April 2009 Balance Poll

Yeah the problem with LL is that on G1 you can take Kar, sink the UK BB, and take Egypt, all on G1 with a possible loss of 2 figs in Kar (depending on AA shot and bombard shot), having 0-2 armor left plus the bomb in Egypt (again depending on turn 1 rolls, G on a 3 if they hit they keep 2 armor usually), and usually walking away with a fig against the BB, but sometimes that goes terribly wrong.  Also, Japan has no worries sending the 1 DD+2 figs vs Pearl, nor in sinking the DDs+trans, and even killing the flying tigers with 1 inf, 2 figs if they don’t mind loosing a fig.  Typically Japan ends in LL with only loosing 1 fig, at most 3 but that is rare.

On the other hand, Russia can do a perfect strafe on R1, China can still get dicey if you attack with just inf, and the subs in the Atlantic are dicey a lot of times too.  Also, the allies can hit exposed G planes on turn 1 with perfect odds, and we know 2 figs, or 1 fig/1 bomb will sink that cruiser, as will the US DD+Bomb sink a G sub, so while LL helps out axis immensely, it also helps allies a tad as well.

Typical bid placement is 1 unit in Karelia, and 1 unit in Egypt.

Also, i have found that KGF works well, very very well.  Step 1 - deny Germany 3 nos, Step 2 - get russia her 2nd NO, Step 3, get france + deny germany all her NOs.  Usually you can get G down to 20ish income by turn 5 and with russia making almost 50 she can hold against Japan pretty well, esp when the US starts to make 50ish as well and drops a pacific fleet on turn 4 or 5  :evil:

@bugoo:

Usually you can get G down to 20ish income by turn 5 and with russia making almost 50 she can hold against Japan pretty well, esp when the US starts to make 50ish as well and drops a pacific fleet on turn 4 or 5  :evil:

Whoa! By turn 5!  :-o German player must be a moron. And USA building Pacific fleet round 4-5? Probably Japan made the error of not countering KGF with a Polar Express?  :|

Axis must do some wacky moves to being in such danger so soon …

The “happy days” have past for axis, although allies need a bid in LL, when playing against decent/good allied players axis cant just do whatever the want anymore, like building a huge navy, 2 air units each rnd. etc….

The small details aren’t so small anymore…
Japan can be contained, to some degree, and Japan can’t just skip mainland Asia even if Japan usually is the strongest nation in AA50.

With a 2 unit bid for allies, and placed in the right TTs, it’s not a cakewalk for either Japan or Germany, Japan can’t threaten mainland US TTs, and the road to Moscow is long, if a good allied player can slow Japan down only one rnd extra, if the Jap player is not highly effective, Japan will be still grow big, but too late to take Moscow, or take back all of Europe.
I’m thinking maybe Germany should play a turtle strat, which isn’t too logical, b/c in the first games Germany could have Russia like the US could easily get Italy if not stacked properly.

With a good German turtle then Japan can decide the game, even if Moscow will be too strong, it would be an economic victory but not a swift kill.

@Cmdr:

Because TripleA is flaky on people’s machines.  It’s far better to use Battlemap that works on everyone’s system, even if you are running an 80486SX chip and DOS 5.0 you can run Battlemap.

I actually got Battlemap to work on my Ubuntu 9.04 with wine, but looking at the map, who would want to use such a pos? It’s not even a game! Sure the unit icons and the map in TripleA is not the artwork of DaVinci, but it looks ok and is very playable.

@Subotai:

@Cmdr:

Because TripleA is flaky on people’s machines.  It’s far better to use Battlemap that works on everyone’s system, even if you are running an 80486SX chip and DOS 5.0 you can run Battlemap.

I actually got Battlemap to work on my Ubuntu 9.04 with wine, but looking at the map, who would want to use such a pos? It’s not even a game! Sure the unit icons and the map in TripleA is not the artwork of DaVinci, but it looks ok and is very playable.

Look out where you are going Subotai. I once tried to convince Cmd Jennifer about the pro’s of TripleA, and before I knew it, it turned almost into a flame war ;-)

I think we all conceded in deciding TripleA and Battlemap cannot be compared to eachother :P

I’m sorry i’d still love to see a polar express attempted on me, if you tried that Russia would liberate the entire way to FIC on her own.  I’ve played good axis players, i’m not saying i’m the best allied player out there, but I win more games than I loose on TripleA, esp as allies, as KGF works.  Japan’s turn 1 still says ‘ignore me i’m worthless for atleast 2 more rounds’ and i can’t change that.  Polar Express? heh, good luck getting US before Russia is in berlin.

I’m on TripleA every weekend, if you dont want that give me a 7 allied bid, set it to LL, put an INF in Egypt, and ART in Kar, no tech, take your G1 with tripleA and send it to me, i’ll play by email but i will not type all that crap.  And please, i’m not insulting your playing skill, don’t try to say everyone i’ve defeated with a KGF is a moronic axis player, and there are more than a few now.

I tried 2 games where I played against myself (so basically, I know what the other is attempting)

Russia can’t survive no matter what I do.
Germany can’t survive neither, no matter what I do.

I think, although my experience is limited, that no Nation can go in a war on multiple fronts. This is especially true for Russia. If Japanese are at their door, or even if Italian can threaten them with Amphibious assault on Caucasus, or can just clear a route for Germany to go to Moscow or Caucasus if the way is free. Russia is doomed (It’s only a matter of time).

The same applies, in my testing, to Germany. They can’t face a 30IPC (average) Russian on the east and face Allies on the West in France, Northwest and even Germany. The solution to this, in my limited testing, is minimal Naval build with Germany. If your fleet is as strong as the fleet of UK + USA, you force them into naval build to protect their transports.

This is of course with two real games experience and 2 personal. I wanted to test this thought, so I gave it a try in a KJF.
UK1 build an IC in India, supported with some Russian Backup.
Japanese1 : Build an IC in FIC. Proceed with normal strategy : emptying some islands to take others, etc. Kill the fighter in China to remove all offensive from that nation. 4 Infantry in Manchuria to face against Russian stack of 7.
US1 : Build a Aircraft Carrier and 2 Research token with some DD, transports. Now, Japanese know I am doing a KJF with USA. (In my first personal game, I got a first turn Heavy Bombers. The game was won just because of that).
On R2, the stack of 7 attacked Manchuria. 7 @ 1 vs 4 @ 2, the 7 won with 2-3 casualties in each of my two personal game. Because I didn’t make any transports on J1, there weren’t enough transports close to bring stuff to retake Manchuria so that’s -5 IPC bonus, and -3 IPC for Manchuria. The Chinese Divisions can be a nuisance. Suicide attack can sometimes take down a man or two. Sometimes, they can even take the territory!
J2 : Knowing my USA is coming for me, what will you do? I proceed with my normal play (2 tanks in FIC), but build 1 Submarine and 1 Destroyer to increase my fleet to 1 BB (I’ve lost it once against a single DD in the Philippines war!), 1 cruiser, 2 AC (4 figthters), 1 sub and 1 DD against USA 2 AC (4 fighters), 3 DD, 1 Sub.
Yes, Japan has more IPC than USA, but if Japan spends all its IPC to fight in the Pacific, that leaves UK ready to strike back in India (UK3+). And doing ground + naval is tough, even with Japan.
I personally believe that even if Japan only goes against USA, Italy + Germany could probably destroy Russia + UK. I haven’t played enough to know that, anyone knows?
On US2, the fleet can advance and take some Islands or even threaten Japan. I also realized that you can take an island close to Japan (Iwo?) so that your Bomber can actually land after attacking the navy.

Some flaws to my limited testing :
-Manchuria can be reinforced easily. (But that means a slower Japan first turn)
-If Japan does a 2 Transport build J1 instead of IC, Manchuria, even if taken by Russia, can be retaken back easily. But by doing 2 Transports, I think UK3 will be able to take ground solidly on Asia.
-Africa : What to do with Africa, when playing WITH Allies or AGAINST Allies? In all my games, Germany successfully took Egypt on G1 with various loss. From there, Africa would become Axis, its just a matter of time.
USA can of course concentrate its IPC on the Atlantic to take back Africa and to threaten Europe. But then, that leaves Japan free to go. And I’m sure UK on its own is incapable of protecting India. At most, he can probably slow down the Japanese. But when he dies, Japan gets a free IC to attack Caucasus.

But to stay on subject, I don’t feel any imbalancement yet. I do feel that Axis are probably easier to win with (only 1 real game with Germany), but winning with Allies is not impossible. Good teamwork can win the game.

Robert

@Omega:

I think, although my experience is limited, that no Nation can go in a war on multiple fronts.

Well since USA has no true ‘fronts’ per se, THEY can split their income and fight a two theatre war.  In fact, that is looking to be more and more a requirement.  The problem is deciding which theatre has a greater need for the US war machine.  Often times, the pacific investment looks like it is easier to just ignore (meaning Germany is the ‘easier’ target), but the IJN needs to be forced to keep an eye on her back door.  Those carriers need to be forced to be loaded.