Posts made by allweneedislove

@democratic:

Sorry, wrong use of the computer calucator.

Using my theroy of points which is

If you say Japan wins easily its 3 points to Japan.
If you say Japan most of the time its 2 points to Japan, 1 to balenced.
If you say balenced then its 3 points to balenced

Vice versa for allies.

Its much better to play as Japan-42%
Its pretty balenced-45%
Its better to play as the allies-13%

can you explain this in more detail. i am not sure if i am slow or you are making things up. heres how i see, let me know if it is wrong

people who said japan is favoured 20
people who said game is balanced 18
people who said allies are favoured 8

20/56 = 53.6%
18/56 = 32.1%
 8/56 = 14.3%

how did less than a third of voters turn into the majority?

using veqs more appropriate count.

Territory      Allied Units                        Axis Units                                  Territory IPC Swap    Unit IPC Swap      Total IPC Gain
SZ34          1BB, 2Trans          1Fig Formosa, 2Bomb Japan, 1Bomb Kiangsu              0                      24                    24
Kwangtung  2Inf                    2inf Japan, 3Fig+2Tac Manchuria                            11                      0                    11
SZ35          1Trans, 1Dest       All from SZ19 and SZ33                                        0                      0                      0
Philippines    2Inf, 1Fig, 1Bomb  1Inf Jap+Car+Pal, 1Art Jap, 1Tac+1Fig SZ33            9                      12                    21
SZ26          1Trans                1Sub SZ6                                                          0                        1                      1
                                                                                                                                                            Total  57
the chart shows the average outcome of battles and in the sz26 battle the counter attack aswell.
the chart does not show the capture of the naval base at kwangtung, the naval and air base in philippines
the chart does not show the importance of killing uk trans that would take 8ipc of dei, or usa trans being in a threatning position
the chart does not show the importance of usa moving sz35 to sz56 to make japan move fleet out of position or counter attack
the chart does not show the importance of usa moving philippeans fig to guam, forcing j to move a transport and escort(to prevent scramble) out of position.

Summary
japan gets 57ipc difference of central units and territories, while sacrificing 40ipc to a far away usa which can only move those 40ipc worth of units on their 3rd turn. japan also does not have to make suboptimal 2nd round attacks that can leave fleets out of position
j1 dow > j2, j3, or j4 dow

@Veqryn:

ya but most of those units die anyway on later turns
its not like the UK is going to run up to hong kong and load those 2 guys and move them somewhere else if you don’t do a j1 attack
even on a j4 attack, those 2 poor suckers will still be sitting in hong kong waiting to die
so i don’t think you should include them in your calculations

you should only include in your calculations the things that CAN AND USUALLY DO LEAVE if you don’t destroy them j1
so for example, the bomber in the philippines can be included in the calculating, but the 2 guys in kwangtung can not.
i would also not include include the 2 inf in the philippines,

good point. my comparison is unfair. i will adjust it to take into account only units that would not die on a j2 attack

@Veqryn:

and i probably would not include the naval units either because you can destroy them in a j2 attack no matter where they move (only waiting til a j3 attack would they have time to link up with anything large enough that you can’t destroy, so unless comparing to a j3, i would not include them)

i am not sure about this one. the usa can move the sz35 fleet to a spot far away enough that japan could reach it but then leave their fleet way out of position. for example if usa moves it to sz56 off west australia. if japan has positioned itself to be able to reach sz56 on j2 they would be open to an australian counter, or even if they dont get countered j is not at a naval base and takes 2 turns to get into position. i think i will not use them in the ipc comparison, but it does leave j2 out of position which should be included in the decision.

@Veqryn:

also, love,
can you detail out all your japan turn 1 moves including purchases, all combat moves, and all noncombat
i would like to see if it differs from mine

yes but not here as it would be off topic.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@allweneedislove:

@calvinhobbesliker:

Actually, it gives USA 80 IPC’s: 40 collected at the end of the 1st turn and 40 at the end of the second

usa collects 40ipc in perpetuity. the ipc difference i showed was also unit value per round in perpetuity.

the difference between a j1dow and a j2 dow is usa gets 40ipc 1 round earlier.

Yes, it does, but the US collects 40 on its 3rd, 4th, 5th, and all turns after that. The only difference is that with a J1 attack, it gets 40 on 1st and 2nd turns in addition to the rest.

hmm i am not sure i can make it easier to understand but i will give it one more try.

j1 dow is one round earlier than a j2 dow. usa can collect 40ipc one round earlier. the difference between j1dow and j2 dow is usa gets 40ipc more.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Also, how could you do unit value per round? The units destroyed are not destroyed each turn.

if you are to count the ipc a power makes every round it makes sense to count the units on the board every round. if you destroy a unit round one it does not get to effect the game round 2 or round 3 etc.

bottom line is you only need to count the difference from round 1 to round 2 as that is what we are trying to compare.

@calvinhobbesliker:

How do you get 12 for Kwangtung? 28 for Phil?

philippeans is worth 2ipc for japan, usa does not collect 2ipc for holding philippeans, usa does not collect 5ipc for objective.
japan collects 2ipc, usa does not collect 7ipc. 9ipc swing in favour of japan for the territory

in philippeans battle usa losses 2inf, 1fig, 1bomber worth 28ipc, japan losses on avererage 3inf worth 9ipc.
japan is positive 19ipc worth of units in the battle.

territory+unit=28ipc for philippeans

good catch for kwangtung. i mistakenly valued it at 2ipc instead of 3. i will edit the original post.

@calvinhobbesliker:

Actually, it gives USA 80 IPC’s: 40 collected at the end of the 1st turn and 40 at the end of the second

usa collects 40ipc in perpetuity. the ipc difference i showed was also unit value per round in perpetuity.

the difference between a j1dow and a j2 dow is usa gets 40ipc 1 round earlier.

i know there are good players that read this site. i also know there are creative minds on how to correct game problems.

i am looking for a way to balance a j1dow with later dows. any feedback on my ideas or ideas of your own would be appreciated.

my order of importance for change is as follows
strategically make j1dow = j2 or later dow
simple to understand
minimal change to game mechanics
historical reality takes a back seat to strategy, but if historical thats a bonus

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.

1. There is an Air base & Naval base on Philippine Islands
2. The minor industrial complex on New Zealand is removed
3. The major IC on New South Wales (Anzac) is now a minor IC

here is just one attack. i am not saying this is the optimal attack, but it does show that a japan first round(j1) declaration of war(dow) is far superior to a j2, j3, or j4 dow.

ignore the attacks on chahar, anhwe, hunan, and yunnan because those attacks will happen if it is a j1 or later dow.

so j1 attacks are as follows

Territory       Allied Units                        Axis Units                                  Territory IPC Swap    Unit IPC Swap      Total IPC Gain
SZ34           1BB, 2Trans          1Fig Formosa, 2Bomb Japan, 1Bomb Kiangsu              0                       24                      24
Kwangtung   2Inf                     2inf Japan, 3Fig+2Tac Manchuria                            11                       3                      14
SZ35           1Trans, 1Dest       All from SZ19 and SZ33                                         0                       15                      15
Philippines    2Inf, 1Fig, 1Bomb   1Inf Jap+Car+Pal, 1Art Jap, 1Tac+1Fig SZ33             9                       19                      28
SZ26           1Trans                 1Sub SZ6                                                           0                        1                       1
                                                                                                                                                           Total   82

the chart shows the average outcome of battles and in the sz26 battle the counter attack aswell.
the chart does not show the capture of the naval base at kwangtung, the naval and air base in philippines
the chart does not show the importance of killing uk trans that would take 8ipc of dei, or usa trans being in a threatning position

Summary
japan gets 82ipc difference of central units and territories, while sacrificing 40ipc to a far away usa which can only move those 40ipc worth of units on their 3rd turn .
j1 dow > j2, j3, or j4 dow

mine came in an envelope, battlestip was a bit dented, 14 tacs sent in total, 12 in perfect condition, 1 lost a wheel, 1 had a small white stress mark on the wing. funny thing is i now have 20 tacs and they annoy me because they take up too much room in the piece compartment in the box.

i live in canada and they did not charge me shipping.

@Hobbes:

@democratic:

Reasults are in

42% of people think its best for Japan
45% of people think its balenced
31% of people think its good for the allies

Was it possible to give more than 1 answer? Because the sum of them exceeds 100%…

democratic leader’s math is on par with his spelling.

the results are
53.6% of respondents have played the game
32.1% of respondents were wishful thinkers
14.3% of respondents have mis-clicked or played by the wrong rules

i think trying to introduce tanks into the game is a mistake. it does not add much strategy or fun to the game.

from the research(quick and unrealable sources) i have done there were no tanks involved in real life.

@Brain:

Sorry about that.

See how easy it is to twist someone’s words.

But, I still disagree. The winner of the struggle for North Africa should be richly rewarded by land-grabbing the rest of Africa.

no problem. it is good you agree. allies should not start out with all the income of africa. they should have to win the battle of north africa and then move units south to gain the ipcs for africa.

@Brain:

@allweneedislove:

in the early designs of revised they toyed with the idea of a neutral africa. i remember seeing a picture with africa a different colour from everything else. i thought it was a good idea then, but now that there will be more neutrals it just makes sense to have africa neutral aswell

This wouldn’t be very realistic, North Africa was important for controlling the Mediterranean.

you did not quote my whole post. you missed a very important part.

south africa and egypt would be british empire, north africa would be axis, sahara impassable, but the rest of africa neutral.

neutral africa.

south africa and egypt would be british empire, north africa would be axis, sahara impassable, but the rest of africa neutral.

so if one side wants to spend the resources to grab the cash they can. but if you want to ignore it you can, without the penalty of the other side making a fortune.

in the early designs of revised they toyed with the idea of a neutral africa. i remember seeing a picture with africa a different colour from everything else. i thought it was a good idea then, but now that there will be more neutrals it just makes sense to have africa neutral aswell

@i:

i dont see the need for an axis bid it seems the axis always win to me.

when revised first came out, lots of players (including my gaming group) were reporting axis wins. the allied strategy is more sophisticated, but with more play you will find allies have a large advantage.

at the first triplea ladder(it crashed after 3-4 years) thousands of games were played by opponents all over the world. they used a 9ipc bid to be placed in units pregame but only 1 unit per territory in a territory that already contains units of the same power. the result was 50.5-49.5 axis to allies win ratio. the game was balanced with these bid rules

no bid = no chance for axis

@democratic:

If the Marsh lets infantry into it, then it could be a massive torn in the side of Germany.

Russia could put 2-3inf into it, and Germany would then be at risk of terriotys been taken behind their lines by infantry coming out of the Marsh.
And to destory 2inf would take 5, a large cost. Unless they can fly air units into it, where they would just send in a bomber, 2 fighters and 2 taks along with 2 inf.

infantry in the marsh was just flashman’s wish. the game designer has already stated that the marsh will be an impassable territory.

this does exaggerate an existing problem.

at first i was not upset that the pac40 map had 10/50 printed the west usa territory. after re-reading the rules i noticed that the 40ipc increase was a national objective and the territory is not and would never be worth 50ipc(japan can not convoy raid for more than 10ipc and if they capture west usa it is only worth 10ipc). i was rightfully pissed off. now when i play global the stupid error will be magnified.

this error will not be fixed. the rulebook was a mess, but for those of us that have found this site have had the rulebook corrected via the errata. the lack of tactical bombers was corrected by mailing the necessary pieces to play the game. however, i am sure they will not mail out a new board for this map misprint.

@Razor:

Larry told in his forum, and this is also quoted in the fact thread above, that in the global game USA will only get a wartime bonus of 30 IPC. That means USA will get a total of 80 IPC when at war, to spend as he likes, either all in one theater or a little here and a little there. This is the facts.

Now some players complains that Japan always win in AA40 Pacific, and that is when USA get 40 IPC in war bonus. How do you think this will effect play ? Will Japan get even harder to kill ?

i also was surprised about the small usa ipc total. this leads me to believe that global will not just be pac40 and euro40 pushed together, but the setup will be different. so to answer your question i do not think it means game play will definitely be negatively effected or make japan harder to kill

@i:

i have a great idea you guys know the old AAR wolfpacks NO for germany well lets chage it from:
when 3 or more subs attack 1 sea zone they hit 1 higher
to:
when 2 or more subs disrupt the same convoy zone they do 1 more ipc lose
anyone like it?

i do not like it. it would only make a difference in a sea zone that is next to >5ipc territories.