How is the balance with the new Alpha 2 changes? Please give your view.

It might only go to show that this may be the first time a movement philosophy made a game imbalanced for one side, since exact moves are not really what unlocks the key to winning. This only shows that some ideas can’t be understood unless you play the game by adopting this ‘Philosophy’.

I hope Jim can somehow crack the code like he did with Sealion.

Well, in the old days when there were only 6 German territories (Germany, S. Europe, W. Europe, E. Europe, Finland/Norway and Ukraine) detailing exact moves was a lot more simple.  Now adays there are seventeen sea zones; SZ 4, SZ 5, SZ 7, SZ 8, SZ 15, SZ 16, SZ 17, SZ 18, SZ 19, SZ 20, SZ 21, SZ 22, SZ 23, SZ 25, SZ 26, SZ 33 and SZ 35 all as sea zones from which SZ 6 may be attacked, and that doesn’t even factor in the possibility of a Naval base in Alaska or French Indo China.

It is MUCH harder to detail how and where to set up your attacks now.  There is so much flux to deal with, it’s more than a flux capacitor can handle!  (Fine, I didn’t need to add that comment.  I wanted to though!)

Not to mention, with Airbases and aircraft carriers at naval bases, there is a HUGE attacking force that can come from all over the board to attack one sea zone, making it all that much harder to keep an eye on every possible attack situation and contend with it.  It’s one of the reasons I think Japan will get pushed back to SZ 6, it just cannot handle all these ships attacking from different angles with different units coming to help.  Hell, a strategic bomber on Hawaii can attack SZ 6 and land on Guam.  The same bomber on Guam can get to India or vice versa.

So really, giving a detailed list of how to move your units around the board would take WAY too long to write out, let alone, the only people reading it would be hunting for the one inconsistency to take out (probably out of context) in an effort to make it as if someone said something they did not or to impune the character of the person making the detailed post.

Yes, there really are people out there that will take a quote out of context and use it thusly.  I know, hard to believe, but they exist.

@Cmdr:

There is so much flux to deal with, it’s more than a flux capacitor can handle!  (Fine, I didn’t need to add that comment.  I wanted to though!)

oooo flux jokes.

There’s so much flux, you couldn’t solder with it!

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23121.new#new

Empirical evidence.  It is round 8.  Japan is contained.  Italy is a monster, but they are on the way out.  America has put 8 new destroyers in SZ 101 leaving a build of 3 destroyers to replace losses along the picket of Japan.  Part of the Japanese fleet has retreated to the Red Sea, but has been marginalized by British and Australian forces. (neither side can win, which means the allies win, in this situation.)  New Britian has been an absolute THORN in my side, having lost 6 ground units to clear it, but that is no longer an issue and Australia should be getting both their NOs this coming round.

Russia has (miraculously according to some) survived Germany and in the invasion of it’s far eastern territories by Japan.

China is still here with their fighter.

England has been lost to Germany, but again, so what?

Italy controls the Middle East, but that won’t last long, as you can see. (Latest map attached for convenience.)

American forces are in China.  (4 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 3 Armor and 3 Strategic Bombers.)  I could have taken Okinawa and Formosa, but saw no need.  I probably should have taken Formosa at least, but eh.  I didn’t see it until NCMs, so…

Anyway, proof of concept.

Edit: Removing the term “miraculous.”  There was no miracle.  The comment was meant to drive home the point that those who claim Russia cannot survive alone against the Europeans are incorrect.  Germany/Italy control zero Russian territories as of the end of Australia Round 8.

Bo_v_Jen_03_08Daustralia.AAM

Actually if Russia survived only by miraculous dice, its proof that the Axis should have won this game.
Britain is gone and Italy is a monster i believe means that the axis has:
London, Paris, Rome, Cairo, Berlin, Warsaw, Lenningrad, if Germany has absolutely lost in Russia then the allies may be fortunate enough to have won the game, but depending on the exact position it could still be possible.

And indeed if this is the situation then Germany lost the game by not moving south to take Volgograde or at least to threaten it (or if he took Volgograde then he needed to move north to threaten Lenningrad)

Anyway your description of the fight in Russia as miraculous leads me to believe the Axis should have won this game. So its far from a proof of concept.  I’ll try to look at your link later. back to work now :(

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

You should really look at the map to see what’s where.

Germany has:  Berlin, Paris, London
Italy has: Rome, Cairo

There are no Russian territories under German or Italian control.

Japan has been halted and is being pushed back from Northern China and the far eastern Asian territories.  They have a strong force in Yakut, but they cannot advance less it be destroyed.  They have a strong force in Jehol, but again, unless they want it destroyed, they cannot advance.  They are locked in SZ 6 with a small contingent by Iraq/C. Persia defending the Italians.

Essentially, my statement of miracles for Russia was being humorous.  Russia has needed no miracles to keep the Europeans at bay.

I expect, on Germany 9, that Russia will lose: Vyborg, Karelia, Novgorod, Arkhangelsk (maybe), Baltic States, E. Poland and Bessarabia.

Of which, Russia should be able to liberate all by Karelia on their turn without much effort.

Italy (Round 8) will take E. Perisa and NW Persia most likely, facing Russians in Caucasus.

Meanwhile, England is free to roam the Indian Ocean and will be sending forces towards the middle east.  As one can see from the map, the British are not needed in the Pacific, nor are the Australians.

Interesting feature to point out:  With a naval base in W. Australia, Australia can shuttle troops to India in one round.  Eh.  We’ll see if that was a waste or not.

Also, I left all the “bases” the color of the nations that purchased them.  That’s why Java has an orange airbase while being an Australian territory.

In my opinion, Germany and Italy are strong,. but it would be prohibitive for them to stack any territory very heavily in Russia, meanwhile, Japan has been pretty domesticated.  That is, all things considered, Japan is largely not a threat any longer.  Yes, they have the complex in Korea and Manchuria, so they can put 6 ground units (plus whatever the can transport) ashore, but they’re pretty locked in just where they are.  (6 units for Japan but China makes 7 or 8 units.  Should be a wash if you factor in transports and airpower.)

If you look at the land strength you’ll see:

Russia = 434
Germany = 319
Italy = 180, but most of that is in the Middle East right now

That’s a pretty equivalent sized army, considering there were some who said Russia wouldn’t be around by round 9 or 10.

@Cmdr:

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

The claim was that the USSR would fall if Germany threatened Sealion, then contained UK and focused on Barbarossa.  Sealion against a fully defended and prepared England is suicide for Germany.

I hope Jim can somehow crack the code like he did with Sealion.

Problem is there is no code here, like Sealion or the India Crush.

Should I win against Questioneer with a set of moves, I could lose against ghr2 with those same moves.

Since the Axis have the initiative, though, they should be able to set the tone for the game.  I would look at on average when does Japan fall vs when Germany gets its VCs.  I would then look at how to speed up Germany’s capture of VCs, and how to stall the US from taking Japan (a good defense is a good offense).

@Krieghund:

@Cmdr:

You misunderstand, Russia got no miraculous dice, Russia surviving “miraculously” was aimed at those who claimed over and over and over again that Russia would crumple like a house of cards in a tornado under Italy and Germany long before the Americans can come to help.

The claim was that the USSR would fall if Germany threatened Sealion, then contained UK and focused on Barbarossa.  Sealion against a fully defended and prepared England is suicide for Germany.

That was your claim.

There was also the claim that Germany would win with a 100% focused effort against Russia.

However, this claim was that Russia would fall soon after England without American intervention, this is a proof of concept that the Americans are not needed to save Russia from falling and thus, could be used to contain Japan without aiding Russia until that objective was achieved.

To test the 100% focused effort against Russia, I would have to play a game in which that was the method of choice.  My thoughts on the matter (my hypothesis) is that England would thus be in position to stop the VC win, even if Russia fell to the Germans, which I also do not think is highly likely to happen, if the Russian player retreats resourcefully.

As for the threat and then retreat, I don’t think there are a lot of players who would advocate changing horses midstream let alone consider it the wisest of moves.  To adequately threaten sea lion, you really need 7 transports and all your aircraft.  That’s at least a 36 IPC outlay for transports, + 30 IPC for the carrier, destroyer and submarine to make the fleet viable against counter attack from England for a total of 66 IPC.  If you are going to use it, then it’s a wise investment, if you are going to shuttle it around like a 300 pound Helga singing “Ride of the Valkeries” then it may be overkill for what you need to accomplish and thus, wasted IPC.

To adequately threaten Sealion, Germany need only destroy as much of UK’s home fleet as possible and buy navy, including two transports, on turn 1, then keep the Luftwaffe ready to strike.  If England lets down her guard enough, more transports may be purchased later.  If not, then on to Russia.

That’s not really enough to get me to freak and dump ground units into England, however.  I would probably go move to SZ 106 and put units into S. Africa for an African campaign in that case. (Along with ground units in England.)

From there I can put fighters out, destroyers out and armor out, without much worry.  If Germany dumps transports, I have plenty of time to dump ground units and pull fighters back to defend England.  It’s really only the round 2 and round 3 periods that England is vulnerable, after that, England’s pretty well impenetrable, unless the British player makes a mistake and doesn’t run the calculators or failes to see some of the invasion force, which can happen, but that’s more a tactical error, not a strategic one. (defined: Player scrubs a round, tactical error, does not mean his overall strategy was flawed, just his actions for one round.)

The axis player in that game wasted too much effort and IPCs on taking England and then allowed Russia to take Norway. That is an 11 IPC swing in favor of Russia.

Your goal of a kill Japan first, becase there is no real formula, will have a wide range of different outcomes.

Looking at 2 of your recent games, I see the Axis in very different positions, both with the Axis in much better shape than the 1 game you posted as your proof.

I also have been playing a Japan heavy or Japan first game since January, as others that I have seen.  My results have been an advantage to Allies, but not to the point that I would observe that there is an imbalance.

I propose that game results should be reported with what side won, and whether it was a KJF or KGF or a split of effort.

That will be a better indicator than 1 game.

The game I posted was following my concept of going after Japan first.  The rest of my games have the Americans investing on both sides of the map.

Then how many games did you win vs lose as KJF?  KGF?  Split?

The following are games of yours I pulled up off the last few pages of the online games.  I ignored games that were not far enough along, but may have missed others.  Which were KJF?

EMvJen_Game04_AA40_11Hitaly.AAM
JMite_v_Jenn_4_09_Agerm.AAM
Wolf_(Axis)vs_Jen(Allies)_G40A+2_7cJapan.AAM

Only allowed 3 attachments at a time.

Here are more.

Which games should I look at to better understand your KJF?

JMite_v_Jenn_5_08_Agerm.AAM
Bo_v_Jen_03_08Daustralia.AAM
Bo_v_Jen_03_08Daustralia.AAM

Bo vs Jen
Kry vs Jen
the latest JMite vs Jen

Can’t count the game with EM, he’s been unable to post in forever.  Anything longer than a 1 week break in posting and my train of thought gets derailed.  Too many games, lol.  If I don’t get a post up every 48-72 hours, I start to forget where I was going.

The Allies won :that brings the score to 2 to 1 the Allies.  We’ve played about 15 games and I think were all familiar with the game. 
  G1 was France,S.France, Norm. , Fin., Yugo and Bulgaria.R1 was to pull back in the east, build in the west. J1 was hit ,china set up for Phil.,Kwang and step in on vacant Russia.  U.K.1 was to take out the fleet at SZ97, land in Greece consolidate what was left of his fleet. IN.1 build and reinforce Born. ANZAC.1 build and reinforce.  Oops I forgot USA on 1 it was build and deploy,  CV, CA, dd in W.USA. sub’s turn. and 1Inf. in E.USA,  my mistake I moved C.US east and west. IT.1 was to take Gib. sink the FR. fleet try his luck in Greece take Anglo. and advance on Alex.
  U.K. and IT. had scramble orders with Fr. and Germ. help
  G2  BB CA & Tran. went to Gib.Sea zone 105. Sub’s went after Brit. fleet and convoy $ ,finished off Greece and started to prepare for operation Barbarossa.  R2 was to pull back one more in the east, and to set up def. and counter punch where Germ. was going to hit. J2 was to hit Hawaii, take it . Hit the Phil.and take it : Kwang , and take it.USA 2 hit Morocco and took it ,trying to sink the Japan fleet in Hawaii.USA 2 built more Navy and dumped it in the Pacific. CH. 1&2 was to push back on Japan and keep the road open  U.K. 2 was to deal with the Ger. subs,  put some units in Africa and start to build a new fleet.  Move the dd into the Med. from the red sea. IN.2  was to reinforce the Islands of Sumatra and Java and push towards Kwang. ANZ 2 was to go after the Islands for $  and their N.O.'s and to reinforce and add to their navy IT.2 was to take on Egy. and to rid the Med. of Allied ships and start to move toward Russia. Fr2 pulled their dd into the Med. and troop move in Africa
    G3 the BB,CA and the trans along with some planes took Morocco they built to replace their looses and organized the push toward Russia. R3 pulled back one more in the east and set up for the start of the war with Ger. J3 was about the same he came after my fleet on the west coast  and started his battles with India and Anzac for Islands and DEI. U.K.3 was all about fleets to deal with the Axis navies, the same for Anzac IT3 was working on the Med. and Africa money mainly naval units to conquer  the Allies in the Med.
  Sorry USA3 was more fleet in the Pacific and only minimal fleet in the Atlantic. I left C. U.S open it was my mistake because on G4 he landed there took my bonus and the 12$. I was able to take it back and we eventually won the war.
    I dont think Ger. planed on the U.S. it was there and he went for it. Gib. is an important key.  I think he should have spread out more in Russia for the money and if his purchases were a little different it would have been tougher for the U.S.
  Japan likes to keep the U.S. as far away as possible from their homeland at least on our boards.
  I didnt mention to any one at the table that if I were Ger. I was going to try for the U.S.  The Ger. player is always very aggressive and the last time he was Ger. he did Sealion followed by Barbarossa and was successful. I do see that if I get Ger. what I will do differently to hit the U.S.A.
  Sorry for the long post and I had to work from my memory so I cant be real specific on what everybody bought and what the  losses were at each battle. There were 5 at the table. Untill next time

Yes, Japan seems to enjoy the Dutch East Indies zones, perhaps because they keep hoping to take India before America is too much of a threat.

I find a lot of Japanese players are negligent in naval manuevering and often times allow me to park half a dozen submarines off the coast of Japan for quite a few rounds before I find something better to do with them.

I think it’s a mistake, but they claim it’s okay to lose 11 IPC a round to CRD.