Are these latest changes the last?

I know how to read, SH, I do it for a living.

I’ve played a lot of games, and since I’d played Axis and Allies before, I didn’t read the rules at all.  I was much more interested in playing a game, 90% of which was already familiar.  We consulted the rules when there was confusion, which was often.  Reading the rules in detail first might have been helpful, but it still didn’t answer most of the 10% of questions that come up as exceptions, nuances or rare situations, which is why I read these boards.    Sure there was plenty of slop and mistakes, but I admit when I’m wrong and try to do it correctly going forward.

@Argothair:

My play group is very considerate about trying to (a) identify when the game isn’t much worth playing anymore, and then (2) accurately describe the likely outcome of the game.

Right, like there are no hard-and-fast rules about “oh, you lost your capital, or you lost Cairo, or you’re making 30 IPCs less per turn, so it’s game over.” Instead we look at the board and try to see if there are battles or campaigns coming up that are likely (>10%?) to make a dramatic impact on the state of the game, especially campaigns where the underdog is going on the offensive, or where the apparent favorite is in danger of being pushed back if they lose a key attack. E.g. it matters a lot whether Germany has one stack next door to Moscow, with nothing to reinforce it if that stack is destroyed, vs. a steady stream of reinforcements and a huge stack next to Moscow. In the former case, Moscow could recover if it fends off a German battle with 80% odds to take Moscow. In the latter case, even if Moscow pulls out that 20% from the dice, they will still have 80% odds to die one turn later, so it’s not a big deal. The former position is interesting and worth playing on if we can manage to find time for a second session; the latter position is not interesting and the game should be called.

When we call a game, we don’t insist on unconditional surrender. Instead, we try to agree on what the game looks like. For example, “the Allies are way ahead, but the Axis still have a slight chance.” Or, “It’s hard to say for sure who’s winning, but it looks like the Axis have a slight edge.” Sometimes we don’t always precisely agree – one side might claim the Allies are ahead by “a little” while the other side might claim the Allies have “a significant lead,” but so far we have always at least agreed on which side has the edge, even if not by how much.

Hey!  I am in your play group and what you are saying is…. basically right.  Although have we played global together?  Don’t recall honestly

@iceage36:

Also i would say i lose about 6-8 original russian infantry who cant retreat back fast enough from the tanks…

I am sorry for being harsh. If he does not attack until G2, this number should always be 0. The only reason for it not to be is if you use a few inf to screen.

All you really have to do is to make your infstacks so big that his tanks are not strong enough to attack them. This is actually not that difficult to do against the force germany can have in russia on g3-g4.

I don’t know exactly what you are doing wrong, but I am pretty sure you are not conducting an effective retreat and not having enough art to present a real danger for a counterattack (which should stop the german for at least 1 turn.

when UK needs USA to stave off Europe disaster or 2) once China and Aussie and UK-India are able to contain what’s left of Japan

zhukov sums up the KJF strat scenarios.

@Redjac:

Commander Jennifer,

How do we check on your games? Where are they?

Redjac

On these forums in the play games section.

Round 4 with Corriganbp, I have England and India and a large show of force down in the DEI for Japan.  He’s got infantry in China, but that does not bother me.  They are not getting reinfroced, they cannot take a VC and I am already close to a VC win for Japan.  Figure another 3 rounds and it’s lights out for the Allies.  (He evacuated the Pacific in hopes of being able to liberate London.)

By 1943 Russia had 2-5 times as many tanks as germany on every front. 2-10 times as many planes. 2-5 times as many artillery pieces, and 2-5 times as many infantry units. Remember Germany had to send 15-20 % against the allies in the west. Norway, france, Homeland Germany, Denmark, and other occupied states, while as Russia had nearly all of its forces Against Germany since Japan was NEVER going to attack russia after it had previous battles against Russia and saw it was hopeless as well as Japan had its hands full against the other Allies. This is just Russia VS. Germany. The allies (UK, Canada, and US) had 10 times as many tanks as Germany and 10 times as many aircraft. Japan was equally screwed. US built over 100 Carriers in WW2. Japan had a total in the 20’s, but never at one time due to battle losses. The US built over 1,300 warships. Japan could never have handled this. No matter what you say the Axis had about a 5% chance to win WW2. this only if Moscow would have gotten taken, but if you read military history you will see that this probably wouldn’t have mattered anyway seeing as how Russia moved its factories back into Siberal in the Ural mountains region. Germany never could have taken Russia due to Russia’s huge size as well as huge manpower advantage, industrial advantage, only one front to deal with, and the fact that their front lines were in Russia meaning tanks and airplanes could drive and fly strait into the battle off the assembly line. While as Germany’s front lines in 1942 were far from Germany’s industry. If the game was ever played to history allies would win 98 percent of the time with two equally skilled players IMO. This is why the game is made to recreate history sort of, while being playable so that both sides have an equal chance of winning.

Had have only 2 global games so far…  but both have been Allied victories.  I have yet to play the Axis as of yet.  both times Berlin fell because A. Demark was lightly defended once the Americans and British had fleets.    and B.  Berlin was lightly defended because all resources Axis resources were in Belgium, Normandy ,  and the eastern front.

When I play the Axis I think I need to make sure I can counter any land invasion in force rather than straight coastal defend.

I think that a Good Soviet Player will definitely defend through turn 4 when the US is in the war in Europe or at least has a fleet in SZ 109 or SZ 110.  I’m not sure that the balance with Japan is all that good since an experienced player can do so much damage with 19 planes in Alpha 2.  But since Japan is so far away from the Soviet union and the axis players waited till turn 4 or later to attack the soviet union,  my view of balance with the Japanese is tainted.

Seems extremely hard to get the Axis to defeat the allies unless they roll extremley well whereas the Allies can roll badly again and again and still pull it out.  This could also be the relationship between IPC’s as the Allies definitely can waste units and rebuild especially the Americans.

I really don’t like the NO’s for America so much.  its just too many NO’s for the US that are very difficult for the Axis to hit.  Maybe remove the Central /Western/Eastern 5 IPC NO .

Again we’ve only done 2 Global games so far.

it looks good i set up,and played a few rounds against my self,it seems balanced,and it looks like sea lion is possible,one more quick tweak and we will be there