AAA Global Alpha+2 - IPC Record Sheet and .doc of setup/rules

@Mursilis said in [House Rules] The 20 IPC Question....:

@barnee
Well if you use the Tamvaan mode PLUS you make the cruiser cost 12, able to transport 1 infantry and A4 and D4 when paired with a BB you could balance out both germany and japan since you slightly buff the Soviets and anzac enough to counter Japan.

Yea I like the idea of taamvan’s mod because it doesn’t change much. I think I’ll make the NOs except for lenningrad a $3 option. Give some more flexibility with it.

Is that what you’re trying now ? My initial thought is that D4 might be too powerful, as my impression is the defensive fleet usually has the advantage.
I’ve never tried it though.

Only made it a couple rounds in my test game before I decided on another approach : ) so haven’t really got much action with A4.
Decided to let planes target capital ships before regular combat starts. Didn’t seem right that AA shooting at them and they just gotta take it heh heh.

Anyway, let me know if you want a triplea option for testing.
Rock On :)

Thanks again for thinking about my question!

BH

@ItIsILeClerc:

@theROCmonster:

Don’t know why anyone would play a game in revised to 8 VC’s. This seems impossibly easy for the axis to do.

How big of a bid do you think the axis would need in a world domination game? maybe a bid that keeps the Italian fleet alive?

Don’t think the axis need a bid for this in 2nd edition.
IMHO: with the other axis strategies not so much (a VC-hunt from the start), but definately with an economic  domination strategy, the axis are very hard to defeat already! In game turns anyway, because this kind of strategy requires 20+ turns to beat (if at all possible). During the first 10 turns or so, the axis at least equalize in economy and TUV on the board but more likely will leave the allies far behind in both aspects.
AFAICS, the only way the allies can maintain rough economical parity with the axis is to go KJF and this will cost them Moscow big time, seriously endangering Cairo later on (or London, or both for that matter).

Because I don’t like the fact that the majority of the axis strategies already require the allies to resort to this ‘KJF thing’, I have never explored this beyond my typical J1DOW response (which indeed already is very Japan heavy).

I’m not saying that the axis will actually win if they leave the allies behind both in income and TUV on the board, because there is also something like where all that TUV is positioned. Are the allies able to once again stabilize the economical imbalance and if yes, will that be lasting…

…Anyways, for me personally, about 15 turns of playing A&AG40 is my tolerance-limit for this game. So with this kind of axis play we always end up with calling it a draw unless the majority agrees that the situation is easy enough to predict a winner.

Ya, that is the problem with a really competitive global game. Most of them go over 15 rounds, at least in LL. In a game where VC’s don’t matter it would take forever to win as allies. You are right that the axis will be ahead, or even, after the fall of Moscow if you are going KJF. The thing is once US gets a large enough fleet majority over Japan the TUV swing will be massive. It would be something like 700 in TUV lost with Japan if you completely defend against US. Even with a KJF you should still be able to easily hold Moscow till turn 9. Also in a game where VC’s don’t matter I think it is always best for Japan to attack T3, unless the allies leave it open for a turn 2 attack. This is because Japan needs to kill china and set up in a better position against US. Also US is down 40 IPC’s if you wait till T3.

It would be interesting to see what would be best for allies. KGF or KJF.

Going KGF would leave a super Japan, but he is really out of position. Russia would be immensely powerful because he would be able to get Iraq, Italian somali land, Tobruk, and Libya. This would mean Japan would have a hard time taking Russia, and Germany has no chance to do it. US would be a lot weaker because of all the NO’s he looses in the pacific, and he would have to keep at least 10 infantry in western US to keep Japan honest. Britain would be weaker as well because he wouldn’t have India for very long. Anzac becomes a worthless country that is only building infantry to defend.

Going KJF would leave a super strong Germany that would have a lot of options open to him. Japan would eventually die, but not before doing serious damage. He can still take out India and China and survive till around R10 or so when US’s fleet just becomes too much for him to handle. US would be way more powerful than in a KGF, so when he switched to going against Germany he would have a ton of fleet and would only need to build transports and infantry. He should be making 90+ vs a Germany that is making the same. It would come down to US/UK/Anzac vs. Germany and Italy.

I would probably lean towards going KGF because it allows you to keep Russia, and even if Japan is making 120 PU’s, he is so out of position it would take him forever to take Russia, and by then Germany should be dead.

I don’t think the axis would stand a chance in hell if VC’s were taken off the table, but the problem is what would a fair bid be? Because allowing the axis to bid ships would be too powerful, especially with Japan. That is why I think a fair start would be to allow Italy to have their entire fleet merged to start the game.

What do you guys think?

Yes it was the first thing I printed up to use looking for game aids.

They look really cool.

Everyone kept losing one or dropping them on the floor.
(I dont know how many times someone has picked up their box with the lid on and the bottom tray falls out and spilled the contents all over the place. I even have one friend that keeps finding a Japanese infantry months after we played at his house. :roll:)

We have set up a small separate table to keep our IPC chart away from the game board and for us the larger objectives with token markers sit out on either side of the IPC chart or can be placed next to the actual player needing to keeptrack of their stuff.

I guess this style just meets our individual needs.

Hi All!

In my preparation I always loved having the old setup maps (made by Krieg I believe). As there hasn’t been one availabble for any of the versions after AA50, I decided to make one myself. It has been monkswork (as we say in Holland ). And having one, I asked myself: “Why not sharing it with all of you?”

So: Enjoy!!

SvO

http://www.mediafire.com/?esmhrshz6sjjkk5

With the relative ease of taking London and Calcutta (in opposition to Sydney and Muskva) it seems better to go after England

But beyond that, if you take London, you negate all of England’s income, even if you cannot take the territories!  Worse yet, Calcutta can take stuff and can liberate stuff on the Atlantic map, but can never collect for it, so you’ve effectively, permanently ended England.

Just my current thoughts, I reserve the right to change my mind with little to no notice and for whatever reason I so choose. (Woman’s perogative.)

Right - good clarification.

Yea that was a poor example that I made and poor argument in what I was trying to say.  I’m going to regroup and state my case again……  thanks for all the feed back…