• Hello,

    I played Axis and Allies way back when I was a kid. I am guessing in the late 80s. I also owned other great games produced by the same company; Conquest of an Empire, Shogun, Fortress American (with Saddam Hussein on the cover), and of course, Axis and Allies.

    Anyway, I recently purchased the second edition. I set the game up and ran through one round to get a feel for how the game plays out. I noticed something while playing as Japan. It seems a little too easy to roll up China. I played one round and easily advance one province and I see no reason why I cannot take all of China. This seems very unrealistic. China should be a meat grinder. For example there was several battles for Changsha and the coastal regions were taken through bloody hard fought battles. I am debating whether or not to add units to the Chinese regions. I am not sure how that effects balance of play. I would be interested in anyone’s point of view.

    On a side note: I am a little disappointed that Chongqing was not a victory condition. It could be argued that if China lose Chongqing to Japan then China would had been more or less defeated.

    Thanks
    Pike


  • You are right: Japan has it far too easy in this game and China  is easily swallowed. Russia needs to look both ways too soon.


  • Excuse my forgetting: welcome to the forum,  PikeStance.

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    Hi Pike,

    Your observations are very sharp for someone who’s been out of the game so long – glad to have you on the forum! Some thoughts on your China complaint, in no particular order:

    1. I agree with you, China should be tougher. In the “House Rules” section I discuss some setups that could help fix this problem, including a slightly different setup that gives the Allies extra troops in east Asia (1 extra artillery in Buryatia goes a long way), and a radically different 1939 setup that cuts the starting Japanese forces in half and makes Chongqing a victory city.

    2. If you want to make a stand in China using the out-of-the-box (“OOB”) rules, nobody can stop you. America can build an industrial complex in Sinkiang and is guaranteed to get at least one build there – usually more like three builds if you’re playing proper defense. Britain’s starting fighter off the coast of India can hit and will usually sink one of the two starting Japanese transports, which helps slow down the Japanese attack. If the British fighter survives, it can land in China (Yunnan) for extra defense, and Britain can stack 4 infantry in Burma on turn 1, which will have to either be killed by Japan or else they become extra Chinese reinforcements. Russia can bring 3 infantry, 2 tanks, and 1 fighters into China on the very first turn without throwing the game away. None of these strategies are considered optimal, because China is only worth 4 IPCs, but it’s worth keeping in mind that abandoning China is a choice, not a requirement. Perhaps in the real historical war, if Britain and the USA had spent fewer resources ferrying supplies to China, they would have been able to start Operation Torch a few months earlier, cutting short the war in Europe.

    3. The OOB game is widely considered to be favorable to the Axis, so many players will give the Allies some units that they can choose to put where-ever they like at the start of the game, called a “bid.” If you want, you can use your bid to put extra units in China. I like to put an American artillery in Szechuan if I have the resources to spare.

    4. If you want to have a house rule tweaking the starting setup, you could put several extra units in China without ruining the game. Be aware that no matter how much you buff up China, some players will pack it all up and send it straight to Moscow, abandoning China anyway. One way to deter such shameless cowardice would be to give Tokyo a couple extra starting tanks – that way if you leave the plains of east Asia vacant, the Japanese can sweep through them quickly to threaten Moscow. Another way is to avoid giving the American Chinese extra tanks/fighters and to put the extra American infantry mostly in Anhwei and Yunnan, so they start farther from Moscow.

  • Moderator

    Welcome Pike!

    Argo is right about many players who would just retreat the additional troops.  The problem is Germany is always the more immediate threat when the game starts no matter how big J will eventually get.  It doesn’t do much good to hold the line in China if Germany has Kar in Rd 2 and can threaten Wrus and then Mos in another turn or two.

    AA50 sort of solved this by not letting the China troops leave China.  It was treated as a “minor” nation.  It was kind of gimmicky (for every two china territories you had you received 1 inf at the purchase units phase of the US turn) but it served its purpose of not letting those units into Russia.  But the China in AA50 also had maybe 8 or 9 territories to start.  Unfortunately it was still steamrolled by Japan.  China was still toast in rd 2 or 3 or reduced to one territory so they’d get no more reinforcements.

    I suppose the best solution would be to beef up the boarder spots.  Territories that Japan attacks on rd 1 and consider the extra losses J takes as the “meat grinder” portion of the war.  B/c anything beyond the front lines is likely going to get retreated.

    Not having a 2 IPC territory hurts as well, b/c with the India IC there, I could see a viable strat to drop a US IC and really attempt to hold Asia.  But with only 1 ipc spots available, it’s not really worth it to spend 15 ipc on an IC.


  • Hello Pike, I have a few ideas you could use, like……

    1. Add 2 infantry, to Siakang. (Please correct me if I spelled the territory’s name wrong)

    2. You could you Argothair’s idea by adding some art or even more inf in Buryatia.

    3. You can even start with a IC in Szechuan!


  • @Argothair:

    Hi Pike,

    Your observations are very sharp for someone who’s been out of the game so long – glad to have you on the forum!

    Thank you!

    @Argothair:

    1. I agree with you, China should be tougher. In the “House Rules” section I discuss some setups that could help fix this problem, including a slightly different setup that gives the Allies extra troops in east Asia (1 extra artillery in Buryatia goes a long way), and a radically different 1939 setup that cuts the starting Japanese forces in half and makes Chongqing a victory city.

    Do you have a link to it, because I am trouble finding it.

    @Argothair:

    1. If you want to make a stand in China using the out-of-the-box (“OOB”) rules, nobody can stop you. America can build an industrial complex in Sinkiang and is guaranteed to get at least one build there – usually more like three builds if you’re playing proper defense. Britain’s starting fighter off the coast of India can hit and will usually sink one of the two starting Japanese transports, which helps slow down the Japanese attack. If the British fighter survives, it can land in China (Yunnan) for extra defense, and Britain can stack 4 infantry in Burma on turn 1, which will have to either be killed by Japan or else they become extra Chinese reinforcements. Russia can bring 3 infantry, 2 tanks, and 1 fighters into China on the very first turn without throwing the game away. None of these strategies are considered optimal, because China is only worth 4 IPCs, but it’s worth keeping in mind that abandoning China is a choice, not a requirement. Perhaps in the real historical war, if Britain and the USA had spent fewer resources ferrying supplies to China, they would have been able to start Operation Torch a few months earlier, cutting short the war in Europe.

    2. The OOB game is widely considered to be favorable to the Axis, so many players will give the Allies some units that they can choose to put where-ever they like at the start of the game, called a “bid.” If you want, you can use your bid to put extra units in China. I like to put an American artillery in Szechuan if I have the resources to spare.

    3. If you want to have a house rule tweaking the starting setup, you could put several extra units in China without ruining the game. Be aware that no matter how much you buff up China, some players will pack it all up and send it straight to Moscow, abandoning China anyway. One way to deter such shameless cowardice would be to give Tokyo a couple extra starting tanks – that way if you leave the plains of east Asia vacant, the Japanese can sweep through them quickly to threaten Moscow. Another way is to avoid giving the American Chinese extra tanks/fighters and to put the extra American infantry mostly in Anhwei and Yunnan, so they start farther from Moscow.

    My preference to make minimal, but as vital changes that are as closely aligned to historical realities. For example; Adding infantry to Chinese provinces and creating a victory city; Changqing in Szechuan. The idea of placing an IPC in Szechuan is also enticing to prevent retreating Chinese armies mentioned. I am little surprise of the low value of Szechuan especially considering the value of Borneo and East Indies are so high. I am sure it is owning to its resources, but if you know anything about China and its history Szechuan is of no less important. It should be a “3” but in this case, an IPC at setup would create an imbalance for sure.

    My worry about placing units in Sinkiang historically was a ‘factionalized’ during the war with a significant (at times) Soviet presence. It would almost be accurate to have Soviet troops deployed here than “US” Chinese troops. When I noticed the space was empty I smiled.

    On a side note (FYI) the game has some interesting spellings:
    Anhui is spelled Anhwei (‘hui’ and ‘wei’ are two different pronunciations).
    Sichuan or Szechuan is spelled Szechwan <– Honestly, I have never seen this spelling anywhere.
    Sinkiang is the anglicized version of Xinjiang. The game does the same thing with Kiangsu, which is Jiangsu
    Kuangtung is Guangdong in English (Or Canton if you prefer.)

  • 2023 '22 '21 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16

    1. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35964.0

    2. Borneo and East Indies have high IPC values to reflect the astonishing importance of their crude oil to the Japanese war effort. Hitler’s tanks may not have run without gasoline, but at least his infantry could carry on shooting their submachine guns when the oil ran out. When Hirohito ran out of gas, what were the troop transports going to do, row with oars? I agree that China as a whole should be worth more than 4 IPC, but I’m not sure that Szechuan all by itself should be worth 3 IPC. Probably 2 IPC, from what I know of China’s economic history. I’m willing to be educated if you know the specifics.


  • @Argothair:

    1. removed because of system prohibition

    2. Borneo and East Indies have high IPC values to reflect the astonishing importance of their crude oil to the Japanese war effort. Hitler’s tanks may not have run without gasoline, but at least his infantry could carry on shooting their submachine guns when the oil ran out. When Hirohito ran out of gas, what were the troop transports going to do, row with oars? I agree that China as a whole should be worth more than 4 IPC, but I’m not sure that Szechuan all by itself should be worth 3 IPC. Probably 2 IPC, from what I know of China’s economic history. I’m willing to be educated if you know the specifics.

    Thanks for the link!

    I just finished teaching in China for four years and will move to Indonesia this August for at least two years, so the comparison is interesting.

    As for Szechuan. It is essentially the resource rich area of China. “Anhwei” is the core of China, no future of Emperor could hope to conquer China and claim the mandate without first taking Szechuan. If you look at the map of China Chongqing is a city in the municipal province of the same name. It is difficult to tell since the map is skewed, but does it appear the Chongqing would be in “Szechwan” province. An argument could be made, however, that “Anhwei” psychologically would be equally important. It is satisfactory to have split the value between both provinces. In the war most of the Japanese efforts were in the south (Changde and Changsha). This is where Chiang-kai-shek headquarters were located adding to the importance of the region.

    To summarize: Szechuan is an important region for resources (both human and raw materials). It was the center of Chinese nationalist resistance and the headquarter of Chiang-kai-shek. Strategically, it would signal the last real area of resistance apart from the CCP in the North. You consider this for “Anhwei” plus the psychological effect of losing the “core” of China.

  • 2024 '22 '21 '19 '15 '14

    I’m a big fan of bids for China. They get hosed every time.

    In AA50 and Global my solution for the China stomp, is to rework the turn order so that China goes First in the sequence instead of Last. But this doesn’t work in 1942.2 since China is USA controlled.

    In general I favor USA control of China in A&A games, over having them as a separate nation with specific rules, but there is the dilemma that any USA troops you add to China will almost certainly just withdraw towards the Center, rather than going forward against Japan.

    I think a starting IC in Szech is a cool concept, and it’s something I’ve suggested a number of times in various threads for many different A&A boards. I think 1942.2 could support it, as an Anchor for the fighter in China, but it would require additional defensive units, or it is just used by Japan against Russia immediately.

    I’ve also supported the idea of Chunking as a VC to represent the Wartime capital. I believe this needs to be offset though. AA50 had the best set up for a VC expansion in my view, since it had 18 total. 1942.2 has only 13. Hong Kong, Sydney, Stalingrad, Warsaw and Ottawa were removed for some reason when this latest edition of A&A came out.

    This is an HR digression, but I’ve suggested that we add these VC’s back in, perhaps with others included as well! Further candidates I’ve played with in the past are places like…
    Chungking, Singapore, Cairo, Amsterdam, Minsk, Vladivostok, Cape Town.

    That’d be 25 total VCs

    Axis 11:
    Berlin
    Tokyo
    Rome
    Paris
    Shanghai
    Manila
    Warsaw
    Hong Kong
    Singapore
    Amsterdam
    Minsk

    Allies 14:
    Moscow
    London
    Washington D.C
    Leningrad
    Calcutta
    San Francisco
    Hawaii
    Stalingrad
    Sydney
    Ottawa
    Vladivostok
    Cairo
    Cape Town
    Chungking.

    I think that would produce an optimal spread to support the VC system.

    To achieve it you need some kind of physical marker to represent these new VCs on the game map, my suggestion would be use something removable at first to see if you like it, then perhaps a small sticker (the sort you can peel off easily, with only the mildest sort of adhesive) if you’re really committed haha. I usually buy 2 boards and combine the sculpts, so I have one of my 1942.2 copies as a “workboard” with HR stuff and heavy use, then a more pristine vanilla map on standby. But like most,  people I would never draw on the actual board, I think that’s just asking too much, so anyway, yeah, you can try it with physical plastic pieces or coins at first if you prefer.

    Expanding the VC game this way, I think it is also advisable to allow players some reason to track control of these territories.
    Like a +1 ipc bonus for control of a VC, or perhaps allowing players to purchase/place +1 infantry in VC territories that they control. Things like that.

    This is basically to lend the territories more significance in the course of gameplay (not just as a metric, but as something with a real in-game value), drawing more attention to them, so that it’s easier to keep these VC territories in the forefront of the player’s mind. I’ve felt this way since Revised introduced the concept of the VC initially, that VCs were too much “outside” of the gameplah. There should be some in-game effect beyond just the victory mechanic, to reinforce and support the VC win idea. Also it’d be nice if the numbers by side for thr VC win were the same. Say 16 or 18, or maybe highter, or whatever makes sense for a Minor or Major win.

    As for a China unit redesign, I think this would probably be fun to explore.

    I like for example the idea of including an AAgun in China, and a Factory.

    Szech is the clear candidate, both for historical reasons, and for gameplay ones. If planning to give the USA a starting factory here, with the aim to make it a defensive choke point, then you’d definitely want some more units on the ground at the beginning of play. A boost to Yunnan or Anwhei seem sensible enough, if you want to make Japan’s mainland opening harder. Singkiang is gamey, but also doable.

    AAguns are fun, but a bit rough on account of not being able to move in combat. These units usually have to flee the front line, but it might be fun to have a pair in China. Maybe one in Yunnan for some combat variety, and then one in Szech to help secure the territory through J1. With back-up from the Russians and the UK, it might be possible for Allies to hold the line here.

    The lone flying tiger does seem a bit sad. I think if you start adding in heavier attack units beyond just the AAguns, you really need to do it spread it out, more hitpoints in Anwhei can really hamstring Japan at the outset for example, so I wouldn’t want to overdo it in any one territory. After a casual glance of the board, maybe something like…

    Szech +1 factory +artillery +1 AAgun
    Yunnan +1 infantry
    Anwhei +1 infantry

    That would actually make for a pretty potent Chinese wall.  Then just let USA buy them some more flying tigers out of the 1 production slot. It would actually pretty helpful as Allies to have a single USA production slot at the center. It would be gamey sure, but it would probably really improve the game pace, and feeling of involvement by the US player.

    It would give the Allies a much stronger incentive to duke it out with Japan at any rate, instead of just folding immediately and then running away  :-D

    Ps. I dig Argothair’s suggestions too, especially of an extra Russian unit in the East. Just call it the Zhukov boost! Or the Mao boost! Depending on where you put it Hehe. An artillery piece seems reasonable, since it’s more valuable on attack than defense. Gives the Russians an incentive to use it for forward offensive stuff instead of just pulling it back. I dig the concept

    edit. forgot Hong Kong up there! in AA50 this was in Kwang, so in 1942.2 it’d be Japan’s. That’d make it an Axis 11 vs Allies 14 situation, with 25 VCs in total. What do you guys think?

    Pps. I’ve played with a Bucharest VC to encompass Romanian oil in the past, but I think Minsk might be more fun. First because Minsk is arguably the reason that the Germans didn’t make it Moscow in time. The decision to consolidate there rather than pressing on to the Russian Capital. It’s easier for the Allies to contest than Bulgaria-Romania, so you get some more “back and forth” out of it. And anyway, we know the Western Allies didn’t make Romania. Who knows why, maybe to prolong with war in the east until they could prepare for Overlord. Minsk seems a bit more dynamic for both sides I think.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

42

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts