Balancing Cruiser (CL) and Battleship (BB) units with other A&A units

Let`s say a word or two about Axis bid strategy in the Balanced mode version of A&A Global.

Usually, players bid for Axis, so well stick to them first. Which nation is the best for giving bid to it? Which are the best bids for each nation? Lets see…

I) Germany

Definitely the best option for the Axis bid. It plays first, it has numerous attack options on it`s first turn, and it has to defend against UK ships and air early on.

What are the best bid options for Germany?

1) A sub (or two)

A sub is the best bid for Germany. Germany faces 5 UK navies that can be striked on G1. Having an extra sub (or two) really helps, especially since 2/5 of that navies do not have a destroyer with them.

2) Land unit/s for striking France

An infantry or artillery in Holland Belgium and/or Western Germany, a mechanised infantry or tank in Germany and/or Greater Southern Germany can really help while attacking Paris on G1.

3) Land unit/s for attacking Russia

If Germany goes after Russia on G1, it is good to have an infantry or artillery in Poland/Slovakia Hungary/Romania.
A mechanised infantry or tank in Germany or Greater Southern Germany can be of help too.
Also an AA gun in Romania would be of help to move it to newly conquered Bessarabia.

II Italy

The next Axis power to which is good to give bid to it is Italy. Why Italy? Because it faces severe threats on land, air and sea from UK eary on. Also, Italy needs more transports and sea units to strike at UK faster and stronger. Let`s see what the best bid(s) for Italy would be…

1) 2 marines

A very good bid that helps Italy to strike Gibraltar, Malta, Crete, Cyprus early on. It also can be used for striking and/or taking (depends on Vichy) territories of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Syria. It gives wideness to the Italy early on.

2) 1 transport, 1 infantry

A similar bid that helps Italy to strike strong early on with more land troops.

3) 1 submarine or 1 destroyer

A ship more can aid in the defense of sz 97 that is sometimes attacked by UK on UK1. It can also help in later Italian moves, both for attacking and defending purposes.

4) Land units to North Africa

An infantry or artillery to Tobruk and/or mechanised infantry or tank to Libya can help a lot to strike Britain strong early on. The unit in Tobruk can also help to defend Tobruk on UK1. That seen, it is a good idea to put an AA gun there, to help defend on UK1, and in later turns, since UK has a powerfull RAF group near.

5) 1 fighter

A decent help from the air in attacking & defending against UK in the Med.

III) Japan

Japan is the last Axis nation that U will be bidding with. But, still it also can benefit from the bid. Japan does not need air units. It does not need more sea units too.

It needs more land units to strike China stronger. So, the bids would be:

1) An infantry or artillery

Put it to Kwangsi and/or Kiangsi to strike Yunnan and Hunan more stronger.

2) A mechanised infantry or tank

Put it to Kiangsu to strike Yunnan and Hunan more stronger.

3) An AA gun

Best to put is to Kwangsi and/or Kiangsu to move it to Yunnan and Hunan and prevent Chinese to take those territories (easily).
It can also be put to Jehol to move to Chahar for the same purposes.

:lol:

@Arreghas:

You are indeed proving to me that changing any rule set is complex indeed and requires very thoughtful analysis.

Yes, that’s quite correct.  An important point to remember is that a complex game such as Global 1940 is similar to other complex devices (such as automotive vehicles): they are systems consisting of multiple interrelated parts which are designed to work together in a particular way and which reflect many design choices and compromises.  Sometimes it’s possible to make minor or even major alterations to some of those components without affecting significantly the performance the overall system, but sometimes even a minor adjustment to a single critical component can wreck the whole thing.  (Take as an example the recent Galaxy Note 7 debacle.  There’s been speculation that Samsung may have changed the electrolyte in the lithium-ion batteries to something less stable, or that it may have gone too far in thinning the separator which keeps the positive and negative sides apart so that the battery doesn’t short-circuit and overheat.)  And design considerations have to take into account the fundamental question of what purpose the system is supposed to serve.  A luxury limousine, a Formula One race-car and a semi-trailer truck are all automotive vehicles, but they’re all optimized to do specific jobs and they all place different leves of emphasis on different capabilities such as passenger comfort, baggage / cargo-holding capacity, speed, fuel consumption efficiency and so forth.

Hello Kreuzfeld.

Thanks for the comments and interest.

Here’s what I’ve found in the 6 or 7 games we’ve played so far with this method.

@Aircraft Carriers: Actually, the games we have played so far did not have restrictions on what friendly nations planes could be on what aircraft carrier.  For instance, ANZAC could launch and recover combat move aircraft from a UK or USA carrier.  Carolina made this suggestion and we are going to incorporate it into our “Axis & Allies & Comintern” House Rules the next time we play in early May.  The reasons are the following:

Allies get a little too much of an advantage in the Pacific if they coordinate right.  ANZAC, being basically land-locked if Japan plays right and gets lucky, can just dedicate their IPC’s to pumping out Fighters and TAC’s …. This free’s USA up to just make CV’s and not worry so much about the planes.  …  Limiting CV’s to just being able to launch Combat Moves with their country’s plane balances this

It could also be argued that having carriers launch attacks with their own country’s planes is more historically accurate.  For sure, USA planes were used on UK carriers.  And I wouldn’t be surprised if USA crews even manned some of the planes (that is a TOTAL guess though).  However, most of the time crews trained long hours with the country and navy that they were going to be flying for.  Therefore, the CAG’s were of the same nation as the CV from which they were operating on.

@Casualties:  Any basically “random” method can be used, including all of the one’s you mentioned.  I gave one example and also left it open to other methods that different groups prefer.

@Analysis & Advantage  I fully agree with you.  The GREATEST advantage to this system is for the Allied and Russian players for sure.  In fact, I think it makes for basically balanced game.  The 6 or 7 games we have played so far have had both Axis and Allied/Russian wins.  ….  Here are some additional things we have noticed:

Like you mentioned, Italy/Germany Can Openers are eliminated on the Eastern Front, greatly helping the Russians.  This is SOMEWHAT mitigated by the new rule that doesn’t allow Allied Forces to step on Russian Controlled territories (and vice-versa) to reinforce Russia in the North … But the overall advantage definitely goes to Russia on this one

It is easier for Italy and Germany to combine forces and hold the Med via Gibraltar.  UK –> USA won’t be able to do Can Openers there.  This lets Italy dig into Africa a little bit more.

ANZAC doesn’t get side-showed as easy.  They can pump out subs, destroyers and maybe even the odd cruiser and incorporate them into the UK or USA fleets.  (historically accurate)

I could go on and on … but basically, “It’s a whole new way at looking at the day.”  :-D

Here are my house rule suggestions for economic balance in Global…. it’s not much, but that’s the point.

#1. The $5 Russian National Objective for no axis ships in the Norwegian convoy zone #125, control of Archangel, and no allied units on originally owned Russian territories has now been modified and split into 2 different National Objectives for Russia.

Lend Lease

$5 National Objective for no Axis ships in the Norwegian convoy zone #125, and for control of Archangel.

National Prestige

$5 National Objective for at least 1 Russian warship on the board, and no Allied units on any originally owned Russian territories

#2. Two significant National Objectives that were dropped after Alpha +3 have now been reinstated.

Merchant Shipping Protected
#1. 5 IPCs for the United Kingdom if the Atlantic is free of German submarines.

Germany controls London
#2. 5 IPCs for Germany if they control London.

#3. When the United States declare war, they are automatically given the War Bonds technology for free.

Is this giving to much to the Allies?

Lol no I think you misunderstood me. I ment do you think we could make rules for a game like this even if it never happened. Like I said you could just commit small numbers and pieces to the game.

This commander idea must be kept SIMPLE. As I have posted previously the commander should be tactical and have special abilities within the army he is in or the fleet. The best way is to have him with target ability for certain units. We have used the tactical bombers, the tanks, the battleships and the cruisers. Also the commander should have the retreat option when defending. This has worked well for our games. We have been giving three commanders to each major nation on the setup. Maybe four or five would work but we have never tried that many. My new Italian units will be here soon and they include commander units

This is what I have come up with:

Rommel allows all panzer and infantry divisions in the same province to travel +1 and two divisions gain +1 attack.
Zhukov gains one free infantry division each turn in the province he is in.

Montgomery’s troops gain +1 defense and two or less tank divisions gain +1 attack.

Patton’s advantage is that three or less land units a battle gain +1 attack.

Yamamoto’s fleet can move +1 and airplanes on carries in his fleet can go on kamikaze missions with +1 attack. (In a kamikaze mission, the plane can go its full range and is lost after attacking.)

A general is dead if his unit is killed.