National Objectives vs balance


  • Question for serious players of Anniversary:

    Do you play with NOs? If you do what is the bid like?

    I have found it pretty heavily in favor of the axis so generally leave this optional rule to the side but am still curious.

  • 2021

    @the_good_captain It’s just not Anniversary without NOs, don’t like playing bids either however I do move some units around the map to make it more balanced between both sides!

  • 2020 '19 Sponsor '18 '17 '16 '12

    We play both 41 and 42 with NO’s and never do bids. We probably get about a 60/40 Axis/Allied win ratio.

    Without NO’s just doesn’t feel right.

  • 2021 '18 '17 '15

    I find the NO’s overdo it. When one side starts getting ahead they streak ahead. I find it more balanced turning them off.
    But, i’m only a newbie, i have played most versions since the classic, but mostly against ai or solo


  • @the_good_captain said in National Objectives vs balance:

    Question for serious players of Anniversary:

    Do you play with NOs? If you do what is the bid like?

    I have found it pretty heavily in favor of the axis so generally leave this optional rule to the side but am still curious.

    In the 1941 scenario of the mentioned game, the NOs have four main effects, in order of importance:

    1. They unbalance the game in favour of Axis to the point where no good player would seriously competitively play it without a bid (of course, as long as you are not using Low Luck, the randomness will assure a decent chance for Allies to win). This is particularly upsetting as the game without NOs is actually highly balanced (a rare case in the franchise if I may say so).
    2. They reduce the importance of bombing raiding, especially of the bombing raiding of Germany (as Germany should have more income whilst the bombing cap is still 20). I believe you don’t need to use the interceptor rule as long as you are using NOs (though bombing raiding is of course still very strong with no interception).
    3. They speed up the game a lot, easily cutting out a few hours of gameplay to get your win against a stubborn opponent (especially the +10 Soviet NO). Meaning that, when the game starts going in favour of one side, the NOs help the unbalance to grow faster.
    4. They make the game significantly more luck-driven (as bad dice making you unable to take a territory may cause you to lose NOs income too).

    As long as you are not using some Low Luck house-rules, I would say a bid of about 9 for either scenario (either 3 infantry or 1 artillery and 1 armour) to the Allies (likely all to Russia) may make for a balanced game while using the NOs but not using Tech.

    If you are using some Low Luck rules, I would say bidding with NOs becomes virtually mandatory, and, in the 1941 scenario, the bid should be higher (maybe as high as 15).


  • A fifth point may be that they considerably increase the complexity of the game.

    It is quite unfair (and likely quite unfun for them) to play with NOs if any number of the players are still in the process of learning the rules. NOs, like tech, are more for players who are starting getting bored of the basic game yet not bored enough to move on.


    As to add my personal opinion, I theorically dislike NOs in Anniversary, even not considering the unbalance that they cause, because I think every territory giving its own income is good enough and cleaner and I do not believe the game needs more money (which turns into more units to stack on the board and manage), but practically recognize that they are a good thing to make the game reach a conclusion faster (if you like to finish games within 12 hours) and to offset the dominance of bombing raiding (if you don’t want to use the interceptor optional rule, which I believe virtually kills bombing raiding as a strategy, rather than rebalancing it).


  • @the_good_captain said in National Objectives vs balance:

    Question for serious players of Anniversary:

    Do you play with NOs? If you do what is the bid like?

    I have found it pretty heavily in favor of the axis so generally leave this optional rule to the side but am still curious.

    I play 42 no Objectives no tech and interceptor rule because it’s balanced. Playing with the NO would require a large bid.


  • Thanks gents. I’m currently editing my video for upload to YouTube and my argument sounds nearly exactly identical to @Cernel .

    I appreciate all the feedback.

Suggested Topics

  • 7
  • 7
  • 2
  • 1
  • 82
  • 17
  • 46
  • 121
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

33
Online

15.4k
Users

36.6k
Topics

1.5m
Posts