State of the Onion G40 2019


  • 2018 2017

    Hey crew!

    I think we are still trading around some great ideas. To throw in my two cents

    Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting
    Going KJF is much more satisfying in some ways than KGF–with KJF you stand a better chance of toppling or surprising and seriously disrupting Japan than Germany.
    However, you can’t defeat Japan and while you’re suppressing Japan: Germany takes the game and so we need to prepare USA for a KGF regardless of what the Axis do or what their plan is
    This dynamic means that the everything the Allies do should flow towards moscow and be in place before the culminating battle

    ANZAC 3 planes to java (dont forget many players think you cannot land on dutch islands without capturing them that is incorrect) and then all 6 of those allied planes go to persia, then russia

    You cant lose on the pac board, so ANZAC should turtle after the intial 3–includes infantry because of limited production then protect sydney. Same Hawaii–guys dumped here early count for alot and can be supplemented by fighters even if you never buy fleet over there
    Taranto must be done, but that costs you alot of fighters–so UK must be garrisoned starting from turn 1 and continuing all game, no exceptions (and no factories, airbases, or tank SA buys until its clearly safe and Germany is headed elsewhere). Not doing taranto makes Italy rage which is way worse over time for the UK than just dealing with them from game start
    UK East wants sumatra and ethiopia and yunnan but you should take persia turn 1 and do what you need to do to keep egypt safe all game (tobruk? turtle? up to you)

    The best KGF I’ve seen has the USA transition directly from SZ 91 to norway, then finland, building bases as we go–so at some point you’ll want to destroy the German fleet to ensure they can’t do anything about it. If Germany wastes time or flinches you will be able to go over the top and take back leningrad thats 3 factories pouring out tanks

    A combination of US north and UK south rescue forces is the only thing that can prevent the income flop whether moscow dies or not
    for russia, more fighters is better than armor or mech or tacticals because they dissuade the crippling stratbombings
    for UK, more fighters is better than more men and ships because you go after the US and can support a US landing
    realistically, USA only gets 1 wave of ground troops before the russia game is decided–do not waste 1 man

    Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*

    I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill

    good luck have fun boys


  • 2015 '14

    @taamvan said in State of the Onion G40 2019:

    Hey crew!

    I think we are still trading around some great ideas. To throw in my two cents

    Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting
    Going KJF is much more satisfying in some ways than KGF–with KJF you stand a better chance of toppling or surprising and seriously disrupting Japan than Germany.
    However, you can’t defeat Japan and while you’re suppressing Japan: Germany takes the game and so we need to prepare USA for a KGF regardless of what the Axis do or what their plan is
    This dynamic means that the everything the Allies do should flow towards moscow and be in place before the culminating battle

    ANZAC 3 planes to java (dont forget many players think you cannot land on dutch islands without capturing them that is incorrect) and then all 6 of those allied planes go to persia, then russia

    You cant lose on the pac board, so ANZAC should turtle after the intial 3–includes infantry because of limited production then protect sydney. Same Hawaii–guys dumped here early count for alot and can be supplemented by fighters even if you never buy fleet over there
    Taranto must be done, but that costs you alot of fighters–so UK must be garrisoned starting from turn 1 and continuing all game, no exceptions (and no factories, airbases, or tank SA buys until its clearly safe and Germany is headed elsewhere). Not doing taranto makes Italy rage which is way worse over time for the UK than just dealing with them from game start
    UK East wants sumatra and ethiopia and yunnan but you should take persia turn 1 and do what you need to do to keep egypt safe all game (tobruk? turtle? up to you)

    The best KGF I’ve seen has the USA transition directly from SZ 91 to norway, then finland, building bases as we go–so at some point you’ll want to destroy the German fleet to ensure they can’t do anything about it. If Germany wastes time or flinches you will be able to go over the top and take back leningrad thats 3 factories pouring out tanks

    A combination of US north and UK south rescue forces is the only thing that can prevent the income flop whether moscow dies or not
    for russia, more fighters is better than armor or mech or tacticals because they dissuade the crippling stratbombings
    for UK, more fighters is better than more men and ships because you go after the US and can support a US landing
    realistically, USA only gets 1 wave of ground troops before the russia game is decided–do not waste 1 man

    Finally, USSR is too weak and Germany too rich–your patch/set bid should address this, not alter the overall game dynamics vis UK/USA v Axis (insert pitch for Taamvan Mod v3.0 here)*

    I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill

    good luck have fun boys

    Hi taamvan,

    thanks for sharing your thoughts. While KJF or KGF are somehow viable options, I disagree on a bunch of your statements.

    “Going all Atlantic or all pacific isn’t historical, but its much more effective than splitting”
    I do not agree on this. The magic in good play with the Allies is to achieve much with little. I believe splitting is essential because I believe that one power will eventually win in case a KxF is played relentlessly. Also, given the defender’s edge in A&A, Allies can actually achieve a lot by splitting in case they manage to exploit the defender’s edge in both theatres optimally.

    “Taranto must be done”
    Disagree. I believe that Taranto is a viable option but moving the fleet to 92 UK1 is certainly a viable option, too which I meanwhile prefer in most cases. Taranto is keeping Italy down but trading UK fleet and planes mostly against Italy at an even rate. (considering the counter potential Italy and Germany have against taranto). There are better ways to crush the Italian fleet at a way better TUV-exchange rate than in Taranto. Also, as you mentioned, the lack of UK planes makes it harder to secure US beachheads in either Normandy or Norway.

    “I emphatically agree that large bids are not needed for anything short of league/master’s play–12-20 is plenty and the allies consistently win games of mixed skill”
    Well, even in league games, the Allies have a decent win rate even at lower bids, but the better the competition, the higher the Axis win rate.
    On the highest level, in Vanilla games, any bid below 35 gives a clear edge for the Axis, I believe the equilibrium lies in the 40-45 range for Vanilla.
    And even in BM, people slowly but steadily realize that after enjoying the thrill of playing the Allies with all those new NOs, that Allies need a 10-15 bid to have equal chances to win against Axis.
    Again, this is based on Axis played on a high level.

    Best regards,
    Tobias


  • 2018 2017

    @JDOW Well said, I’m always re-evaluating my strategies, and the more I play, the more re-evaluation I’ve got to do.

    Next, AA50.


  • 2019 2018

    Where do you find Taamvan mod3.0? Triplea?


  • 2019 2017 2016

    Completely agree with JDOW on most of that.

    With Taranto, if Italy don’t scramble that means the destruction of 39IPC of Italian ships for the ultimate loss of 36IPC of British ships, assuming no bid ships are sent in. It only becomes viable if enough other units are destroyed and given that at least one UK fighter is trapped in SZ97, you need destroy enough to compensate for that one too.

    If Italy scrambles 3ftr to Taranto and only 1ftr 1bomb are brought from London/Scotland and no bid units, there’s a significant chance of losing (27% or so) and on average it’s only a 6TUV trade.

    I guess those odds show you why Taranto became rare in Balanced Mod, because you usually don’t have the sub bid. You can theoretically bring a second fighter from London but that’s another unit lost for sinking the SZ97 fleet.

    The SZ92 stack works really well providing your fighter/tac sink the SZ96 TT (96%), include the SZ109 DD & the SZ91 Cruiser and Germany doesn’t claim Southern France. You only need the airbase if you need to compensate for any of these issues not going the allied/SZ92 way although many players feel that it is worth it anyway. Perhaps in part because it also defends SZ91 and you probably will need the airbase round 2 if you want to maintain your position there.

    Sounds like you’ve discovered the difficulty of USA making a real difference in the Pacific. If Japan are on their guard this seems to be difficult although a miscue is always possible. USA do need to do enough to hold Hawaii because you have to assume India will fall eventually. I’m inclined to think that once the allies have a decent foothold in Europe it’s time to start spending big $ to hurt Japan.

    One thing I’m not convinced of though, is the need for such a high bid as 15 for the allies to be competitive. Once the bid gets to 10, the Scotland fighter becomes possible and that throws a real spanner in the works for the Axis script.


  • 2019 2018

    @crockett36 said in State of the Onion G40 2019:

    Where do you find Taamvan mod3.0? Triplea?

    Not sure if it’s 3.0 but under “Experimental” in DL Maps is “Global 40 House Rules”. Click on “Option Taamvan” in Map Options before game start. It explains what’s different in the “Game Notes”.

    2)Option taamvan Changes the control of Novgorod, Volgograd, Russia Objective to 3 PUs for Germany. Control of Caucasus is also reduced to 3. Also adds a Fighter to Russia and a Armor to Urals.


  • 2019 2018

    thanks so much


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015

    @crockett36 said in State of the Onion G40 2019:

    thanks so much

    Much less money involved for both sides compared to BM. This means the game will end in less than 15 rounds and not the 30+ epics sometimes experienced for BM3. Compared to original 2nd ed its just less money for axis. Simon33 and oysteilo played it twice and allies won both games. More playtesting is need to see if this holds over time. Most likely it wont. However, it really makes a difference with +9 (+12) instead of +15 (+20) for germany when holding novgorod, stalingrad, caucasus (and moscow). The extra russian fighter and armor also comes in handy if you want to mess around in China early on


  • 2019 2018

    I scratch my head when I see all the work the community puts into customization for the sake of balance when the problem is the NOs. I could go along with a recruitment bonus ie more volunteers ie more infantry, but 5 per city per turn for four Russian territories. It is the nose on our faces.


  • 2018 2017

    Glad people are still experimenting with this, its a quick and easy way to balance the game. Dave and are using a 23 bid for Global40, i’ve won the last 2 games. I estimate the taamvan mod has a similar effect.

    G42 has 3 tanks and 1 fighter in Urals, that’s probably where I got the idea. Its not close enough to mess up the opener much and the income nerfing effect doesn’t begin until a turn after the war in Russia does.

    The OOB NOs are more-or-less fine (except some could be reduced to 3, as in my mod), unlike BM and AA50 they are sparing and uncomplicated. It’d be nice to push some more dynamic play with that part of the game but as it is, it directs the action just where it needs to be (malaya, norway, java, egypt, med etc.)

    That’s the problem with the bid, it puts pieces in areas where they aren’t stricly needed (russia). Even 16 changes the UK game quite a bit…


  • 2019 2018

    You don’t think Russia needs more units?


  • 2018 2017

    @crockett36 Just bad grammar.

    …puts pieces in areas where they arent absolutely needed, when they are badly needed in RUSSIA"


  • 2019 2018

    I think all bids should go to Russia.


  • 2018 2017

    @crockett36 I agree, it doesn’t mess with the rest of the map, which is pretty balanced.

    Did you give my Taamvan 3.0 Mod a shot? It works pretty well…

    1 tank 1 fighter in Urals
    Reduce Moscow, Leningrad, Volgograd, Caucasus Bonus from 5 to 3
    Capitol Rule (from BM)

    Another possible add-on might be “Tankograd; If the Russians Control two or fewer factories, they MAY place a minor industrial complex in Urals during their Collect Income Phase”


  • 2019 2018

    @taamvan I love that. Haven’t tried it yet. My games take forever. I’ll start a game with the computer. Also deep into War Room.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 142
  • 4
  • 20
  • 1
  • 15
  • 6
  • 17
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

53
Online

13.7k
Users

34.1k
Topics

1.3m
Posts