As long as axis does not get screwed on dice, its not very hard for them to win if the allies get no bid.
Again, I wouldn’t be the one to know since I have yet to win (as you very well know, since you’ve beaten me a few times. soundly).
As long as axis does not get screwed on dice, its not very hard for them to win if the allies get no bid.
Again, I wouldn’t be the one to know since I have yet to win (as you very well know, since you’ve beaten me a few times. soundly).
Play the game without a bid. :-o
Threaten a sea lion (in some way) with your round 1 German build.
Sink the UK Cruiser in sz91 (to reduce the number of units that the UK can send after Italy)
Sink the ships in sz110 (to keep them from relocating into the med to be used against Italy)
Sink the ships in sz111 (to make a viable sea lion threat)
there are several other things to possibly do to help but (imo) those are the big key things.
But most importantly, as I said at the top of the list, play the game with out a bid.
lots of players on tripleA insist that the allies need a bid. And maybe the allies do need a bid, but I really wouldn’t be the one to figure that out since I have yet to win on tripleA. It doesn’t matter if I play as the axis or the allies, with or without a bid, 1v1 or multi. I’ve come close a few times, but no win yet.
BUT…ANYWAY, I just know that in the games that the allies do not get a bid the Italians (pending dice and player choices of course) have a chance, a small chance, but none the less a chance, to get on their feet. And in the games that the allies get a bid, the Italians NEVER ever even come close to getting on their feet because the bid is invariably giving to the UK to use against the Italians in the med and Africa. (as if Italy is too powerful at the start of the game for the UK to handle without a bid).
I think the Basic game is different from global….how do Heavy Bombers work in Global? It’s not the 3 dice is it?
in G40, regular bombers work that you roll 1d6 and add 2 to the damage. so they do 1d6+2
the rules for the strategic bombing do say that heavy bombers just roll 2d6 and pick the best of the two. BUT…we play they still get the +2 so they should be getting 2d6 (pick the best roll) and add 2.
thats not the rule for heavy bombers?
@Cow:
do a basic g1. g2 make like you do sea lion. G3 go to gibraltar, use italy to kill any blockers, shazam. that simple.
yup it is that simple. against a noob. i’ve done it just like that. but against anyone else…wont happen.
… Is there any way to counter this?
what you could do is… remind your russian playerthat his capital is very important and…DEFEND IT better. :-o :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
hahaha…just kidding dont go all stalin on me.
i’ve tried this german tactic a couple of times, its never worked. those troops get isolated, cut off and crushed when that far behind the front lines. so…generally speaking i agrre with what someone else said, it worked in that game because of thetranport/tank blitz mistake it sound like your guys made.
when i’m the Japs and do what you mentioned above, the USA does 1 of two things, build loads of strategic bombers and desimates my fleet with them and lets anzac clean things up. keeping me off the DEI. or they go heavy and go into sz6 and bring in the russians behind me and beffore i know it i have 5 enemies and a front on any side i look. and than its just a matter of a few more rounds i my japs are dead in in the water. either way, no matter what round i DOW with jpas, everyone i play goes heavy pacific with the USA, beats me back to my home island and than turn 100% into europe.
japan can not compete for long agisnt Chins, UK, ANZAC, USA and Russia with the US dumping more IPC than they earn on thier own. because than the IPC that CHINA, ANZAC and UK make is just iceing on the cake. i dont see how the Japs can win in the G40. they always get crushed 1st in the game i play, no matter who plays the japs.
sometimes i do build one, sometimes i dont build one for all the reasons mentioned above. to say difinitavly that an IC in Egypt is good or bad is like saying its always best fo do a sea lion. lot depends on the player you aer working with and against, and the board situation.
generally speaking, i never build one on round 1 becasue of the sea lion issue.
most games i use the transport shuffle from sotuh africa.
sometimes IC (s) in the midddl east.
some games, i build up in south africa, give egypt to italy ,let them build and IC there and thatn i take ti from them…and thank them for it…of course. 8-)
maybe i just need to face up to the fact that the reason the games i play in seem to be so diffeernt is me and the dudes i game with msut suck no matter who plays the axis, cuzz most of our face to face games result in an allied win and we play with no bid.
@Young:
What about a bid of zero?
I agree that if people play an entire game they will find that the allies are not as weak as they think.
Agreed.
In my group we play to the death (or till it looks like one side will never win and defeat is inevitable) so no bid for the Allies.
i agree 100%. Â bid of zip, silch, nadda…NOTHING for u allies!
keeping in mind…i maybe win 1 out of 10 times with the axis and can win 9 out of 10 with the allies. so maybe i just suck as the axis or maybe i just rule as the allies or maybe i am great as the axis but always face better allied players or maybe i suck as the allies and always face suckier axis players. :-o hhummm
@Eggman:
just wondering, do you believe the allies need a bid in the G40.2 game? and why?
At first I didn’t, for the same reason mentioned by elzario: if the Axis make too many mistakes, then the Allies can roll all over them pretty quickly. For experienced players, a bid appears to be necessary just because the Pacific side of the board is too weighted in Japan’s favor. An aggressive Japan can easily eliminate either China, ANZAC, or UK-Pacific by turn 3. In theory, this should have an opportunity cost in that either the Russian Infantry stack or the US can save the Allies’ bacon over there, but the large size of the Pacific and the requirement to spend so much on Navy dilutes the effectiveness of the USA far too much. The USA has to spend at least as much in the Pacific as they would in the stand-alone map; if they don’t, then Japan probably has a lock on the DEI and will meet or exceed the US income, making them largely untouchable. I’m actually curious if the USA’s global income is equal to the separate Europe & Pacific incomes taken together. If it isn’t at least equal to that, then the global game is unbalanced for sure since the Allies have no chance in the Pacific stand-alone.
the pacific side of the g40 game is too weighted in japans favor?!?!? how?!
the set up between the G40 and P40/E40 is EXACTLY the same with very minor differance in 99% of the board. the big differance is russian units on the pacific map in the g40 that are not in the p40 game. so in the p40 game japan will NEVER be faced with the possiblity of facing 5 enemies like they can in the G40 game. also, in the G40 game, the USA (if they dump ALL thier IPC into the pac side of the map) can dump 114 more ipc in the G40 game onto the pacific map by the time their auto DOW kicks in on round 3 than they ever could in just the Pac40 game. if the USA goes to war on J1 than they can dump 17 more IPC per turn into the pacific (on average) than they can in just the P40 game.
so, in the G40 game, Japan can face 5 enemies, has the US making more IPC than in the P40 game and has to be concerned with the US using russian land to put air units onto.
3 things agaisnt them that they do not have on them in the P40 game! how can having more allies things added to the pacific in the G40 map make them stronger than they are in the p40 game?
granted they are strong in the P40 game, but than they have 3 less things on them…so it only is logical that they should be stronger in the p40 game. a J1 in the G40 game is very hard to stop harder to stop when combined with a G1 dow but a J1 DOW in the P40 game is almost unstopable and to some degree it should be, they have no russian issue to hit them on the back door with and the US makes less money but the Uk and anzac are EXACTLY the same.
@Eggman:
so it probably behooves the German player to encourage RAF scrambles in the UK during G1 so this doesn’t happen (and also hit the French fleet, so Italy doesn’t have to worry about it).
thisis what i do with my germans, i try to entice the UK into a scramble situation on G1 hoping they take the bait and loose fighters so they dont have what it takes to kill italy UK1, but MAYBE 1 out of 10 someone takes the bait. most UK players want to kill italy ships in the med more than they want to kill off german air G1. they prefer to cripple itally. only a G1 sea lion build/threat ever helps to save italy’s sz97 fleet in my games.
I’m starting to warm up to G1:J1. � It leaves no time for the Allies to regroup or even position themselves properly for defense. � What do you guys think?
i agree 100%
it packs a big punch, can cut UKpac income down to 7 ipc by round 2, does not give the US time to flood the pacific board with more IPC than they can in the P40 game and puts lots of presure on russia asap.
When I’m playing Italy, I take control over Gibraltar, Southern France, and Egypt earning 5IPC and then crushing the British and french fleet in mediterranean and get 5IPC more.
Then taking Northern Africa and later Cairo and become even greater than Germany.If you take over Egypt, you’ve already got Cairo… ?
how do you do that with italy when right out of the gate, the UK sinks 2 of thier 3 starting transports? even if you build a transport I1 you will only have enough IPC to build 1 so if u r lucky u have 2 transports to use on I2. not enough in my games to take egypt on I2.
what am i missing?
just wondering, do you beleive the allies need a bid in the G40.2 game? and why?
i dont get why they would need a bid in the G40.2.
and if you bid in the G40.2 do you bid in the E40.2 and the P40.2 and if you do…why?
i agree with what most others have said so far…
sometimes its a good idea, most times its not. it depends on the baord situation. in the situation you describe i think it was the right choice, in a differnt situation…maybe not such a good idea. so my final answer…it maybe, maybe not…it depends.
Russia: it’s starting units, political situation and “spread of communism†NO
The 18 Russian infantry and two AA guns that start in Amur, Sakha and Buryatia.
Do these 20 units and the related Japanese/Russian/Mongolian Political “situation†“break†the balance in the pacific OR do the Allies need these units and the related Japanese/Russian/Mongolian Political situation rules in order to “make†the balance in the Pacific? In other words how do these 20 units and related political rules regarding their use impact your Global games?
Russia on the Europe half of the map:
Do the Russians start with “not enough†units, “just the right amount†of units or “too many†units on the “western front†(Europe half of the board) to “adequately†defend themselves against the Axis until the Allied powers on the Europe map can “open a second front†(help them)? In other words can your Russians “stand on their own†with out needing “direct†Allied help and/or do they even need “direct†Allied help to stand on their own? AND, can they do this without NEEDING the 18 infantry and 2 AA guns that start the game on the Pacific half of the map? In other words do they NEED those 20 units in Moscow or do they NOT need those 20 units in Moscow?
National Objective: 3 IPCs for each original German, Italian, or pro-Axis neutral territory that the Soviet Union controls. Theme: Spread of Communism.
Does this NO need to be scaled back some, to be limited to exclude Territories on the continent of Africa (and islands in the Med) or is the NO good as is? In other words, how does this existing NO impact your games?
anychance we will see an update (soon) for these charts to match the tweaks made on the 2nd eddition game?
sorry to be the one to ask this (again) i really like your charts and i’m really thankful that you made them…but…any chance you will be updateing these charts anytime soon to match the “2nd eddition” out of the box set up and NO’s and stuff? i think its some minor tweaks but since i have no clue how to do all this way cool stuff…maybe its more work than i think it is.
anyway…thanks again for these charts.
occupy the USA and convoy raid them do death while japan wins in the pacific is the nut shell of this idea correct?
seems possible… but not probable (imo). look me up on tripleA, i’m on there most days builder_chris and try it against me a few games and we will know if its a good idea or not. my gut tells me…NOT…but than again i’ve never seen anyone try it.
actually, i hate to diapoint you…but…i am going to have to concede and admit defeat.
you are a very solid player, i learned a lot from just this one partial game. thanks.
also, i will not be able to participate in the tournement you set up with me and seth as a team; i already let seth know i wont be participating in it.
i hate to admit this…BUT…i feal i owe you at least an explanation…
BUT…i know i have a very compulsive, obsessive and slightly addictive type of personality and playing this game and just the one other game with seth like this is too much for me; all i do all day is think about his game, it consumes my every thought and keeps me up at nights. ont he 1 or 2 face to face game days we have, we start gaming at noon, finish by about midnight and its about 3 am before my mind shuts off enough for me to sleep and than it still takes me a couple of days to stop thinking about the game i played on saturday; this is worse on me. i hate to admit that, and even as i am typeing this i feal like i must sound like a total pussy but…well…thats where the dice roll for me…and i have learned over my life its better to head the dice than try to make them roll what you want.
so, thanks for the game and lesson in how vulnerable italy is and i look forward to maybe atleast debating strategies with you in the future.
peace out!