Balancing OOB Global

OOB wasn’t actually all that bad. Axis had to be aggressive and take London or Russia sooner rather than later, that’s all.

USA had insane income, but USA is really far away.

Here is what typically happened. Mexican standoff in pacific. Stalemate in Europe as italy was sunk super easy, uk probably liberated by then, USA showed up and is shipping men into europe.  Germany either took russia (in which case axis will win the game eventually) or Germany has a strong foothold.

So it either ends up in a stalemate, allies income too high for axis so allies win, or axis rushed and won.

@Xandax:

My main issue with OOB is the inability to hinder the US income in most any plausible scenario which becomes a factor when USA enters the war.
Giving any significant bid to the Axis would tip the scales too quickly in the early game, and allow them to rush Russia (for example) too fast.

I play mostly OOB as well, simply because the Alpha rules IMO changed fast and kept being in some inconsistent state, so things kept changing. Then it was easier to deal with the hardship and try to beat the odds in OOB IMO. :D

I play OOB but with no NOs except 30 to USA. USA should be a monster because that is the way it was. Anyways, it plays well IMO.

17 bid.

ask a question get a simple answer. 14-20. very similar to the bidding pattern of classic.

@Flying:

I play OOB but with no NOs except 30 to USA. USA should be a monster because that is the way it was. Anyways, it plays well IMO.

Um, I am quite sure that multiple of the NOs help the axis at the start. And with no NO’s italy is doomed to basically pass 20

Yeah, NO’s, while encouraging some repetition in strats, are needed.

I think that the only mayor problem with OOB is that there is no way for allies to prevent Germany taking London unless odd luck, thus giving Germany and Italy too much free space to grow. Allowing countries which capital is lost colecting IPCs and building units is the way to balance this. This is the only must change

In Asia, Japan could abuse their excess of aircraft sending most of them to land before USA can go war, so Japan could smash China, India and Siberia and then, by round 4, bring most of planes to east and fight the yankee navy. AA guns and a non-agression rule will solve this. So in resume I’d suggest these changes:

• Powers act normally (collect money, build stuff, research, etc) after losing their capital but you can still stole the money when you take a capital (this change is vital)
• 1 aa gun for China (Szecwhan probably), 1 aa gun for Siberia (Amur), 1 aa gun for ANZAC (NSW) (optionals)
• Non-agression pact USSR-Japan (choose the one you like more, being mongolians, free IPCs or the attacker pays 15-20 IPCs) (this change is optional but probably needed)
• Maybe you should give Axis the victory if they take 8 cities in Europe map or 6 cities in Pacific map. Allies win taking 14 VCs. (I think this is not really needed unless the rivals are too stubborn with ignore Japan strats, and even then, San Francisco is nearer to Tokyo than Moscow is…) (optional)
• And of course, delete restrictions of movement for China (China should not enter USSR unless that Japan and USSR are at war or unless that western Axis attack China) (this one is optional as well, but will save you from odd glitches in the long run) (Gamerman says that this one is my pet peeve  :lol: )

17, the bid follows classic bid. you can go 20-13… jeez

STOP MAKING THIS MORE COMPLICATED. HE ASK SIMPLE QUESTION AND YOU MOCK HIM. THEN WONDER WHY FORUM HAS ONLY THE SAME PEOPLE.

But yeah I’d house rule against japan cheese and give axis a bid. It’s simple, you move in allies sz territories you declare war. thada!