[Global 1940] One rule to balance it?

@general-6-stars

As I said, there are different views as the chapters are written by different professors. The one by David Glantz is most interesting. He says that had Germany taken Moscow, the this is how the general sequence in the east would have transpired:

Soviet counteroffensive in the central USSR, winter 1941.
German offensive in the southern USSR, summer 1942.
Soviet counteroffensive in the southern USSR, winter 1942.
German offensive in the southern USSR, summer 1943.
Soviet counteroffensive in the southern USSR, summer 1942.

I’m not in the beat position to explain it, but the reason why the general tide would have been similar to history is something like the commanders involved, geography, political considerations, and other factors, regardless of what ifs.

His conclusions at the end of the chapter is that something which the Soviets call “objective reality”, where no single decision made solely for the Eastern Front (example, what if Germany attacked Moscow instead of Stalingrad) could have changed the outcome of the war.

It says that the rapier’s thrust was crucial in the chess like war of North Africa, but in the east, a war waged with meat axes, the thrust only gave a fleeting advantage.

The rest of the book is so good I don’t wanna spoil it to you.

I haven’t read the book

@simon33 I really like Crocketts France 1st idea.Always seems to me that it’s too easy for germany to kill szs110+111+106? as well as taking Paris.Historically,Germany needed the luftwaffe to defeat France.In early june1940 France had just replaced their top commander and was not yet at war with Italy.
I would suggest Frances 1st turn be restricted to non-combat.For their 19ipcs ,I place a TT in sz 93 to start plus 12ipc to spend on units.Keep in mind,not being at war with Italy ,France can pass through or park in szs95,96,97.

@ampdrive

You make a good point about accuracy. However, as much as I don’t care about balance, how could Germany have come (somewhat) close to victory without sinking the Royal Navy? And why does those abilities/advantages not apply in the game?

@crockett36

Exactly. If Germany didn’t come close to destroying the RN, and yet supposedly the ability to do so is crucial to balancing the game, then how come Germany had a chance at winning the war?

@ampdrive

Unnerved on anti Axis imbalance on that idea.

@crockett36

Then why is it so easy? To be honest though, the big gun warships of the RN are of little use if Germany does Sealion. The journey to the Pacific is too long to be a viable option.

@crockett36

Good. How did you house rule that though? What did you change?

This is worth a try imo https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/25000/g40-china-goes-first-in-the-turn-order?_=1666671232242

@crockett36

“Nerfing” Japan makes me afraid for that power.

A simple rule change that would really shake this up (could really tilt it either way) is a guaranteed 1st round of peace. Meaning first round is no attacks but every other phase with same restrictions. I am having a hard time seeing how it would help the Axis more than the Allies but it might.

Another rule that I think can go at least a little ways towards balance is allowing to choose between low luck and full dice before each battle. It really helps the US in the pacific. Goes both ways though but still helps a good Allied player a lot.