Alpha+.1

Link up A&A Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940, and you've got Axis & Allies Global 1940.
User avatar
stefano1189
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 5:05 am

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by stefano1189 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:41 am

Infrastructure wrote:Stefano,
Don't get your p......

I meant no offence and simply proposed jocularity in my excitement of this game that we all love. This is probably not the right place, but who cares, I get to play A&A this weekend against my best and favorite opponent. woohooo!

Again I meant that in a purely tough guy, non-sissy guy kind of way!

Guy i'm joking.. don't get angry! :-D

m7574
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by m7574 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:30 am

So when Guy is talking about himself, you could say its Guy on Guy? :wink:

sorry, couldn't help myself! :lol:

mantlefan
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by mantlefan » Wed Jan 12, 2011 7:58 pm

I know I might be a little late to the discussion but I have some ideas.

1. Give Japan an NO when the USA declares war on them unprokedly.
2 .Also, the 10 IPC's for not being at war with USA could be increased, just a few if #1 is implemented, quite a few if it's not. Right now the 10 IPC's alone does not deter a J1 attack.

The NO for Japan being the "victim" could be a one-time bonus or some IPC's every turn.

This accomplishes a number of things.
-Makes USA think twice about declaring war without provocation
-Reflects less of a conviction to fight that the Americans would have without actually having been attacked
-Creates more historical accuracy and options for Japan as it allows Go North and Go South (Nanshin-ron) strategies.

All in all, it creates a greater sense of historical accuracy, while at the same time giving MORE options to the Japanese player (and even the American player as there actually is a negative consequence for them going to war unprovoked, which I beleive is lacking). Something that creates more options and accuracy is seldom possible in A&A, for example, restricting entrance of war to turn 3 or 4 (I'm not saying those are bad, but it is an example where historical concerns override freedom)

Increased accuracy, freedom, and dilemma (should I attack as USA or not?) all at the price of adding just one more NO.
“A lie never lives to be old.” — Sophocles

The Fire Knight
Posts: 161
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by The Fire Knight » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:37 pm

I like the 10 ipc thing. It has deterred me to a J2 attack although i could see other options, which is the point. And though much as i would like to see something to deter the U.S. from attacking w/o provocation, this will not happen. It wouldn't be an alpha, it would be a new game.

mantlefan
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by mantlefan » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:05 pm

The Fire Knight wrote:I like the 10 ipc thing. It has deterred me to a J2 attack although i could see other options, which is the point. And though much as i would like to see something to deter the U.S. from attacking w/o provocation, this will not happen. It wouldn't be an alpha, it would be a new game.
I'm sorry, but why would it be a new game? It's an NO that affects IPC collection. New ones of those are added every revision. Have they made it a new game? This would really be quite similar to the 12 IPCs involved with Japan and USSR. There is nothing preventing USA from declaring war, just something to make it make a little more sense that USA would be at just a slight, slight disadvantage for not having the will to fight that they would have had they been attacked first. I'm not sure what the bonus should be (5-7 IPCs a turn (it doesn't need to be 5 although most are), or 20-25 IPC's once.

Thanks for saying the 10 IPC's deterred you, but there's a lot more saying they still go J1 anyways .


Larry, if you've got a minute, I'd like to hear what you think. Thanks.
“A lie never lives to be old.” — Sophocles

User avatar
Carico67
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 10:08 pm
Contact:

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by Carico67 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:16 pm

This thread has been so tied up worrying about a piece here and a tweak there to give the axis a chance I think a major issue from the past that was discussed could settle things and level the game quite a bit based on recent playtest games. (There was also a recent post about this from someone---- lost it login back on).

Make the US split its funds East Coast and West Coast, like the UK does. This gives all 3 axis powers some resiliency to the USA tidal wave. NO's open to go either way (though must be declared at the end of the round when collected). Japan can't be met on the level navally that way, and GER and Italy have some hope against a Kill-Italy-First campaign powerhousing from Gibraltar to the same degree as can exist now. C2

---Edit; NO's assigned to Atlantic/Pacific/Choice could balance spending. 35/17 starting points and option to all NO to the Atlantic = too heavy to Atlantic for this to make any influence on balance otherwise.
Carico67, Vice Chairman Axis and Allies Members Club (www.aamc.net)
email me for help or questions about PBEM; Carico67@hotmail.com

kcdzim
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:07 pm

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by kcdzim » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:28 pm

Carico67 wrote:Make the US split its funds East Coast and West Coast, like the UK does. This gives all 3 axis powers some resiliency to the USA tidal wave.
It might slow the US down just a smidge because they HAVE to build on both sides, but since West US and East us are a grand total of two spaces away, it's hardly a split economy. If the us wants to split but still kill one side, they build bombers on the other and Bob's your uncle, split econ. Not really going to help all that much.

13thGuardsRifleDiv

Re: Alpha+.1

Post by 13thGuardsRifleDiv » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:41 pm

Carico67 wrote:This thread has been so tied up worrying about a piece here and a tweak there to give the axis a chance I think a major issue from the past that was discussed could settle things and level the game quite a bit based on recent playtest games. (There was also a recent post about this from someone---- lost it login back on).
Except that the axis already have a chance, just not an easy one which some seem to want. And I'm not the only one who thinks that.

User 'chompers' on axisandallies.org
See, that's the part I don't get. We've played about 15 to 20 games total of Alpha using its various setups and the Axis have won about 80% of them, the only time the Allies haven't lost has been when they managed to contain Japan through ceding most of Africa by retreating to the south and holding there while the Mediterranean UK fleet went into the Pacific to link up with the US and ANZAC fleets. This was the only game we've played where the US was actually able to spend enough IPC's in the Atlantic to overcome the German naval and air force deterrent in a reasonable time frame (before, say, turn 8 or so), which is generally 8-10 planes plus the Baltic fleet (usually a carrier and battleship) as well as one to two subs purchased per turn. The UK atlantic has a tough time ever putting out any sort of navy in time to be threatening as their turn 1 purchase is generally dictated by the Germans, and they're forced to spend a portion of their IPC's each turn to hold the Italians back from overrunning all of Africa. This only leaves them with IPC's in the the mid-teens to commit to fleet each turn, some of which has to be transports for it to have any effectiveness, which the Germans can happily blow to kingdom come every time they approach the shoreline. If the UK slowly builds a fleet off of Canada and holds back until it has a (slim) chance at surviving the German deterrent, its generally not showing up before Germany has enough spare IPC's to watch its coast as well as continue its push into Russia.

With regards to Russia, I agree that they need some offensive power in their purchases in order to keep the front line as far away from Moscow as they can so that they retain a degree of purchasing power longer into the game. However, its been my experience that whatever Russia does, Germany can do better. Even purchasing a sub a turn Germany still has more IPC's to spend on attack than Russia has on defense and also has the numerical advantage out the gate in armor as well as parity (roughly) in inf/art/mech. If the German is cautious in his drive into Russia, only moving forward in the north when he's assured to survive whatever Russian counterattack might come, and sitting comfortably in the south trading the Ukraines with Russia, I don't see where the Russians really have any option but to begin to fall back eventually. As I've said before, this is generally a slow process in our games, but once you do begin to fall back Russia surrenders a lot of the IPC's it needs to be competitive and loses its ability to divert significant German spending away from the Allied landings that are now occurring in Europe.

I just don't see how more than 1 Axis power can really be contained effectively by the Allies. Whatever theater you choose to bring the pressure in, the other one goes to hell. If you choose to fight hard in both, you cede the advantage (slightly) to the Axis in each.
My plea to others: stop trying to make it easy for Germany in particular and the Axis in general by inundating Larry with requests for more units which Axis really doesn't need anymore.

Balance is achieved.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 9 guests