[House Rules] Axis get too much money


  • I just wanted to post that I think the Axis get too much money in G40. In the real war, USA was producing 60% of the world’s oil, and most of that was coming from Texas. The axis struggled because they didn’t have much oil. Germany was making synthetic fuel out of coal and hydrogen because the oil from Romania was mainly used for airplanes.

    I submit that USA should get 30 IPC’s if they control Eastern US, Central US, and Western US, instead of 10 IPC’s. USA should also get the other 20 IPC’s if it has its other NO’s, for a total extra of 50 IPC’s.

    Not only would this make the game more realistic, you probably wouldn’t need a bid for the allies.

    Moderator’s edit: Added tag [House Rules] to title


  • The problem is that I don’t know the context of the GDP based on real life. However it should also be pointed out that Germany did have access to oil, just not a lot in comparison to the three major allies.

    G40 is already set up that the Axis will have the advantage in early games. If anything, I agree USA NO’s should have changed but this is foolish to think 52 + NO is not enough money. If we’re going to pound realism, then it should be noted that out of all the factories producing equipment in the US, everything from California, Texas, and Oklahoma was produced primarily for the US military, if it came from another state, chances are the equipment you made will be used by someone else.

  • 2021 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 Moderator

    I have always thought this .
    I have experimented with giving the US 10 amd 15 more a turn. I know others have given the US 5 more each turn they are at war, increasing with each turn that goes by. Perhaps,  There should be some sort of timer in games like that though. Give the Axis 15 turns to win , for example.
    Try things out with your group of friends.
    Ultimately, I think the problem lies with Japan’s starting Air units. It  has far too many and ,as we know , Air projection is very important. I would rather start my balancing realism by shaving  off 6 of its Fts and Tacs. It is also ridiculous how the US starts with justbthe one Carrier. It should also have 2 or 3, and one of those on the Atlantic
    side.
    As I have said, try a combination of changes , until you are happy with things. Have fun playing.


  • It is designed as a balanced game, if the Axis win all the time, you need to learn to play the Allies correct, not change the set up or income

  • '19 '17 '16

    @Narvik:

    It is designed as a balanced game, if the Axis win all the time, you need to learn to play the Allies correct, not change the set up or income

    well if you can win as allies 50% of the time OOB without a bid you should be league champion, so long as you can play Allies all the time.


  • Something that I fooled around with for a bit, is giving the US the 30 IPC Pacific bonus for going to war. They get it straight away and it only works for one time. Along with a 5 IPC Bonus for being at war with the Axis. (Happens per turn)

    Another thing I do at times is that I add a US infantry to Midway, Guam, and Wake Islands. I also add French Infantry and French Artillery to Indochina. Creates a minor road block for the Japanese, so they cant just walk in and take it.

    @Narvik:

    It is designed as a balanced game, if the Axis win all the time, you need to learn to play the Allies correct, not change the set up or income

    I would like to point out that it is virtually impossible to have the Allies win in a timely manner using OOB. The only realistic way for the allies to win is to have the Axis Surrender. For that to happen, 1 of 2 things would have to happen.

    1. The Axis Player Blundered way too much
    2. The Allies played, really, really well

    To respond to the first post, I think the Axis have enough money, I just think the Allies need a bit more. You dont want to hand them the game, but throw them a bone, to help them out.

  • TripleA

    I win 20 strait games on triple a lobby plus 10 on the forum… Mostly as the axis against bids of 12-21… Meanwhile some guy says oob is balanced and the allies should win 50%. Yeah ok.

  • TripleA

    Try starting USA off with more infantry. Russian bomber. More Africa Corp for UK.  Or any mixture if not doing a bid

  • 2020 '19 '18 '17 '16

    Or simply try a BM3 game (Balanced Mod.).
    You should be fine as Allies.

  • 2021 2020 '18 '17

    After many games, I agree.    There is simply too much money in the middle of the board, and after key roadblocks are down, the Axis go to 70/80 income.  This creates a game where there is a “flop” to the point where, if the axis achieve their milestones (india, Moscow, also Egypt in some games), the income is tipped too far in Axis favor.

    Leningrad NO = this is a gimme space, it should be 3$
    Caucasus NO =  this is a good incentive but its piling on, should be 3$
    Volgograd NO = piling on…if they have this they are about to win the game…3$ max.
    Moscow NO =  why are we giving them 5 extra dollars for doing what basically ends the game…piling on…0$
    India NO = Japan doesn’t need incentives to take this the factory is the incentive = 0$

    last G42 game Japan was pulling down 83$ and 88$ paydays with bonuses, once its larger than the US KJF wont work anymore.

  • '19 '17 '16

    Don’t reduce the Leningrad NO, reverse it so that the USSR get it for holding Leningrad. That way it becomes much less of a gimme. I don’t mind the Moscow/India/Caucasus NOs so much.

    It seems the Axis get NOs for doing everything they failed to do in the war, with a few exceptions. I don’t think this is best basis.

  • '17

    @simon33:

    Don’t reduce the Leningrad NO, reverse it so that the USSR get it for holding Leningrad. That way it becomes much less of a gimme. I don’t mind the Moscow/India/Caucasus NOs so much.

    It seems the Axis get NOs for doing everything they failed to do in the war, with a few exceptions. I don’t think this is best basis.

    I’d still be interested in exploring some of Taamvan’s ideas. Most of those territories are still 2 IPCs each. Rostov, Caucasus, Stalingrad, Leningrad, Moscow and other territories nearby add up to about 11-12 IPCs. Maybe reduced to a 2-3 IPC bonus for the NOs money. What he’s saying is that if Germany sacks Moscow, than obviously Stalingrad and Caucasus usually follow. If Japan is still economically in the game, not destroyed by the US Navy, then the Axis have reached that economic threshold which is near to the point that cannot be overcome.

  • Sponsor

    Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.


  • I would like to counter and throw 2 destroyers in Washington instead, and keep your Battleship off Hawaii.

  • 2021 2020 '18 '17

    We all have our balancing setup ideas, but what I’ve noticed (thanks to Cow, YG, ABH) is that it is the BOARD that is part of the problem, and the NOs, because the Allies have to go to great lengths to inject power into the middle of the board where all the goodies are, whereas the Axis can do it in most games even if they DONT take their key objectives (india, Moscow).

    Even when im losing and failing as the Axis, I just divert to the cash instead of the capitals.  I may still lose, but the Allies are working so hard to defeat me and take my money (Greece, Normandy, a few spice islands) whereas I’m tearing Russia apart even in death and going back up to 60/70 cash which starts to turn the tide again.


  • Isnt that the reason why “Middle Earth” almost unbeatable, unless you do a Sea Lion? It helps a lot of areas. (India, Egypt, Moscow, etc…). Its where its placed. There are a lot of 2’s in that area, along with 4 VC’s, 2 of which are capitals. Whats that old saying about the middle of the board wins the game? That applies here as well.

    Curious, what exactly do you think needs to be changed with the national objectives. Add some, take some? You dont want to hand the game outright to one side.

  • 2021 2020 '18 '17

    there is no locktight strategy in G40 for the Allies.  There is for the Axis.

    There is no reasonable VC for the Allies (kill 2/3 axis)

    There is for the Axis.

    I agree, that the game should be more balanced, but finding consensus on that is difficult.  My primary goal right now is to reduce the Point of Imbalance (turns 6-8?) where the game tips in the favor of the Axis too readily.


  • I would agree with that. No airtight strategy exists for the Allies. The best way to play is to do reactionary play because the Axis have control of the game at the very beggining.


  • @Hunter:

    I would agree with that. No airtight strategy exists for the Allies. The best way to play is to do reactionary play because the Axis have control of the game at the very beggining.

    Well that is what makes the game so difficult for the allies, the axis have a simple guide to follow the allies have to respond and jump in the gaps.
    This is a lot harder to do as the same strategy might not work always, the axis can do the same strategy and if the allies dont respond well they win, the allies have to respond well to stop an axis win.

    The allies have to make use of the dice, some combats go well others go bad, you have to leverage those good rolls.

  • '17

    @Young:

    Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.

    Have you ever play tested that?

    I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.


  • @Ichabod:

    @Young:

    Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.

    Have you ever play tested that?

    I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.

    Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.


  • @calvinhobbesliker:

    @Ichabod:

    @Young:

    Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.

    Have you ever play tested that?

    I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.

    Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.

    If you are giving the US a Battleship in Hawaii, then you are effecting the Japanese turn if they decide to go after the Hawaiian Fleet. That could manipulate them to go for it now. I usually find Japan goes for it Battleship or not.

  • '17

    @calvinhobbesliker:

    @Ichabod:

    @Young:

    Give the Americans a battleship off Washington and a battleship off Honolulu… That’s my quick solution for G40 balance.

    Have you ever play tested that?

    I know you’ve said that your group doesn’t like any kinds of bids that affect the Axis opening moves any way.

    Giving stuff to the US doesn’t really affect the Axis opening moves.

    Yes. I’m aware.


  • The best way I’ve found to balance the G40 setup is to eliminate the Victory City conditions and play until either total annihilation or surrender. In my current game Japan has held all of the standard VCs as well as Calcutta, Moscow, Sydney and now Honolulu for many turns. The Allies are still looking good to win tho. US/UK/FRA have just wiped out Germany and are heavily threatening Japan’s front in and around Moscow. We are on round 13 and the allies are just now pushing back and look poised to win, when OOB rules would have called this for the Axis many turns ago.

    And yes, this also means we pulled of a Gasp KGF.

  • 2021 2020 '18 '17

    but you didn’t, because Japan won.  😉

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 13
  • 3
  • 203
  • 4
  • 3
  • 13
  • 24
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

30
Online

15.6k
Users

37.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts