Posts made by Chompers2

Yes he tried it and it worked LOL.  We have played a lot of games of US going into Pacific first and that has been hit or miss with the allies.  Mostly hit for him and miss for me because he plays a much better Japan.  Basically the former tactic being used by the allies was to try and maim Japan with everyone in the Pacific and US spending all its points in the Pacific for the first 5 turns or so.  At that point if it works Pacific UK, Anzac, and China can keep Japan in line while the US speeds over to Europe and trys to deny a victory city and spend its points there from then on.

The problem with that tactic is Japan can fight it’s way out of it sometimes at least in our games and if that happens the axis will win.  Also if the US does not show up in Europe till turn 6 or 7 then by the time it does show up Russia is crippled and Germany is about at 70 points a turn.

So when I played our last game as allies I built a very offensive Russia with art, tanks, and even a couple more planes.  I did this because I shot to Gilbratar at the first chance with a large Navy and about 8 transports of men as US.  My goal was to then look at the situation and decide where to hit from there. My opponent built a bunch of subs and planes as Germany to force me to build more fleet and to give himself a shot at sinking my fleet.  I used blockers to stop the subs from hitting me and I dropped one US inf into Northern Italy and wrecked the major factory.  I then dropped one inf in Norway and denied Germany 8 points a turn. By that point India fell on J4 as he used your tactic.  I then started building up a fortress in Hawaii because I was one victory city away from tapping out no matter how much I had wrecked the European Axis.  I then got all my men and fleet that had gone to Europe and began to head for Hawaii.  Sadly I got greedy and decided to make a pit stop on the way there to crush the baltic German fleet that had come out into the Alantic to play ball.  I sunk it with ease and put men in Normandy and Holland so that the German airforce could not waste my Navy with 6 transports filled with troops.  I made a terrible blunder because with the new turn order Italy used the 3 tanks and a couple of fighters which made up of all that was left of its army to retake Holand.  At that point on the German turn the Airforce was able to reach my fleet and send it to davy jone’s locker along with the six transports and then rebase in Holand.  That was probably when I lost the game because when the huge naval battle took place in Hawaii I lost but had the reinforcements been there Japan most likely would have never been able to take Hawaii.  I was looking like a champ in Europe because the US had gotten Germany to not spend nearly enough on the Eastern Front and had allowed UK Alantic to defeat Italy in Africa.  Had the game gone on Russia and UK would have revived France and occupied Berlin and Rome.  But it’s my own falt I lost by a hair at Hawaii and also due to some good moves by CHompers.  Your tactic did work and he won the game.  The next game we are playing he will be the allies and I will be the axis.  I think your tactic for winning the game in Pacific is very good and your were right about bypassing the money islands for one turn to crush India dead.  That being said I am going to try some of my own ideas and see if I can find a way to win my game as the axis.  I like the new set up a lot better and think it opens up a lot of possabilites.

I just played a game as allies were I went kill Europe first with US.  Italy got recked to like a 17 point country and I knocked Germany down to the high Thirties.  Alantic Brittan got a fleet up and was at just under 40 points and growing and Russia was spending over forty a turn as it was winning against the Germans as the US had taken Norway and killed all German transports.  I feel like UK and Russia if left to there own at that point could have revived France and the three of them would have taken out both European Capitals.

My opponent Chompers read Gangtua tactic for doing the non combat move with the Japan Navy past my blockers and India died turn 4 even though I had 30 inf and planes sitting in it.  At that point the Japan Navy made a bee line for Hawaii, Australia was a fortress of inf, tanks, and planes that would have taken forever to fall against the now depleted land units of Japan.  As US I kept putting every point I had into Navy to fortify Hawaii but it fell and the allies tapped out into submission for losing 6 victory cities in the Pacific.  I feel like I could have saved Hawaii if I played slightly better but it was not ment to be.

I am starting to think this new version of the game may be pretty darn balanced but more play testing will be required.  I like it far better than OBB.

I don’t believe so.  The axis have been given enough advantages in Alpha 2 vs OBB that they can afford to have one of their starting fleet sunk.

If the allies are landing in Europe turn four then I feel the Japan starting Navy with mostly naval builds the first couple of turns should be able to hunt down the US Navy in the Pacific and destroy it.  After that Hawaii is lost and the clock is ticking on Anzac.  I feel it takes a lot of early US investment in the Pacific or Japan will be in postion to claim the needed 6 victory cities on that side of the map to achieve victory.

Japan can easily explode to a 70+ IPC country if the US is not doing a lot of heavy lifting in the Pacific.  Yes the Anzac, Pacfic Brittan, China, Russia are all key in the fight but without the help of the big dog, big time they are in an uphill battle.

I built a fairly large Italian Navy and then sent it at US.  It sunk 9 subs and a carrier off the coast of Florida.  Then US counterattacked with about 6 bombers four carriers with only 3 fighters and 4 destroyers.  The Amercians sunk the Italian fleet but only 2 bombers stumbled out of the fight.  At that point with the American fleet dead Germany took a time out from Barborossa and pulled a successful G9 sea lion.

I played Chompers in this game and I agree that Germany is strong enough as is unless a doctrine of maiming Japan first can be created that is successful 80-100 percent by turn 6 or so.  It would have to leave Japan maimed enough that Anzac, china, and pacific Brittan can hold it in check while US goes for the throat of either Germany or Italy at that point.

Even though I was outplayed by chompers in the game it was technically a draw because after two days of playing we reached a point where Germany would take forever to die as it was at 78 points.  Germany had about 70 troops sitting outside of Moscow but Russia had about 85 inf inside plus multinational help arriving.  I should have built much more art but I was trying a tactic of inf/mechs with planes at the attack power.  I had my cities in Europe as well as Leningrad and London but the amount of effort it would have taken to hold London from being taken back at that point would not have left Germany much to continue to send towards finishing Russia.

Now even though I would tip my hat to chompers for a game well played I think if I had built inf and art at Russia as Germany I would have gotten the capital.  Also I did not use Italy very well.  Although funny enough I got really lucky with an Italian fleet that defeated the US off the coast of Florida and resulted in the death of London on around turn 9.

That being said I was not ready for his tactics in the Pacific.  I think moving my transports in better position turn one might have saved Japan from becoming not very relevant.  If that would have happened he would not have been able to head towards Europe around turn 6.

So as is I think the game favors the axis slightly but if the person playing axis does not go at Russia in an effective manner and builds too many expensive tanks than I can see why they think Germany needs to be strengthened.

I would like to play a game with at least 4 people but most of my friends that played Spring 1942 did not move on to Global.  They found it to be too time consuming and complicated.  I myself love the game and I am thinking of trying out playing a forum game at some point soon.

This might be something fun to try if I was playing a someone who did not have very much experience with the game but an experienced player would make you pay for this I think.

when i wrote my original reply alpha was in its early stages. since then lh has gone to great lengths to balance the game. i now am very happy with the new set up and think it is balanced

Okay never mind I did not see that added when I played last.  Changes are coming fast but this is a really cool thing.  I will have to play with that to make a decision now.  Improved shipyards on top of that is probably too much.

The only changes I did not get to play with are the extra Russian units and the UK Battleship in the Med.

I have played four games now using Alpha + through it’s various developments and I feel safe in saying that the game now favors the axis.  In out of the box set up rules and NOs the US could rush Europe with almost all it’s points and crush Germany.  In Alpha + I believe the US must spend points on both sides of the map for the allies to win.

It can not allow Japan to get out of hand or it will gain control of the needed 6 victory cities in the Pacific.  If the US can not send help to Europe then Germany and Italy will most likely break the backs of UK/Russia given enough time and gain the needed 8 victory cities in Europe/Africa.  So when you think about it the US really needs a substantial naval fleet in the Atlantic to survive attacks from the German U-boats/Air force and possibly even an assault from the Italian Navy.  If the US does not have a sizable Navy in the Atlantic then it is at risk of losing it’s transports and ability to send troops to liberate UK, take heat off Russia, or lend help in Africa.  And this does not even begin to consider taking and holding at least one of the axis capitals which will be necessary for the allies to begin to meet their victory conditions.

Now when you take a look at the other side of the map it is going to take a very large Navy to hold Japan back from rampaging in the Pacific.  Japan starts with a much bigger Navy than the US and a sizeable Air Force to complement it if the US should decide to venture very far in the Pacific.  In the games I played my axis opponent upgraded the Japanese Navy while stomping out China with Japan’s starting ground forces/Air Force.  He also was able to grab the money islands by peeling away some of his starting Navy that was facing off against the US to protect his transports.  There was never really a window for the US to capitalize on this because like I said he was adding subs/carriers/destroyers each turn to his starting Navy from turn one.  His first turn purchase was two transports and two subs.

The point I have been trying to make is the US/Allies now need some help to bring the game back towards the center now that it has drifted in favor of the Axis.  If the US is given improved Shipyards when at war to help represent it’s war time production ability it would help provide incentive for the US to spend on both sides of the map and have a chance to win.

I don’t believe it could really be abused to sack Tokyo easy because Japan can build carriers to put her starting Air Force on as the game progresses if needed and fighters can be scrambled in Sea Zone 6.

On the other side of the map the US goal is to build only the right amount of Navy it will need and no more so it would not lead to abuse there either.

I think improved shipyards for the US would help bring the game back into balance.  I understand this is a really big bone to throw the allies way but at this point I think they need it.  Not to mention it will only help give incentive for US to fight on both sides of the Map.

I believe the axis do have the advantage now.  I am glad everyone stopped denying that the allies had the advantage in out of the box set up and made changes.  I tip my hat to Larry Harris for all the work he has gone through to make this more fun for us.  That being said I have played 4 games of Alpha Plus so far and I believe I have seen enough to know the axis have the advantage now.

If the US wants to stop Japan from getting 6 victory cities then will have to spend about all it’s points in the Pacific if Japan is spending points on Navy early, killing china with it’s starting forces, and grabbing the money islands.

The consequences of US not showing up in Europe in a significant number means that axis will then beat down UK and Russia with Italy and Germany who have both been beefed up big time.  The extra units that were just added to Russia will help but I do not believe it will be enough.

I am in favor of bringing in a multinational attack rule for the allies to represent planning an operation the size of D Day against the axis.  This helps the axis force the allies to still react to them but gives the allies a way to plan a way to sack an axis captial.  The victory conditions for the allies is still that they have to control all three axis captials to win.  This means that even if the allies sack Rome and Berlin but Japan grabs the 6th victory city that the axis win the game.  If the victory conditions remain as is something will have to be done to help the allies now imho.

I think 6 victory cities is too easy.  In the game I played yesterday I was allies and I captured Berlin and had reduced Italy to a 6 point country and was going to capture it completely within two turns most, UK defeated them soundly in Africa.  Yet  I was going to lose Hawaii that turn and thus lose my 6th victory city in Pacific.  I split points with US in both sides of the map.  I built over 30 destroyers in the Pacific to help hold off Japan but it would not have been enough.

If the victory conditions remain 6 victory cities in the Pacific I believe most people will find out that the US will have to spend close to 100% of its points in the Pacfic to stop Japan from getting 6 cities.  The problem is if they do that they will lose on the European side of the map.

I think Larry Harris is doing a great job with making adjustments to the game but I think the allies need some boasting up somewhere now.

In my games against chompers I have been the allies twice, and the axis once.  I lost both games I played as the allies and won the game I played as axis.

I do believe the game is now very much in favor of the axis though I like it much better than the out of box set up.  In out of box set up the allies pretty much always won.  In the new set up I find it hard as the US to send anything to the Atlantic but if I don’t then I get beat in Europe.  Japan can now hurt the US economy big time and force them to build land units if the Pacific is ignored.  We have found that when playing Japan if you buy mostly Navy and some transports to take the money islands, combined with Japan’s huge starting Navy that it forces the US to spend just about all of it’s points in the pacific to stop Japan from getting out of hand.

I think the allies need a little something added to them now so they have a chance to achieve their victory conditions.  While I understand almost no one plays until allies have taken over all three axis capitals there needs to be a way the allies can respond to the axis and still form a long term plan to capture at least one axis capital and hold it.  This would give the allies a chance to achieve a victory.

I have a suggestion.  One is to give the allies a special rule where once per game they could conduct a multinational attack.  This would represent the allies getting together and planning something of the likes of D Day.  Or it could represent an alternate history such as the Anzac, Pacific UK, and US joining up together to wage a battle for Tokyo.  There would be some options.  This would keep the game where it is the allies responding to the axis but would open a window for the allies to also play to win rather than just playing defense of the victory cities.

The rule for the multinational attack would allow the allies countries to all attack at once as one force in any allied turn against a single axis controlled territory but the allies could only manage to plan this once per game due to the complexity of planning and organizing such a major military operation.

Do anyone feel this is a good idea that would balance the game more?  Maybe the rule could be tweaked to give the axis some ipcs to immediately place once the multinational attack is declared to represent them spying out the attack is coming and marshalling together extra forces. This way the special rule might not become too overpowering to be abused.

Any feedback would be appreciated.

In the game I played my opponent pulled off a successful sea lion but it he lost his air force in the assault as well as about 15 german ground units in the assault.  I attacked him with USSR turn 4 and was able to take Norway and then landed about 12 american ground forces there after liberating UK.  He was later able to retake it using his transports.  US was able to take Pearl Harbor so I built a huge navy in the pacific to try and take it back but my opponent kept matching points with me so our fleets got huge.

Germany was able to recover in the fight against Russia and it was an arms race where both sides built art and inf.  Italy meanwhile became a 40 point country because Africa was over run due to the fact that I had to spend all my points as UK on defending my capital and then on top of that UK was knocked out of the game for awhile.  By the time UK got back in it Italy had won the fight for Africa and could now focus on attacking Russia with Germany.

I could not stop Italy from attacking Russia with USA because I had to spend all my points on navy every turn because my opponent was spending at least 60+ points to beef up his navy each turn.  Eventually I was at an economical disadvantage and had to make a move.  I decided to attack his navy in the pacific with my navy but I lost the fight because I rolled horrible.  So I conceded at that point.

It will take more play testing  Okay edits to come I have to move to a different computer brb.

Just curious everyone’s thoughts and experience on Alpha Plus so far.  I had argued that the game’s original set was two overpowered for the allies.  So I am glad to see a beefed up Germany and Italy.

I have played one game of Alpha Plus so far and the axis won after I conceded when I saw no path to victory as the allies in that game.  I don’t want to come off as complaining but I think the game most likely favors the axis now.  It now takes a lot of skill to play the USA as spending points in just one theather is not really an option any more.  Splitting points is very hard to do correctly.

Do you think the game is now balanced?  Who do you think it favors?  And finally anyone got any good tactics for achieving victory as the allies.

Thanks in advance,

If I do a bombing raid on a city that has an AA gun and I bring fighter escorts.  Does the AA gun fire on my escorts or just my bombers?

I am working on a theory for the best way to conquer Moscow and not lose Berlin/Rome/Paris in the process.  Chomper’s and I have played about 20 games of Global so far and neither one of us has been able to take Moscow once as the Axis (A couple of games were called a draw in which it looked like Japan would eventually take Moscow but America would take Berlin).  The standard build for the Russian player is essentially 9 artillery the first 2 Russian turns to go with bulk of Russia Infantry the Russian’s start with.  The Russian’s fall away from the borders, if they are facing Tanks/Mechs and a Italy can opener they may leave enough Infantry to block.  After that Russia builds a mix of infantry and artillery to try and keep them around equal numbers.  The Russians than mass together at the best strategic location depending on which way the German’s move when they launch Operation Barbarossa.

Some ways we have tried to take Moscow that have not worked for us and resulted in Axis defeats.

-Using Tanks and Mechs to Rush to Moscow and take it with speed and mobility.  The problems we ran into is Germany has to spend too many points on these expensive toys and they don’t make that much more than Russia when it is all said and done considering they have to fight Brittan/US and sometimes make sure Rome does not fall.  We can make it to a city such as Leningrad but at around then major points have to be spent on the Eastern front and before long the Russia stack of Infantry and Artillery grows so big that the Germans are so behind in numbers as Russia was buying cheap units that they can either fall back or stay and be destroyed.

-Pulling off Operation Sea lion first so that Germany has to fight one less enemy and give Germany a point boost by looting the UK treasury.  I think this would actually work if it could be done on the cheap and preferably on G2.  For this to happen though it requires the allies to make a mistake in leaving London undefended and that is not in the axis control.  If too many transports are required to be built than it costs too many points to capture London.  Germany can’t afford to then spend points defending it so US will take it back before long and most likely sink the German transports.  The final result has been not enough boots on the ground for Operation Barbarossa.

-Building a major industrial complex in Germany and then producing it’s own army of infantry and artillery with it’s two major factories.  The idea was that the Germans could then make more units than the Russians and have more IPC’s that they could gain the number advantage.  This has resulted in our most competitive games but the problem the Germans ran into was the Moscow was too many spaces away so they would start out with the number advantage but by the time they get to Moscow the Russian army is too big as the Russians have had too many turns to build up.

-Romania Factory failed for multiple reasons.  30 points is a lot to spend for Germany on a factory that can’t also be used for defense.  Also ten unit’s a turn is not enough as Russia builds 8-13 unit’s a turn depending on the situation.

There are other strategies we have tried but I won’t list them all her for time’s sake.

One strategy I am considering that I have not tried before is bombing Moscow with Japan bombers from the first available opportunity and from that point continuing to do so until either Germany or Japan can take the city.  I have never tried this before so I am not sure what to build to go with this method of attack.  Do you think if Japan started bombing Moscow around turn 4 it would be possible to capture the city with Germany with Tanks and Mechs or is it still not feasible?  Maybe the Tanks and Mech’s could then be used to peel more points off Russia and capture a city, maybe two?  At that point Germany spends most points on making Europe a fortress and waits for Japan to bust through India and China.  Then the axis could one two punch Russia with both armies and it just might fall.

Are there holes in my method of attack here?  The whole thing falls apart even if Moscow is captured if the allies can crack Berlin.  So it would be a delicate balance of points spent on attack and defense with the Germans.

Any suggestions would be appreciated,
Thanks,

Frank T

@chompers:

You might want to try just giving chase to the 18 inf with your land units in Manchuria/Korea backed up with enough planes to keep the russians running.  If you push simultaneously through northern China you may be able to cut them off.  I also like building an airbase in Suiyuyan on J3 so that from J4 onwards you can start strat bombing Moscow with your 4 (or 2 depending on setup, although I’ll normally have bought at least 1 more by now using Alpha setup if I’m trying this strategy).

@ Chompers

I was thinking if this tactic on the way home from work today before I read your post.  I figured I could set up about five bombers are so to start bombing Moscow every turn asap.  I wondered if just maybe that would give Germany what it needs to finally crack this nut.