bumped so players can look at setup while discussing strategy.
check out the first few posts for pics.
dont forget
The Faq/Errata also made some changes since then.
imperious leader, i recomend that this should become a sticky
How about move the Japanese transport from SZ33 to SZ6. Makes Japan choose targets on a J1 attack, or set up for a J2 attack. Is that more of what you had in mind?
thanks for the idea variable.
this is more what i had in mind. however, moving the transport from sz33 to sz6 does not hinder a j1 dow enough to make a j2 dow equivalent. the transport in sz6 can not reach the dutch territories but still can reach kwangtung, philippines, and french indo china on a j1 dow.
…I’m in the same camp. I don’t think any changes are needed, and I think the J1 attack probably always was what the designers thought would be the best option for the Japanese.
thanks for the replies kaufschtick.
even if the designers thought that a j1 dow was best for the japanese it would be fun for us gamers to have a valid strategic option for when to have a dow.
…My bud Buckeyeboy on here and I have have both commented how historically accurate the J1 attack appears. The US transport getting zapped at Pearl kinda represents the situation after Pearl Harbor without actually having to recreate that disaterous chapter of the war for the US…
remember the game starts in 1940 japan launched their surprise attacks on the uk/usa on the 7th/8th of december 1941. this is about 3 weeks from 1942 almost 2 years after the game starts. for a more historical playout usa would need to take a turn and non-combat move more naval pieces to pearl harbour then japan declares war and takes down more navy in that battle.
all this said historical accuracy is not what the game should be about otherwise japan gets crushed every game, and there is no variability in playouts
it is good to see that some people are finaly starting to make sense. i thought the axisandallies.org community had become stunted with wishful thinking that they want a japan(j) first round(1) attack to be balanced so they keep telling themselves andd posting that the game is blanced.
it is clear to those that have played the game many times that a j1 declaration of war(dow) always leads to a japanese victory.
i think the game is unbalanced in 2 ways. j1 dow is far superior to j2, j3, and j4 dow. and japan is far superior to allies.
the latter issue can be fixed with a bid, like all axis and allies versions before it. the former issue is more difficult to fix.
i have started a thread for possible fixes. unfortunatly for me no one has commented possitivly or negativly on my ideas. wild bill and variable have offered up new ideas aswell, but no one has commented on thier ideas either. robbie358, gharen, and variable have said to ignore the problem by barring a j1 attack. frontovik has said japan needs help on a j1 dow. bube has said all dows are balanced. kaufschtick (who has made many insightful and entertaining posts on other threads) and silverangel surfer have also said to ignore the problem as this is more historical.
depends on what you mean by “won the war”. if you mean land troops in usa and take over government, then no they never had a decent chance.
if you mean capture resources in south east asia, then negotiate peace they did have a decent chance.
like amirable admiral stated, japan could have taken the resources they needed, crushed uk and dutch, and hoped usa would not declare war. this would have accomplished japans objectives and would have been a “win” for japan.
as japan decided to not only take the resources crush uk and dutch they also wanted to keep usa out of the pacific. i believe if japan had been luckier in pearl harbour with the usa carriers location and more effective in damaging pearl by carrying on after the 2nd wave of attack with a 3rd wave destroying pearls infrastructure. more importantly if usa did not crack japans code and midways outcome was as japan planned then japan did have a decent chance, at keeping usa out of the pacific and “win” the war.
triplea is an open source gaming engine.
it has aa42, aswell as classic, revised, and anniversary.
it is free to play by yourself, against a weak ai, or against other gamers from around the world realtime or play by email.
for some reason my posts disapear, so i cant see exactly what i said, but i was just a LITTLE MAD TH
imperious leader deleted your post. you made personal attacks and used derogatory language.
IMO The game is balanced. J1, J2, and J3. I have won with Japan on all DOWs and beat other players on all DOWs.
thanks for your input bube.
however, you winning all the time shows that you are better than your opponents. it does not show that the game is balanced as it is clearly not. but game balance can be shown in another thread.
this thread for players who have played enough to find out that a j1 dow > j2, j3, or j4 dow and the best way to balance the timing of the dow to add variability to the game.
…And Japan has a much better chance of winning this game the “normal” way - beating down China, UK, and then ANZAC. When so many players are struggling to figure out how to win with the Allies, why in the world would you use some hair-brained strategy like this?
becuase it can add variety to your game.
but you are right, this attack only works 35% of the time and even if it does work you are not guaranteed victory, unlike a j1 with kill china and uk first which is a guaranteed win
bumped for mrblack trying to do kuf
sorry i bumped the wrong thread. will bump correct thread
So what your suggesting is a split income. :? :? :? :?
i think britain being forced to spend canadian ipcs in canadian industrial complexs would have added fun logistical problems and spread the battle of the atlantic(more fun)
i am not making a suggestion because the game is finished. this is just my opinion on how the game could have been improved.
it is funny how i am expressing opinions on a game that is not released.
to best represent the battle of the atlantic canada should have been a semi-separate power.
to reflect the huge amount of resources coming from canada to britain, it would be best to have uk spend canadian ipc in canada and ship the units across the atlantic. for this to happen uk would control canadain units so they move and attack together. uk would collect canadian ipcs separetly and be forced to spend the ipcs in canadian ics.
there would be no extra turns slowing the game down, canada would not be a separate player(just too small), no need for the manufactures to produce extra molds, it would just be a way to force the battle of the atlantic from the americas to europe.
unfortunatly this wont be good to house rule as the setup and playtesting was not based on canada as a separate or semi-separate power.
@WILD:
Now I am confused, your first two options are just that a built in bid.
I know I mentioned what has become the third option (move UK navy), to aid in your quest. I will say most games I’ve played to this point have favored axis w/J1 attack.
the first two options are not just a built in bid. the first two options are disincentives for a j1 dow. the additional ipcs are only added to the allies if it is a j1 dow. a bid could still be used to determine sides and balance the game.
balancing the game is easy, just use a bid. players have been using a bid for every version since original axis and allies.
balancing a j1dow with j2, j3, j4 dow is much more difficult.
no.
it seems like no one is answering the threads question.
japan initial purchases are transports, then subs and destroyers to keep usa back. they have enough tacs already
china they can not purchase tacs
uk needs to buy ground units
anzac needs to buy cheap naval units
usa is the only country that i would even consider a tac purchase. then give my head a shake and realize that i need more important units.
here are 2 purchases i like.
1sub, 3inf, 1art, 1tank
2inf, 2art, 2tank
the best r1 combat is
9inf, 1art, 1tank into west russia(leave nothing in karelia and archangel)
3inf, 1art, 3tank, 2fig into ukr(yes 3 tanks)
hi krieghund,
i have one of the milton bradley editions. i am curious to know the 3 different sets of rules. are the 3 rulesets available online. if not can you give me a synopsis of the rule changes.
1st Edition can be found here, and 2nd Edition can be found here. I’m not sure where to find 3rd Edition anymore, but a synopsis of the changes can be found here.
thanks krieghund, your help and response time are amazing
There were three editions of the Milton Bradley version. 1st Edition was published in 1984, and 2nd Edition was published in 1986. The 3rd Edition rules were included in the 1997 CD-ROM game. The only thing that changed between these editions were the rules themselves. The physical components remained the same.
Most people refer to the Milton Bradley version as “2nd Edition” because this the most popular edition of the game. Whether this is because people didn’t like the changes in the 3rd Edition rules or just didn’t know about them for the most part, I don’t know.
hi krieghund,
i have one of the milton bradley editions. i am curious to know the 3 different sets of rules. are the 3 rulesets available online. if not can you give me a synopsis of the rule changes.
allworkandnoclay, where did you get those jeep units, photographed beside the halftracks and tanks?
i dont see any jeeps, but if you mean the trucks, they are included with Battle of the Bulge
thanks johnny, yes i did mean trucks.
are you and morrissey ever going to get back together?
allworkandnoclay, where did you get those jeep units, photographed beside the halftracks and tanks?
@Frontovik:
give japan more ground forces on the mainland is the key to balancing the game
or extra transport at first round
hi front thanks for the input. however, i am looking at how to balance a j1 dow to a j2 dow. your suggestion does not do it.
it sounds like you think allies are favoured and are trying to balance the game. i am not so worried about balancing the game because a bid can be done for that.