Good point re expansions vis a vis basics, but it still begs the question why did they give germany 5 IPC armour? Variance makes great points regarding the numbers and you’ve made good ones regarding the extras for the Soviets (2 IPC infantry, new ICs). Overall though, I am not too sure about scraping the 5 IPC German tanks due to the reasons given above. Heck, I’d even go for cheaper/better Soviet artillery as suggested.
Have you tried a game using the changes you suggest? It’d be interesting to see the effect.
Maybe try 3 major, 2 minor factorys and inf at 2 icps for Russia. It might offset the lower inf total for Russia at start of game. Just gonna have to play test it. I`m working on getting this game setup right now too.
Right on SS,
Please tell us how it goes.
Based on my past experiences inf @ 2 IPC’s has been game breaking the other way…
Germany with its 5 dollar tanks might save 10 to 15 IPC’s in a turn. Russia with $2 infantry, will save $25+ a turn, and have hits to spare.
So I have another alternate proposal.
-Give Russia + 1 minor IC in Stalingrad
-Lose the Russian Berlin NA (As it’s never used).
-New NA - “For the Motherland!” Russia gets +1 infantry during the place units phase each turn at any industrial complex it holds in the following territories (Moscow, Novisibirks, Karelia, Stalingrad), so long as it has held the territory from the beginning of it’s turn. This advantage does not count against maximum production.
This inspires the Axis to go hard and fast for the industrial complex’s, or face that many more infantry a turn. It’s an incentive for the axis to start early, without breaking the game.
If that’s not enough, the NO can be reworded so that Russia gets +1 inf per complex it holds. They may gamble and place extra factories early, as an investment, but may have to pay the price for it down the road.
Only 1 problem remaining.
Germany is still only going to build tanks, because dollar for dollar, Germany gets so much more out of thier tanks. My proposed solution? Bump tanks back to 6, and for each Major factory Germany controls from the start of it’s turn - it receives +1 armor at that location during the place units phase.
Seems like a K.I.S.S. solution to me.
Thoughts?
If you were to give Germany and extra mech at each major instead of an extra tank, then maybe they would build some artillery to go with them to the front and defend the tanks?
What if you try putting a limit on tanks for Germany. Keep it $5 but force them to buy art or mech like Var said. I know its startin to not be K.I.S.S.
ok,
I’ll bite.
Just got a call; a game is on for this weekend. We’re going to try this:
USSR (as per Gargie): 1 infantry per turn at each IC owned since beginning of her turn and a minor IC with AA in Stalingrad.
Germany (as per SS + Variance): 1 mech per turn at each major IC owned since beginning of her turn. She keepers her 5 ipc armour.
We’ll see how it goes.
If you are giving Germany 2x mech. Make sure Russia gets inf for any complexes it builds. Just to keep things even.
Roger that Gargie.
So I have another alternate proposal.
-Give Russia + 1 minor IC in Stalingrad
-Lose the Russian Berlin NA (As it’s never used).
-New NA - “For the Motherland!” Russia gets +1 infantry during the place units phase each turn at any industrial complex it holds in the following territories (Moscow, Novisibirks, Karelia, Stalingrad), so long as it has held the territory from the beginning of it’s turn. This advantage does not count against maximum production.This inspires the Axis to go hard and fast for the industrial complex’s, or face that many more infantry a turn. It’s an incentive for the axis to start early, without breaking the game.
If that’s not enough, the NO can be reworded so that Russia gets +1 inf per complex it holds. They may gamble and place extra factories early, as an investment, but may have to pay the price for it down the road.
I’m going to weigh in on this with a personal “unofficial” response. I agree there could be some improvements made to the Eastern Front. Whether it’s setup changes, rules changes, or strategy changes (or a combo) I do not know yet.
First, I agree with Garg that 2 IPC infantry will break the game too far in Russia’s favor. We can’t go there. But, I’m not willing to throw out Germany’s 5 IPC tanks yet.
I see the above solution as the most sensible to try out. Thanks go out to those guys already trying it. Please let us know what happens!
I don’t like rules that limit production of common units like tanks, so I’m against that. Special units is one thing, but limiting tank buys beyond income and factory limits goes against the feel of the game IMO.
Any “official answer” on a game changer like this will have to be tested and discussed by all 4 game designers before anything is written in stone. But I encourage trying the above as Garg suggested, then telling everyone what happened. Let’s start there.
We will play test the Russian advantage with free inf at Karelia, Stalingrad, Moscow, and Novisibirsk on Feb 22nd. +1 Stalingrad IC at setup.
-No free mech for Germany.
-No extra infantry for new complexes the Russian’s build.
IMO - This will be the best way to square things up. The axis will feel the heat to get pressure on those factories early.
What I always find strange about Russian production is that it’s consistently and permanently lower than Germany’s whereas in the actual war Russian production far outstripped Germany’s. So how about:
Russia keeps on rolling 1 d12 until it reaches a maximum production of 60 (?) or even 80 (?) and adds this result to its production. It’s maximum production of 48 is just far too low, if you ask me…
Well, there is the lend-lease rule. The odds of losing some or all of the IPCs make it somewhat unappealing, but it does give the allies a chance to pull Russia’s bacon out of the fire.
Koba, how did your game go with the changes?
Our group has had VERY bad luck with lend lease.
3 out of 4 attempts have put the money in Axis hands.
1 out of 4 only 20% of the IPC’s got through.
I know that our results have been flukey, but it’s VERY unappealling! LOL.
Yes, personally I’d have the success or lack thereof of lend lease depend on how many German subs are in the Atlantic and whether or not the “Norwegian” Convoy route is occupied by Germany. This would not merely have lend lease depend on luck, but you could actually enhance the chances of it getting through by keeping the Arctic route open as well as keeping the number of German submarines low.
Just a thought…
Hey, Koningstiger,
That sounds like a good idea. How about if there are no Axis subs or surface ships in the convoy box between sea zones 3, 5, and 14 at the start of the US turn, then add two to the die roll when giving lend lease to the Russians? For the British, it would be the convoy box between sea zones 27, 31, and 32.
GREAT CONCEPT GUYS!!!
Going to playtest something like this for sure!
If this is the case, $5 German subs would be a fair trade.
You’re welcome. I tend to be good at making [house]rules, if I may say so myself. Heavily involved in that sense in Tide of Iron.
I was indeed thinking along those lines.
I like this Lend Lease idea too. It gives Germany another option to spend money on potentially helping the balance issues.
