no its really not amazingly bad. and that is just because they don’t have a true system in place for transporting and the axis has a lot of troops still on the board. it is really going to come down a lot to dice rolls and some solid execution
I don’t find any of the countries “boring”. They each have their own unique role
US-“The arsenal for democracy”
UK-“The Wild Card”
Japan-“King of the Pacific”
Russia-“Commie Cannon Fodder”
Germany-What can you say…they’re Germans…always starting wars and generally stirring up trouble!
OK 88, no i like the africa deployment plan, but do you suggest dropping my guys off in algeria or below algeria round 2? also what kind of force will I be looking at. If I hit algeria then that means I can feasibly get 3 inf/1 art/2 tanks into there, and then the round after that I can deploy an airplane or two from my carrier. also what type of navy would you suggest I build t1/t2, I was looking at an initial build of 1 ac, 1 sub, 1 trannie, 1 inf, 1 armor
Heavy bombers also kick the living krap out of navies for their cost. The closest a navy can get is 24 IPCs for a battleship for 1 roll of 4 + absorption, but here comes the heavy bomber that is 3/8 cheaper and rolls two 4’s……
Also, doing away with that rule would create some really fracked Allied strategies…
Things like the Allies LETTING USSR fall so that UK and US could have the rest of Russia’s income and become incredibly strong immediately.
yeah,
I know :lol:
I would never imply the system in one of my games!
A suggestion for you, so you will have the chance to play USA and Russia.
Go with match play. Set the victory conditions for the 5 game match. You will play each of the countries once. Draw for pairings for each game, thus changing the partner structure.
Who ever collects the most victories, wins the match. Break any tie by head-to-head.
