Alpha+1 game session Europe situation after seventeen rounds 01/03/11

[Fishmoto37]

@calvinhobbesliker:

Okay. Out of curiosity, what were the incomes of the remaining nations? I have a feeling that, with the fall of Moscow and Tokyo, the allied still have the economic advantage.

OK Calvin, here are the incomes at the end of 17 rounds.  U.S.–-53 IPCs+35 NOs                                                             U.K.—15 IPCs                                                                        India—28 IPCs+ 5 NO                                                              U.S.S.R.-3 IPCs                                                                       China–20 IPCs+6 NO                                                                Italy—36 IPCs+15 NOs                                                            Japan–22 IPCs                                                                       Germany-68 IPCs+15 NOs                                                          Anzac–13 IPCs+10 NOs

[Fishmoto37]

@gsh34:

That is an absolutely crazy looking board.  It looks like there are over 1000 units on the board including the chips.  How many hours did the game last before calling it?

About 17 hours including breaks.

[Fishmoto37]

@Gargantua:

TANKS TANKS TANKS!

Why so many TANKS?

OK Gar here is the scoop. Germany had attacked Moscow in an earlier round but did not have enough infantry. So after one round of combat they performed a retrograde movement. (they went back to were they came from) So Germany was left with panzers and luftwaffe but no infantry. More panzers were coming up but got there way before the infantry. Germany took the extra panzers toward China while infantry came up. Italy started the arms race in the south by moving towards Persia. India saw that Persia was good ground because of access to Turkmenistan in southern Russia. To keep India from helping the Soviets the Italians rushed tanks to Iraq with the intent to take Persia. Tanks and planes were the only units that could get there quickly.

[Gargantua]

TANKS!

[Fishmoto37]

@Gargantua:

TANKS!

How appropriate. On this forum I am a tank! (older model)

[ZehKaiser]

I am astounded by the number of pieces on the board by round 17! I only have two serious players in my gaming group (myself being one of them ofc), one player who is moderately into A&A and a few more who will play but view it as a simple board game and expect it to only go few hours and are unwilling to play more than one session.

As a result most of our games end at about round 6-8 when the weaker players quit due to lack of interest.

We have been fortunate to get a few games to go 15+ rounds. But every game we play we have very few pieces on the board compared to this because we are all very agressive players. Especially me and my friend who play axis. We are under the impression that if you don’t play agressive the game gets bogged down in stalemates and/or the axis lose out economically in a protracted arms race and a stragegic war of attrition.

So we never let a fleet or ground force get as big as you guys do which makes me guess that your group as a much slower and more cautious defensive style of play. Is that correct? Its the only way I can account for your giant forces.

[Fishmoto37]

@ZehKaiser:

I am astounded by the number of pieces on the board by round 17! I only have two serious players in my gaming group (myself being one of them ofc), one player who is moderately into A&A and a few more who will play but view it as a simple board game and expect it to only go few hours and are unwilling to play more than one session.

As a result most of our games end at about round 6-8 when the weaker players quit due to lack of interest.

We have been fortunate to get a few games to go 15+ rounds. But every game we play we have very few pieces on the board compared to this because we are all very agressive players. Especially me and my friend who play axis. We are under the impression that if you don’t play agressive the game gets bogged down in stalemates and/or the axis lose out economically in a protracted arms race and a stragegic war of attrition.

So we never let a fleet or ground force get as big as you guys do which makes me guess that your group as a much slower and more cautious defensive style of play. Is that correct? Its the only way I can account for your giant forces.

It is possible you are correct. But one very large difference is that we do not use victory cities. We play until one side wins the war by defeating the other or one side surrenders. This current game has gone farther than any of the others we have played due to the improved play of my good friend who plays in most of our games. We have also developed the habit of analyzing the games when we are finished, going over the mistakes and making suggestions. We are both retired and have more time than most.

[docfav7]

I don’t see how you guys can have SOOOO many pieces on the board unless you aren’t doing any battles?!?!?  How many red chips are under that stack of infantry in Moscow?  It looks that’s about 50-60 infantry?  It doesn’t make any sense.  17 turns is 8.5 years in “game time”.  China has WAY too many infantry and artillery.  I saw ANZAC with bombers and fighters in Mainland China.

Unless this is a silly game, am I the only one confused???

[Fishmoto37]

@docfav7:

I don’t see how you guys can have SOOOO many pieces on the board unless you aren’t doing any battles?!?!?  How many red chips are under that stack of infantry in Moscow?  It looks that’s about 50-60 infantry?  It doesn’t make any sense.  17 turns is 8.5 years in “game time”.  China has WAY too many infantry and artillery.  I saw ANZAC with bombers and fighters in Mainland China.

Unless this is a silly game, am I the only one confused???

Did you read my previous post? I gave an explanation as to how our game may be different!

[docfav7]

I did read it.  I’m not trying to make fun or or be demeaning in anyway.  I was just confused.  You have the USSR as only making 3 IPC yet they have a TON of troops in Moscow.  If you keep falling back and lose ground to the Germans, you don’t have enough IPC’s to buy that much stuff.  That is my only question.  It just looked like a lot of things didn’t make sense is all.

Sorry about the post.

[dvsimp]

@Gargantua:

I think they came from either the original Pacific or Guadalcana

What failed miserably however, was the advent of movement counters that were supposed to follow your aircraft pieces.  What a waste of time and resources.  In 500 games I’ve never seen them used.

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

[Gargantua]

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

Why?  Does it “Really” help you?  Tell me this, what happens if you don’t use those pieces?

[Fishmoto37]

@docfav7:

I did read it.  I’m not trying to make fun or or be demeaning in anyway.  I was just confused.  You have the USSR as only making 3 IPC yet they have a TON of troops in Moscow.  If you keep falling back and lose ground to the Germans, you don’t have enough IPC’s to buy that much stuff.  That is my only question.  It just looked like a lot of things didn’t make sense is all.

Sorry about the post.

I reckon my friend playing the Soviets saw the end coming and decided to turtle up in Moscow. All those units were purchased on previous turns. That is why I as the axis attacked once and then retreated instead of trading expensive tanks for infantry. I decided just to wait for more infantry to come up. I still had the Chinese and Americans to deal with. I guess that I have some kind of phobia about trading tanks for infantry.

[Fishmoto37]

@dvsimp:

@Gargantua:

I think they came from either the original Pacific or Guadalcana

What failed miserably however, was the advent of movement counters that were supposed to follow your aircraft pieces.  What a waste of time and resources.  In 500 games I’ve never seen them used.

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

@Gargantua:

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

Why?  Does it “Really” help you?  Tell me this, what happens if you don’t use those pieces?

I will tell you Gar. I somtimes have a senior movement when a lot of planes come from different territories and I forget which plane has what movement left. I do use some homemade markers now and then.

[Stefano1189]

@Fishmoto37:

@dvsimp:

@Gargantua:

I think they came from either the original Pacific or Guadalcana

What failed miserably however, was the advent of movement counters that were supposed to follow your aircraft pieces.  What a waste of time and resources.  In 500 games I’ve never seen them used.

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

@Gargantua:

I always use them to mark how many movement points are left on my air move after combat.

Why?  Does it “Really” help you?  Tell me this, what happens if you don’t use those pieces?

I will tell you Gar. I somtimes have a senior movement when a lot of planes come from different territories and I forget which plane has what movement left. I do use some homemade markers now and then.

Japan in my thoughts remains a little weak despite European axis… these images seem to confirm my impressions… and reading the incomes i have a proof of what i been saying in the Larry’s forum…

[Gargantua]

Transports, boots and or a factory on the ground, would go a LONG way for Japan’s success.  My thoughts are similar to yours, especially since all the advantage of a J1 attack are now removed - especially in global.

It’s that, or more ships (subs and destroyers) to keep the american navy at bay.

Japan has too many fighters.  I would trade 5 japanese fighters for 12 or 15 extra infantry starting in China, any day.

[RedHunter]

Wow that was too many pieces left on the board. Like holy crap. How much % does the Axis win without VC to aid them?

[Fishmoto37]

@RedHunter:

Wow that was too many pieces left on the board. Like holy crap. How much % does the Axis win without VC to aid them?

I do not know the answer to that. We may be the only ones on this forum who play without VCs.