is it possible to have a game more balanced?

[Rodimstev]

hi all,

i play allied in a MP game. scenario 39.

it is a long long serie of defeats for the allies….

Poland, France, it is normal...but impossible to defend Malte and i used a lot of ressources.
Chine is completely weak in face Japon. each turn, one unit or more destroyed and no possibility to defend correctly.

Moral and exp for germans and japan units are high (117%)

Barbarossa begins…(22 june 41) in one turn, all soviets units in the border destroyed after encerclement.
The MPP for URSS is 580...
the germans has 600 too...and more with conquest from russia. in parallel Cairo is taken…

I think the game is not correctly balanced for russia for example. It would be usefull that the mobilization create automaticaly
new units to simulate this mobilization.
why the game is so unbalanced?

Rodim

[xwormwood]

The game may look unbalanced if you play against a stronger opponent. Your example of the russian border units show that you're probably still new to the game (and that is ok!).
But you have to play "good" as well if you play against someone who has a good strategy and a very strong knowledge of the game mechanics.
From what you describe the latter one is the case in your MP game.
But that would only mean that the players knowledge is unbalanced, not that the campaign is unbalanced.
The solution would be to play against opponents with the same game experience level as yourself, or to play a couple of games against the AI to train a bit.

[Dorky8]

Its very important to understand all the factors that influence Soviet mobilization. You need to keep the Soviets leaning towards the Allies as much as possible. There is a thread in the Europe forum that lays out all the decisions that influence US & SU mobilization I think most are the same.

Also I try to research Soviet Industrial Tech first with 2 chits, I sell the anti tank chit, and keep Industrial tech at 2 at all times.


have fun

[Schokolokos]

At the Status right now I would say the Allies are borderline OP, not the Axis.

have to play more PBEM for more proof, but I really dont think its that much unbalanced.

[Rodimstev]

hi all,

i am not a newbie for this game i play a lot for the strategic command series and i have the same level as my opponent may be he is more experimented.

if you have advices to say me Don't hésitate to writte me how prepare UK, USA and more important the SU to resist to the attack to germans…

Rodim

[Dorky8]

Hi Rodim,

I was great at the AI game in older versions and horrible at PBEM when I started. The irony of the soviet reinforcements that arrive when attacked are a negative for Allies against skilled opponent. Usually almost no non -Leningrad reinforcements mare eliminated and it provides large experience for Axis.

The large map size and weather help soviets. I find its impossible to defend Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad so I focus on 2, against very skilled player maybe just 1.

[Rodimstev]

in world at war the size about the european map is cleary différent (smaller) versus war in europe...

[Dorky8]

true but each turn twice as long correct?

[Dorky8]

I do think the ranges of troops isn't adjusted down enough for the smaller
map size

[Hubert Cater]

As mentioned in a previous thread, the map scale may have changed from war in Europe, but terrain penalties, zones of control and weather effects are the same.

We did start with scaled down action points but in game it just didn't work and was found to be too restrictive and we ended up with the action point ranges we have now.

It's easy enough to edit them as desired in the Editor, but I believe if you were to scale them down and try a few games that way, you'd quickly come to the same conclusion and revert to the current numbers.

Essentially we went beyond just scaling on a number of areas and treated this as a game design in its own right and used values that worked accordingly.