That is also what I was thinking, it seems to me that it is more worthwhile for the U.S. to spend most of their IPC’s on the European side and just try to hold off Japan from capturing the 6 victory cities.
Easier said than done. Japan starts off with 19 fighters and tacs, so after they take India, which they will, they can just build like 8 carriers and the rest subs making US have to retreat everything from the European theater just to hold Hawaii to stop Japan from winning in the pacific.
Been gone for a while. I will gladly play someone as Allies without a bid. I’m not afraid to lose and tend to play outside the box so maybe someone will see something they missed and can incorporate into their games. I prefer to play a live networked game. It might take us a while to play but we’ll figure it out a few turns at a time. PM me and I will send contact info.
You’re a good sport, but I hate to tell you the allies have no chance. GL! :) This map has a couple egregious errors that are just too hard for the allies to overcome.
This change would be very easy to make in the xml too.
How long do you have to wait for the map creator to allow you to test your changes after you have made them? I changed the XML in GitHub, but is there a way I can play with the turn order changes myself somehow?
The way I read it ShadowHAwk was that China went after Japan in the turn order you described. UK going before Japan is huge for the allies in the pacific, and would make japans life a lot harder, but UK’s fleet would be toast in the Med and Egypt would be guaranteed to fall every game if Italy went before UK, and I don’t know how the allies could come back from that…
The more I think about it I would have Russia go before Germany, and change Russia being able to declare war till turn 5. I’d also move the Italian BB to SZ 95 and maybe add a Destroyer to 97?
Because you are right if Russia got to go first that extra 37 in income plus Italy not being able to can open could possibly be back breaking for the Axis in Europe. That is why making Italy a little stronger by keeping the BB would help with the Africa situation. Not sure though. I just can’t stand how weak Russia is and the fact that they don’t seem to have any options open to them other than stack in Moscow because Italy can can open so easily, and that trying to hold Leningrad means you have to have 30+ units there the turn Germany attacks seems stupid to me. What do you guys think?
For 6 player games (3 allied players and 3 axis), I was thinking of actually switching the Italy and Japan player turns. Giving Italy the initiative in the Med will make them much more interesting to play, and prevent a J1 attack. It will probably shift the US’ focus more towards the Atlantic and allow UK Pac/ANZAC to be more impactful instead.
It does change the dynamic of the game and might even balance the game more as well.
It makes japan somewhat weaker.
Maby not switching italy and japan only but change the turn order more drasticaly.
Ger-Rus-Italy-UK-Japan-US-china-anzac- (france ) Otherwise i fear that US will be to strong to handle for japan with both UK and US beefed up.
This is effectively a bid of around 20ipcs for the pacific allies ( maby even more )
This helps with the Italy can opener problem, but now Italy is way to strong in the med. Italy going before UK would be disastrous for game balance. I don’t know how the allies could recover from UK loosing everything to Italy before they even get to move… UK going before Japan is really huge for the allies in the pacific, and will make taking India much much harder for Japan, but again will Europe be able to hold on with Italy being a massive powerhouse?
For those who are interested in a different turn order check out my Axis & Allies Global 1942 setup. The turn order proceeds in this manner:
Soviet Union
Germany
United States
Japan
United Kingdom
Italy
China
ANZACThis turn order gives the Soviet Union, United States, and United Kingdom the initiative against their rivals.
Would be interesting in 1940 to have the turn order changed to:
Russia
Germany
Japan
US
China
UK
Italy
Anzac
France
This would really help out the huge issue of Italy being able to can open for Germany, and Germany just having way to many units for Russia to ever counter attack. Would lead to a lot more possibilities for the allies with Russia being stronger.
The problem is the US won’t be able to do anything with those transports off Gibraltar because the axis will be able to counter attack the allied ground forces almost anywhere they land. Not only that if you move to land in say Southern France, now your transports are woefully out of position. Also Russia just gets absolutely creamed in this version by Germany and Italy’s can opening ability. You need to have US send a steady stream of 18 ground a turn into Europe. That is 9 transports off Gib landing in Spain, and 9 transports off Eastern US getting ready to pick up the land units for the next turn. Good players won’t let you land in a beneficial spot for the allies without significant loss of tempo from moving your transports and fleet way out of position.
There is literally no way to stop Russia from falling on T8 if you are playing low luck. In dice you can get really really lucky I guess…
You can only really use the british fighters if Japan declared war T1.
The reason people are willing to loose so many planes as Germany or Japan in large attacks against many units is because of the strategic implications of the subsequent result (the way the board would look after the attack).
When Germany clears Egypt of units it is because Italy can then take the territory with a lot of ground units left over, and UK has no great way of retaking it outside of an early factory in Persia, and even then its not good. So Germany looses a lot of air and money to then allow the Italy to grab a stranglehold on Egypt for the rest of the game.
Japan loosing a lot of air in the attack on Szchewan to kill off all the Chinese units is so that China is left with nothing on the board except a few infantry every round, and you can push through and take the rest of China’s PU’s quicker. This saves ground units that would have died or had to be used as implied pressure on china that can be used for India. Granted you are weaker vs a US Pacific first, but in that case you can just push on through China into Russia’s back door.
Infantry are OK, but you only need to buy as many as is required to match arty 1:1 in every standoff.
In my oppinion the maximum ratio of infantry to arty is 3:1. Meaning you have 3 infantry/mech for every 1 arty you have. That is because you only want to loose 1’s on the first round of dice, if the rolls are average. This will give you perfect efficiency because you won’t loose any value on your artillery the second round.
I dislike the fighter buy on USSR1. You have plenty of factories at this time, no threat of SBR and no need whatsoever for the fighter. Better to buy it later when you are building solely in Moscow and can’t spend more than 30 IPC on inf. It is useful later but mostly only needed when the German bombers are in SBR range.
Artillery is a bit more useful because you can at least threaten a counter attack with it.
Disagree that there’s no need for it early on.� It deters SBR (by G3 Russia will already have 4 fighters), it helps with those little counter strikes (instead of having to use artillery on the front lines you can strike with 5+ planes), and using the money on extra infantry early doesn’t equal more infantry later.
Let’s say turn 1 and 2 Russia spends 74:�
- 24.67 Inf
or
- 2 ftr & 18 inf
Now let’s say you want to get those extra planes on turn 3 and 4 instead, and lets say Russia can spend 65 total:
- 21.67 inf
or
2 ftr and 15 inf
Either way, Russia has 2 ftrs and 39.67 inf.� So the question is what has more value in those first few turns: 6 extra inf, or two extra ftrs?� I’d argue the latter
That is a very interesting though Nippon-Koku. There are several factors you have to account for to see which buy is better for Russia. Are the fighters worth it at all, and if they are when should they be purchased?
At first I thought the answer was obviously those 4 extra inf and 2 arty are better a few turns earlier because they can be used to counter/defend against Germany earlier. The infantry you build in Moscow take time to reach the front and become an implied threat, but the fighters you build in Moscow are immediate implied threats, so infantry should be purchased before planes with that line of thinking. When you look past game theory and go into real game scenarios, though, more factors come into play.
A. Can the 4 inf 2 arty be used for a more effective possible counter attack than 2 fighters. The answer is yes, obviously, but is the counter attack reasonable? The answer to that is simply, no. A good German push is going to be un-counterable/defensible anyways. Meaning countering a German/Italian stack in West Russia/Ukraine/Bryansk isn’t realistic. The odds would be at best horribly unfavorable for you to attack.
B. Can the 4 inf 2 arty be used for a more effective defense than 2 fighters. The answer, again, is obviously yes, but is the defense reasonable? The answer depends on what you want the allies to do as a whole. Russia alone can’t defend certain key positions without support from her allies, regardless of how many infantry they buy. If you want to have UK help defend Bryansk later in the game with fighters, then you might want to build 4 inf 2 art over 2 fighters, but if not then maybe you should build the 2 fighters over 4 inf and 2 art.
C. What would the planes be doing if purchased early rather than later/not at all? This depends on what your strategy is for the allies. The only reason you’d want early fighters is to help china. Russia and China alone cant stack stack Szechwan with enough units to defend against a J1 that puts 20 planes in Kwangsi. You’d have to put the 3 UK planes there as well, which would mean you are declaring war against Japan as UK on turn 1. That is because Russia and China can easily stack Szechwan if Japan declares war on turn 1. Here are the numbers for what the defense in Szechwan would look like given maximum values for offense and defense minus 3 infantry for China that would be used to take back Yunan, which is average.
Japans Offensive power that can reach Szechwan:
10 fighters
8 tacs
2 bombers
Total offensive power: 70
Russia not purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK not declaring war:
10 Chinese infantry
1 Chinese fighter
2 Russian Mechs
2 Russian tanks
2 Russian fighters
1 Russian Tac
Total Defense power: 45
Win %: 3
Russia purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK not declaring war:
10 Chinese infantry
1 Chinese fighter
2 Russian Mechs
2 Russian tanks
4 Russian fighters
1 Russian Tac
Total Defense power: 53
Win %: 22
Russia purchasing two fighters turn 1, and UK declaring war:
10 Chinese infantry
1 Chinese fighter
2 Russian Mechs
2 Russian tanks
4 Russian fighters
1 Russian Tac
2 UK fighters
1 UK tac
Total Defense power: 64
Win %: 76
In Global 1940 2nd edition with an average bid of 25 I’d say the buy might not be worth it. That is because Japan declares war Turn 1 much more often then in the balanced mod version, and a turn 1 declaration means a lot less air-power that can reach Szchewan.
Neglected to mentioned one anticipated tweak in Balance 2.0. In the current version, the Game Notes specify “[W]hen not at war with Russia, Japan may not move its units into any originally Russian territory controlled by European Axis.”
That restriction will be expanded to apply to all Axis powers. Therefore, Germany may not move its units into Italian-controlled Russian territory (for example), unless Germany is at war with Russia.
When does this ever affect Germany and Italy’s combined movement in Russia? Germany is always going to be at war with Russia when Italy is, so does that mean Italy can still can open for Germany?
I agree Regular Kid that it is more fun playing in person, but it isn’t always so easy to get a group together to play.
@Young:
Perhaps this is more consistent with your perception…
America at War
From game round 3-9, the United States will receive a free unit according to the list below.
Round 3 = Submarine
Round 4 = Transport
Round 5 = Destroyer
Round 6 = Fighter
Round 7 = Tac bomber
Round 8 = Cruiser
Round 9 = Strategic Bomber
I’d add a round 1 and 2.
Round 1 = 1 Infantry
Round 2 = 2 Infantry