Unbalanced game with 2.nd edition rules?
I’m wondering about the balance of the game. I and my friend are neewbie’s and have played the game 4 times now. My friend find the game very unbalanced. We use standard 2.nd edition rules and we don’t use “individual-victory”-rules (does it make sense at all?) and bidding.
Well….I’m satisfied with the game, and think that with more experience and more skilled players, I’ll be better too and the result of the games will be more even. But my friend finds it way too easy when he’s allies and want to make it more balanced by using one of the additional rules in the booklet (Germ: jetpower Jap: subs, RR, no IC).
Well…is that so? Do the axis have such a disadvantage, that they’ll have to use the additional rules?
The recent games we’ve been playing have always started with the same moves, and therefor I believe why he find it so unbalanced. I think he’ll change his mind when he’ll face way more experienced players. I compare this game with chess. If you only have one start-move and stick to it, then the game will be a kind of “stiff” and it seems like the other guy is better/have an advantage.
God damn him AND the game if he’s right!
Yanny last edited by
The first turn or 2 can seem repetitive. I know I always use the same moves. But after that it gets exciting, and you will use different moves every game.
The game is unbalanced however. Try using the Russia Restricted rule (Russia can’t attack round 1). It will serve for awhile to keep the game even.
cystic crypt last edited by
It is like chess in a way - at the beginning you have some fairly traditional beginnings (with some wild variations - depending on your skill/comfort level), but overall the first turn is usually an axis offensive countered by an allies “counter”. AFter the second round, however, no 2 boards will look the same (unless you have little imagination).
Also i agree (with most people on the board) that the game is broken in favor of the allies. Once the Axis get caught in a war of attrition they are toast, and smart allies will bend their forces to this kind of war.
Definitely try RR (smart subs are useless), and once you realize the game is still broken then look to a “bid” (lots of forums on bidding, so check some of those out)
I don’t find the game to be unbalanced at all. The 2nd Edition rules, IMO, only improved the play balance.
With very serious and experienced A&A players, the first 4 - 7 turns are basically scripted. There are slight deviations given the current state of the game – but on the whole you can expect pretty much the same thing.
By turn 5 - 7 the playing field should be, for the most part, even. From there on out, victory will be decided largely by proper purchasing/economics and savvy tactical play.
A couple of basic tips to improve your play:
Do not rely on luck or gambit-oriented strategies. While luck can win games, it can’t win consistently. You should only use average die rolls as a guideline for determining the feasibility of any attack or defend.
Purchase Infantry. It is the single-most cost effective piece within the game. You absolutely get the most bang-for-your-buck with infantry. Infantry will overcome any cost-relative force, on its own, ALL THE TIME w/o exception. You need it on the attack as sluff (to keep your expensive pieces alive) and you absolutely need it to maintain formidable defensive fronts. A few examples:
Player A has $30. Player B has $30. Player A purchases 6 tanks. Player B purchases 10 Infantry.
Player A attacks Player B. Player B, on average, will win this fight 90% of the time. Player B’s replacement costs, on average, will run about $15. Player A’s replacement cost will be, on average, $29. End result: Player A’s infantry has achieved an economic and tactical victory.
Now let’s assume that Player B attacks Player A. Player B’s infantry will STILL win this fight roughly 73% of the time. Player B’s replacement costs will be approx. $18 and Player A’s replacement costs will be approx. $26. End result: Player A’s infantry has achieved an economic and tactical victory.
Obviously infantry alone cannot win games (it needs to be supplemented with appropriate attack pieces), but it DEFINITELY won’t hurt.
In the end, I find A&A to be very balanced. In fact, one of its major flaws is that it’s TOO balanced… a SINGLE MISTAKE by either side could spell its doom (though it might take 2 - 4 turns for it to come to fruition).
Sometimes we play RR and add 2 subs to Germany, 1 in th Baltic SZ and 1 in the West Spain SZ.
This has the effect of protecting Germany’s air in that fateful first round attack on the UK navy. Most of the time it also has a secondary effect of saving Germany’s navy for a turn as the UK air must then go after the surviving German subs.
After the first round if Germany has all it’s original air and it’s navy I believe it has some good breathing room and that seems to even things up quite a bit. You might try it one game and see how it works for you. Good luck.
How was that for Internet etiquette, eh? I didn’t even say anything “witty”! I’m on my way to becoming a mature adult. I think I’ll go pick some flowers. Wait - DAMN I think I just screwed it up. DAMN YOU SUBTLE SARCASM! WHY WON’T YOU LET ME FUNCTION IN SOCIETY!?!?!
FinsterniS last edited by
RR is enough.
Anyway, often the best player are going for Japan or Germany for the challenge and the liberty. Axis (even more with RR) are rhythming the game.