Limited run??Axis & Allies Europe 1940

@Alpha-Admiral Germany goes before Japan, so if you attack USA with germany, the benefits of waiting with Japan (low US income) are a bit scrambled. Also, you may not be able to kill the entire UK fleet without sacrificing the precious German battleship if you divert subs to other objectives.

The diplomatic rules in Global 40 give you precious time and space for the Axis to play and cavort all over the UK, France and China. You need to sacrifice that advantage at a maximum cost to the Allies.

I’d agree with everyting said.

I believe that any 2player game should be played with a bid or a handicap based on skill (in a broad sense of the word). We have had players here who believe the axis can’t win, and need a bid of 20. That is probably correct for the way they play the game. That being said, it is an interesting exercise to figure out what the bid would be on an expert level.

One thing that has not been mentioned is the game LL or not?
a LL game has to have a higher bid than a luck game. LL attacks can be optimized a lot better, an a smaller force in needed to ensure a win. Just try to calculate how much you need to be 99 % certain of paris falling in a LL game vs a regular game

I’m still not sure that this aspect of the tech discussion belongs here since it is more about a house rule but I mentioned how we have developed a progressive valued chart  for the techs but I didn’t give the limitations of attaining the tech.  A tech die is three (3) IPC’s every tern a player wants to roll for a tech.  A neutral nation can roll one die only per rounf thatthey are neutral.  That is three IPC’s per round.  If a tech has a R&D value of 25, it may take a nation at least 5 rounds to develop that tech.  That is at least 15 IPC’s in order to develop a tech.  A nation that is war may invest in three dice (9IPC’s) per rounf in order to develop three different tech.'s at a time.  They can not be applied to a single tech but must be spread over the three techs to be develpoed.  It can get expensive but the thought process is this; a country will invest in R&D to develop a specific technology.  It will not just through money at a problem and randomly hope to get a good result….governments maybe but not gamers.  If and when we play with technology, I prefer this R&D chart.  The Anniversary/Global chart and dice costs can definately thow the balance of the game off.  Last game I played of global 1940, theAmerican player shelled out alot of IPC’s on tech.  It put his production behind and the other allied player had to really hold on for the US to catch up but the US player was able to develop long range heavy bombers and cheaper ships.  It was devostating to the the axis player (me) because he then went dark skies on the axis and it became a war of attrition that I could not repulse effectively.  I have to take this moment to say I love Narvik.  Direct and to the point.  Tech is fun sometimes but there is alot to just playing the game.

That is why I prefer to incorporate the “no more than one unit per territory or seazone” rule.

I think the great variation that bids provide allow for great replayability. Who wants a game that always depends on what kind of dice Germany got G1? Pick sides, set up the board, roll a couple dice, quit. Blech.

To your point about a 12 being too much, though - only 1 game has been finished in the league this year with a bid over 11, and the axis(-15) won.

Most good players are not going to give their opponent more than 10, is what we’ve been seeing in the league results. And among what appear to be opponents of close skill level, the Allies have won at +9, +10, +8, +10, +9, and +8. And the Axis have won at -9, -15, -7, -9, and -11. Yes, that’s a small sample size, but it seems to be pretty even.

I think the best judges of when a game is fair and balanced are the players. As you can see, over half the games have been run at an 8 or 9. And 2/3 of those games have been won by the Allies. You have people that don’t want to give bids too big, people that acknowledge the Axis has an advantage, people that don’t really want to play the Allies - it’s an interesting and fluid dynamic that always seems to find its own level.

The size of the map is getting a bit better with each installment.  You used to be able to fly a bomber from Omaha or Texas to Moscow!!!

I agree with Frank T and Brado… but I build 7 more transport during G2 (which brings them to a total of 10). Italy must focus on Egypt at first (taken at I2) and then hold strong Gibraltar to sceal Med Sea and US footstep to Europe.

Battle for Russia will be long and with a slow start, but will succeed. You have to cause many frontline… and Japan should attack Russia the very first turn.

@ Rock’n Roll : Yes, I won 4 times here…

@Pelanderfunk:

I like the early attacks against the US, but it looks like Russia was becoming a problem.

The attacks against America were half baked - I was still at the drawing board but jumped in anyway.

A bigger problem than Russia is UK in Africa, the Mediterranean, and South East Europe.  If Italy were an asset to Europe and not a liability, I think I could deal with the Russians.  In fact, if I could lock UK out of the Med (without extra effort from Japan or Germany) I would combine the Japanese North American campaign with Sea Lion and be sitting pretty.

What to do about that pesky Med…

In my first Europe game, the Allies won after 16 rounds.  When the US liberated France, giving them 4 extra men and their economy back, they did help by attacking and taking Western Germany.  The next round, USA was able to move through Western Germany and take Berlin.  Germany was not able to properly defend it’s territories, even Germany itself, because of so much stuff committed to the Eastern Front.  Moscow did eventually fall, but it took Germany a long time to get there and cost them a ton of units in the process.  Plus, the very round Moscow fell, the US took Berlin.
One strange thing about this game was that London was never liberated.  Once Germany took London, they built a strong force of infantry there and the US decided to bypass that to take Rome, liberate Paris and go after Berlin.  The German navy was decimated and the Atlantic was totally controlled by the US so all those troops on England were pretty much stuck there.  On the very last round, after taking Berlin, the US had enough forces left in the area and they liberated London.  Technically the game was over though because the final German round to see if they could retake their capital had passed.  It was really impossible for the Germans to retake Berlin because what was left of their forces were way east in Russia.
In my second Europe game, the Axis won in 8 rounds.  So with those two games, it kind of goes along with history.  Shorter game/war, Axis victory.  Longer game/war, Allied victory.  One big thing that did the Axis in was that they were planning on a short, quick war to achieve their goals.  When the war dragged out, the greater Allied industrial and mineral resources told.