good to hear