G40 League House Rule project

[gamerman01]

Agreed….

Best A&A game yet, but lots of room for improvement…
I guess if you’re playing with a buddy all the time you can house rule it to your heart’s content, but playing all these games online we’re stuck with the default rules and setup so that we’re all playing the same game…  :|

[Eqqman]

@Gamerman01:

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

I have a hard time reading some of these kinds of comments and thinking we are still playing the same game.

It would be interesting (albeit very time-consuming) to go through every league game and try to put a finger on exactly when a particular side won or lost, although I suspect there would be plenty of disagreement.  Speaking from my own collection of games, there are a few commonalities:

• If Japan allows its fleet to be sunk too early without inflicting equal or greater Allied naval losses, this usually results in a loss.

  • If Japan allows its air force to take heavy losses too early, this might result in a loss, it can depend on what happens with the navy.  You need to keep the air force together so that it can strike any emerging Allied fleets in tandem with the air force.

  The German player only has one real direction in which to vector their forces: Russia.  Japan has several, which has already been pointed out.  An unwise Japanese player is going to expand out in every possible direction, which leads to an initial high income but spreads its forces out, allowing them to be attacked and defeated piecemeal, especially if the Allied player is willing to fight battles they know they will lose in earlier turns to create a winning battle for one of the countries that plays afterward.  This basically works akin to blowing up a balloon too fast, the Allies can pop it, if they have been careful to preserve enough of their starting forces.

  The wiser Japanese players move a little more slowly and keep their fleets together.  With the Air Base in Kiangsi (I hope that’s the right K province) and the vast majority of the Japanese fleet parked off Malaya or the Philippines, no Allied fleet is going to make a move on the DEI or SZ6 unless they can be sure of surviving the Japanese counter-attack.  This is going to take round after round of spending, and if Japan continues to make modest increases to the navy, the Allies won’t be able to keep up for a long time.  The game should pretty much be over in Europe by then.  Japan can abandon China completely and focus on holding the DEI and still provide an Axis victory, since the Chinese are stuck there (it is harder, however).  Holding the DEI is worth +19 to Japan and -9 to India, they need to prioritize holding it in a manner that doesn’t fritter away their naval advantage.

  At the start of the game India and ANZAC are total pushovers, those precious air units are the only thing keeping them from being routed.  Just seizing Malaya and holding it is a loss of -10 to Allied income.  If Japan can’t handle holding every one of the DEI islands, they can focus on Borneo.  With Borneo, Malaya, and Hong Kong in Japanese hands (very easy to do) India is down -15 of its income.  Park a few ships (preferably subs, once you sink the starting UK and French DDs, which you probably did already if they were used as blockers) off Calcutta and they will have no appreciable income, meaning you won’t even really have to fight them.

  ANZAC is in slightly better shape since it has 2 NOs and is far enough away that it is inefficient for Japan to try and send ships down there to convoy away its money.  It is hampered by having no access to a major IC and its starting minor IC is only in range of Java once you start making TTs (than can also be a pro, since it takes Japan longer to get to it).  ANZAC is the only player in the Pacific that can seriously harass Japan long-term since it would take Japan the longest to utterly crush it.  Still, it isn’t hard for Japan to minimize their threat by forcing them to fight for their Outer Island Defense NO or even doing spoiler attacks, dropping an odd Infantry or two into West/North Australia to distract.  ANZAC has to make constant choices between buying ground units to beat off a sudden invasion or building up navy to be ready to hit once Japan overextends.  If Japan makes the mistake of leaving too little presence in the DEI, then ANZAC is going to start cranking out ships.  They need to be forced to invest in ground and TTs as long as possible.

  I don’t think losing Yunnan J1 is a game over for Japan.  In order for the Allies to really capitalize on it, the UK would have to DoW on UK1/2, which I still think is a terrible idea (although I’m open minded, I might be convinced otherwise).  If Japan has been keeping their forces together the Allies will find very few targets in an early DoW, and to me the sacrifice of +20 income for the US for 1 - 2 turns isn’t worth it.  Given that 10+ planes are going to be sitting in China, I don’t think the Allies can move enough in there that they won’t just be wiped out J2.  Japan can then just say thank you for having the chance to kill these units sooner rather than later.

  Another footnote to Japan, I’m very surprised that I don’t see the J3/4 India crush in more league games.  I don’t see how the UK-Europe economy can handle keeping Italy down and doing anything to rescue India.

  Now, having just said all this Japan is awesome stuff, I don’t actually think the Axis should be expected to win in the Pacific board.  With optimal play by all around I would expect the Axis to win on the Europe board every time.  Since Japan is potentially much more powerful than Germany (it will hit 70+ income faster than Germany does, even when both sides do well), the USA is almost required to spend everything in the Pacific in order to stave off defeat.  Thus, Japan will probably end up suffering more since the Allies have to choice but to hammer them.  Another comment said this but I wholeheartedly agree: all of Japan’s Pacific foes are so weak that they will crumble much faster than the Allies will in Europe.  Japan’s real mistake comes from trying to crush all these foes at the same time too quickly.

  Moving on to Europe-

  • If Germany spends too much on naval, this can result in a loss.
  • If Germany doesn’t help Italy, this can result in a loss.

  The Axis powers in Europe are basically on a shot clock.  If they miss their big chance and allow the game to continue, then the Allies have an opportunity to win.  But just like in basketball, if they keep calm and just focus on what is important, they shouldn’t miss the shot.  The main mistakes I’m seeing on the German side is sending too few ground units after Russia.  A lot of German players are dribbling out subs or other naval units to be annoying to the Allies, but there is no need for it.  Any time the Allies pose a serious problem at sea, just make a single large buy of navy.  If you hold Normandy you can pop a DD right into the Channel to block a fleet that might be trying to go Gibraltar - Germany or Gibraltar - Norway.

  The German air force should absolutely be used to help Italy as much as possible (unless you went G1).  If you’re just taking a massed stack of units over to Moscow, the Russians are going to just retreat every time anyway, so there is little for the Luftwaffe to do over there.  Wipe out all the Allied ships in the Med, leave somebody behind in Italy to scramble if needed, and possibly land others to defend the Italian stack in North Africa if needed.  There is plenty of time to redeploy them to Russia later for the final attack, or to send some to Germany if you need to guard against an Allied landing, etc.

  At best, it takes the Allies 4 turns from the time they start to prepare an invasion force (from scratch) to the time they finally hit the beach.  If the USA can’t do full spending in the Atlantic because it’s worried about Japan, it will be even longer.  I think this is the most dangerous part of the G1 attack, since it leaves so many Allied warships on the table, the Allies can shave a turn off their invasion schedule.  But again, if Japan is doing the right things, you should still have time.

  I haven’t seen anything in my own games that would lead me to offer conclusions on how much of the Mediterranean territories should be split between Germany and Italy, I’ve seen both extremes.  But if Italy takes all of it, then Germany is very limited in how they can aid the Italians directly, and all of that income is subject to Convoy damage anyway if the Allies are allowed to get the upper hand at sea.  My leaning is that Germany should probably get as much of this income as possible since they want everything to send after Russia.

  Europe is a lot harder to evaluate since I think Germany can make a lot less obvious blunders than Japan can.  But if it seems like Germany isn’t prioritizing ground units, the Axis are undervaluing an early seizure of Cairo, or Germany isn’t helping Italy get their NOs, then the Axis (may) be heading to a loss.  The Axis can lose, but it’s their game to lose.

[boldfresh]

@Eggman:

@Gamerman01:

I think India and Australia are overpowered.  Japan shouldn’t have such a hard time taking and holding money islands, as you observed.  ANZ and India shouldn’t start with 3 planes, IMO.  Maybe 2.

I have a hard time reading some of these kinds of comments and thinking we are still playing the same game.

It would be interesting (albeit very time-consuming) to go through every league game and try to put a finger on exactly when a particular side won or lost, although I suspect there would be plenty of disagreement.  Speaking from my own collection of games, there are a few commonalities:

• If Japan allows its fleet to be sunk too early without inflicting equal or greater Allied naval losses, this usually results in a loss.

  • If Japan allows its air force to take heavy losses too early, this might result in a loss, it can depend on what happens with the navy.  You need to keep the air force together so that it can strike any emerging Allied fleets in tandem with the air force.

  The German player only has one real direction in which to vector their forces: Russia.  Japan has several, which has already been pointed out.  An unwise Japanese player is going to expand out in every possible direction, which leads to an initial high income but spreads its forces out, allowing them to be attacked and defeated piecemeal, especially if the Allied player is willing to fight battles they know they will lose in earlier turns to create a winning battle for one of the countries that plays afterward.  This basically works akin to blowing up a balloon too fast, the Allies can pop it, if they have been careful to preserve enough of their starting forces.

  The wiser Japanese players move a little more slowly and keep their fleets together.  With the Air Base in Kiangsi (I hope that’s the right K province) and the vast majority of the Japanese fleet parked off Malaya or the Philippines, no Allied fleet is going to make a move on the DEI or SZ6 unless they can be sure of surviving the Japanese counter-attack.  This is going to take round after round of spending, and if Japan continues to make modest increases to the navy, the Allies won’t be able to keep up for a long time.  The game should pretty much be over in Europe by then.  Japan can abandon China completely and focus on holding the DEI and still provide an Axis victory, since the Chinese are stuck there (it is harder, however).  Holding the DEI is worth +19 to Japan and -9 to India, they need to prioritize holding it in a manner that doesn’t fritter away their naval advantage.

  At the start of the game India and ANZAC are total pushovers, those precious air units are the only thing keeping them from being routed.  Just seizing Malaya and holding it is a loss of -10 to Allied income.  If Japan can’t handle holding every one of the DEI islands, they can focus on Borneo.  With Borneo, Malaya, and Hong Kong in Japanese hands (very easy to do) India is down -15 of its income.  Park a few ships (preferably subs, once you sink the starting UK and French DDs, which you probably did already if they were used as blockers) off Calcutta and they will have no appreciable income, meaning you won’t even really have to fight them.

  ANZAC is in slightly better shape since it has 2 NOs and is far enough away that it is inefficient for Japan to try and send ships down there to convoy away its money.  It is hampered by having no access to a major IC and its starting minor IC is only in range of Java once you start making TTs (than can also be a pro, since it takes Japan longer to get to it).  ANZAC is the only player in the Pacific that can seriously harass Japan long-term since it would take Japan the longest to utterly crush it.  Still, it isn’t hard for Japan to minimize their threat by forcing them to fight for their Outer Island Defense NO or even doing spoiler attacks, dropping an odd Infantry or two into West/North Australia to distract.  ANZAC has to make constant choices between buying ground units to beat off a sudden invasion or building up navy to be ready to hit once Japan overextends.  If Japan makes the mistake of leaving too little presence in the DEI, then ANZAC is going to start cranking out ships.  They need to be forced to invest in ground and TTs as long as possible.

  I don’t think losing Yunnan J1 is a game over for Japan.  In order for the Allies to really capitalize on it, the UK would have to DoW on UK1/2, which I still think is a terrible idea (although I’m open minded, I might be convinced otherwise).  If Japan has been keeping their forces together the Allies will find very few targets in an early DoW, and to me the sacrifice of +20 income for the US for 1 - 2 turns isn’t worth it.  Given that 10+ planes are going to be sitting in China, I don’t think the Allies can move enough in there that they won’t just be wiped out J2.  Japan can then just say thank you for having the chance to kill these units sooner rather than later.

  Another footnote to Japan, I’m very surprised that I don’t see the J3/4 India crush in more league games.  I don’t see how the UK-Europe economy can handle keeping Italy down and doing anything to rescue India.

  Now, having just said all this Japan is awesome stuff, I don’t actually think the Axis should be expected to win in the Pacific board.  With optimal play by all around I would expect the Axis to win on the Europe board every time.  Since Japan is potentially much more powerful than Germany (it will hit 70+ income faster than Germany does, even when both sides do well), the USA is almost required to spend everything in the Pacific in order to stave off defeat.  Thus, Japan will probably end up suffering more since the Allies have to choice but to hammer them.  Another comment said this but I wholeheartedly agree: all of Japan’s Pacific foes are so weak that they will crumble much faster than the Allies will in Europe.  Japan’s real mistake comes from trying to crush all these foes at the same time too quickly.

  Moving on to Europe-

  • If Germany spends too much on naval, this can result in a loss.
  • If Germany doesn’t help Italy, this can result in a loss.

  The Axis powers in Europe are basically on a shot clock.  If they miss their big chance and allow the game to continue, then the Allies have an opportunity to win.  But just like in basketball, if they keep calm and just focus on what is important, they shouldn’t miss the shot.  The main mistakes I’m seeing on the German side is sending too few ground units after Russia.  A lot of German players are dribbling out subs or other naval units to be annoying to the Allies, but there is no need for it.  Any time the Allies pose a serious problem at sea, just make a single large buy of navy.  If you hold Normandy you can pop a DD right into the Channel to block a fleet that might be trying to go Gibraltar - Germany or Gibraltar - Norway.

  The German air force should absolutely be used to help Italy as much as possible (unless you went G1).  If you’re just taking a massed stack of units over to Moscow, the Russians are going to just retreat every time anyway, so there is little for the Luftwaffe to do over there.  Wipe out all the Allied ships in the Med, leave somebody behind in Italy to scramble if needed, and possibly land others to defend the Italian stack in North Africa if needed.  There is plenty of time to redeploy them to Russia later for the final attack, or to send some to Germany if you need to guard against an Allied landing, etc.

  At best, it takes the Allies 4 turns from the time they start to prepare an invasion force (from scratch) to the time they finally hit the beach.  If the USA can’t do full spending in the Atlantic because it’s worried about Japan, it will be even longer.  I think this is the most dangerous part of the G1 attack, since it leaves so many Allied warships on the table, the Allies can shave a turn off their invasion schedule.  But again, if Japan is doing the right things, you should still have time.

  I haven’t seen anything in my own games that would lead me to offer conclusions on how much of the Mediterranean territories should be split between Germany and Italy, I’ve seen both extremes.  But if Italy takes all of it, then Germany is very limited in how they can aid the Italians directly, and all of that income is subject to Convoy damage anyway if the Allies are allowed to get the upper hand at sea.  My leaning is that Germany should probably get as much of this income as possible since they want everything to send after Russia.

  Europe is a lot harder to evaluate since I think Germany can make a lot less obvious blunders than Japan can.  But if it seems like Germany isn’t prioritizing ground units, the Axis are undervaluing an early seizure of Cairo, or Germany isn’t helping Italy get their NOs, then the Axis (may) be heading to a loss.  The Axis can lose, but it’s their game to lose.

  this just in -

  Eggman has begun to write a treatise rivaling that of the venerable “cow”.  it’s gonna be a page turner!

[gamerman01]

Bold, why in the heck did you use the “quote” feature on that?

It is really fun to write about Axis and Allies strategy - it really is.

I read about 6-8 different sentences of the treatise as I skimmed over it, and pretty much everything I read was, I’m sorry, completely ridiculous.

With all due respect, Eggman, could you spare us your wisdom until you at least have a winning record?

[boldfresh]

@Gamerman01:

I read about 6-8 different sentences of the treatise as I skimmed over it, and pretty much everything I read was, I’m sorry, completely ridiculous.

my eyes glazed over after i read the first three sentences…  no offense eggman, i have ADD.

[gamerman01]

@Boldfresh:

my eyes glazed over after i read the first three sentences…  no offense eggman, i have ADD.

Says the guy who scored all 6 A+'s at the University taking difficult pre-med classes

[boldfresh]

@Gamerman01:

@Boldfresh:

my eyes glazed over after i read the first three sentences…  no offense eggman, i have ADD.

Says the guy who scored all 6 A+'s at the University taking difficult pre-med classes

must be what led to my ADD.  :lol: :lol: :lol:

[gamerman01]

@ Bold - Now that makes sense.

Eggman, on the other hand……

It’s a good thing you have an open mind, because until it’s changed you’re not going to stop losing.  Maybe you should study a couple of games between tier 1 players

India and ANZAC are NOT pushovers in the first couple rounds for Japan.  Their capitals are jusssst 1 space too far away…  Japan can build naval bases but they’re still just too far away for a good strike, because a destroyer blocker stops them every time.

I rarely lose India, and have never lost Moscow a single time yet.  I have never lost New South Wales.  I have given away London on a silver platter and am VERY confident I will easily win that game without getting London back, maybe ever.

Now I am intrigued by one of your points.  Perhaps everyone’s playing the Axis wrong.

[Eqqman]

@Gamerman01:

With all due respect, Eggman, could you spare us your wisdom until you at least have a winning record?

I don’t see why that would be any kind of requirement.  People with an even lower record than mine feel pretty comfortable posting their advice without anyone telling them they have to prove themselves.  And in a different post, Zhukov44 brought up the old saw about learning more from your losses than your victories.  In that regard, I have plenty to offer people who don’t want to repeat my mistakes.

I hope you can see that your statement doesn’t make much sense.  Will I earn the right to post if I focus my efforts at beating the people on the bottom of the rankings list just to get my win ratio over 50%?  Logically, that is what your implying but I’d like to think you don’t really mean that.

Keep in mind that it is also very easy to find things that went wrong.  If I lose, I’m not under any illusions why.  The real challenge comes from finding the strategy that doesn’t rely on I hope my opponent makes a mistake.  This is why I’ve been focusing on playing the Allies exclusively- their optimum strategy remains a puzzle to be solved.  Given that the content in the forums discussing Allied strategies is far weaker than that for Axis strategies, I would think that the current state of play for this game bears me out.

[Eqqman]

@Gamerman01:

India and ANZAC are NOT pushovers in the first couple rounds for Japan.  Their capitals are jusssst 1 space too far away….  Japan can build naval bases but they’re still just too far away for a good strike, because a destroyer blocker stops them every time.

Perhaps, but that is a far cry from being overpowered.  Unless the UK decides to DoW on turn 2, Japan can sail right past their blockers and still hit India J3.  Since I don’t see this happening in a lot of league games, I can admit there must be some drawbacks to this attack that I’m not seeing.  But even if you don’t do the India attack, too much of their income can be taken away with Convoy damage for them to pose a major threat.

You also don’t need to take Sydney to keep ANZAC down.  Holding Malaya and threatening a landing will force them to make trade-offs on how they spend their money that keeps them down in the short-term.

[Karl7]

The Problem with Japan can be simply put as thus:

To destroy ANZAC and/or India decisively and hold the DEI, Japan must push major forces south, which will allow the US the opportunity to move right into sz 6 and then strangle Japan to death.  :-P

In this regard, the favorite US strategy of late is fire off fighters from WUS to land on CVs from hawaii to hit sz 6. Something tells me the designers didn’t think of that.  Or maybe they did?

[gamerman01]

It was not a requirement, it was a suggestion that I thought logical.  I did not mean any offense, and no, I don’t think you should worry too much about your win/loss record and pick weaker players to prey on, you’re right.  I think you should just be maximizing your own enjoyment, and I understand that sharing your experiences, strategies, and opinions are a big part of the enjoyment.

Keep in mind, however - As Dave Ramsey (financial guru) says, you don’t ask a fat person how to lose weight.

[gamerman01]

@Karl7:

The Problem with Japan can be simply put as thus:

To destroy ANZAC and/or India decisively and hold the DEI, Japan must push major forces south, which will allow the US the opportunity to move right into sz 6 and then strangle Japan to death.   :-P

In this regard, the favorite US strategy of late is fire off fighters from WUS to land on CVs from hawaii to hit sz 6. Something tells me the designers didn’t think of that.  Or maybe they did?

Karl, you are sounding real smart today.  Probably has something to do with hitting 20 games this year plus your experience in the past.

I’m DANG sure the designers didn’t think of A LOT of things!!!

[Eqqman]

@Karl7:

The Problem with Japan can be simply put as thus:

To destroy ANZAC and/or India decisively and hold the DEI, Japan must push major forces south, which will allow the US the opportunity to move right into sz 6 and then strangle Japan to death.   :-P

In this regard, the favorite US strategy of late is fire off fighters from WUS to land on CVs from hawaii to hit sz 6. Something tells me the designers didn’t think of that.  Or maybe they did?

The problem I’ve had with moving into SZ6 is that you can still get hit with a Japanese counterattack if they parked off SZ36 with the Naval Base.  If you didn’t also secure Korea to give your fighters a landing spot, you could be in for a rough time in the battle if you’re keeping Carriers alive longer than you might otherwise.  Japan can also just leave a ship or two hanging out in SZ6 so they have the option of hitting your Carriers with Kamikazes if you move in and weren’t clever enough to avoid it.  I ran into this problem in my second game with Jeff28, no matter what I bought for the USA Pacific fleet he would still have >90% odds to wipe me out if I moved into SZ6, which he basically left empty.  It takes significant naval spending to be able to survive being hit with the entire Japanese air force + navy in one battle.  In that time you’re basically giving Germany a free pass on the Europe board.

[Karl7]

Yeah, but while Japan is dicking around in sz6 Anzac and India are running wild in the DEI or SEA.

[gamerman01]

Let’s take the strategy discussion elsewhere, please.  There are plenty of boards for that.
Go to the Global 1940 forum and start a topic there.

[gamerman01]

Updated

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[gamerman01]

Seems I miscounted a bit before…

Allies 59
Axis 62

Completed Axis wins by tier to compare to Allied wins by tier

For example: tier 1 players have taken the Axis 52 times and the Allies only 41 times.
tier 1 players have a .788 win pct with Axis and .756 with Allies

Any way you look at it, in the 121 games played so far it looks like each side is getting their share of the wins (almost all games have had small Allied bids)

Updated with the latest Eggman result

AA Gamer’s League Rankings.xls

[Cow]

I am proud to be the worst tier 1 player. :)  I was axis both times against 15 bid allies.

I think 3-11 is fine.

[Cow]

I am playing from high bids down to low bids. Going to help facilitate this bid gathering data.