Concerns and Balance Problems with 42.2

@SeaYa quick point of reference. I play test games. So no version, certainly not out of box, is completely baked. And this is proven by 2nd editions and tournament rules. That is why I have been advocating for a governing body for years. Gotta go.

@FranceNeedsMorePower

Go to https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/releases/

Click on the latest version (the top post).

Under “Assets” there should be a set of links. Click on the one that fits your computer (if you use Mac, click on the link with the macos, Windows, the one with windows in it, etc.).

Click on the file in Downloads. It should open up a TripleA downloader similar to the one you used when you first downloaded TripleA. It should open (if there’s an error, it’s probably on your end).

It’s a vast improvement over 2.5 but is very easily navigable.

@grinchveld

the ‘Suggested Topics’ does look like others have come up with similar ideas.

like this from 2015
https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/26036/simultaneous-play-in-opposite-theaters/11

I have not played the versions with more than 5 powers, but I do think the basic idea can work to reduce the number of turns in a round. by changing the turn order.

Implement after the 1st round or 2, to keep positioning balanced.
Depending on the balance, some small advantage for the power who gets skipped.

Then powers on the same side who have consecutive turns may all go together as long as you break the combat moves along the original order (from the perspective of the attacked)

Breaking the combat into multiple rounds does seem to be the organizationally new thing.
(or at least I haven’t found someone say it that way on this site yet)

For info we played twice with this rule and the result is 1/1 … mmm …  
Maybe it’s because we are not much experienced and we donno how to play the allies the best way as all newbies?

Anyway this “Rounded IPCs” option rule seems to balance the game and we’ll keep on testing it! If it comes around 50/50 on the long run = Perfect … But if it comes around 55/45 for the allies (with better allies moves by more experienced players) = Let’s say it’s a more historical tendency and I feel like it’s normal for the Axis player to be the underdog trying the challenge to change history!

And maybe the point is that as a frenchman I’m not too much fan of the Axis … Ha Ha!

National Objectives

Germany NO
+5 IPC’s not at war with spain 5

+5 IPC’s atleast 1 german land unit is in egypt

+5 IPC’s germany controls Denmark Zweden norway and finland

+2 IPC’s germany controls Iraq

+2 IPC’s germany controls Persia

+2 IPC’s germany controls North west persia

+5 No allied warships in the Mediterranean sea

+5 if the Axis control at least 3 (Gibraltar,S-france,Greece,Egypt

Russia
+9 IPC’s if russia controls Novosibrisk and is no longer neutral

+5 IPC’s SZ125 is free of allied warships and they control archangel

+3 for every caputered territory ,Turkey,West India,Egypt, saudi arabia

US
when at war
+25 IPC’s if your control all of its orignal territories

UK
+5 IPC’s if your control all of its orignal territories

Italy

Spain
+?

I read numerous posts about historical rules like a separate Canada and rules for Vichy (just to name those two)

Since most of you seems to agree that the game is in favor of the axis, how do you (re)balanced the game if you use those two rules(canada and vichy) or any other one that sesns to slow down allies or advantage axis ?

ok lets do it.

@Imperious:

+++++ Then i feel we should use the same pattern in AARHE to fit with LHTR. The language should be similiar so as not to confuse. Please modifiy this throughout the text.

Ok.

The diplomacy modifier of -3 was too much and leads to many neutrals converting too fast.

Yeah I can imagine.
Thats hitting on 4 or less, which is 66%.
Allies has 4 dices per turn.