First Reported Allied Victoy

[targul]

Forwarn45 is the first person I have known or seen win as the allies. Game went until mid 42. Axis never got past Minsk. Russian tanks were advancing everywhere. I surrendered as it was very obvious game was a massive Allied Victory.

Africa was falling apart with 3 carriers sitting off its coast pounding all the units to nothingness. It was close for awhile there but everything arrived just in time to save them.

Once Rommel died with his tanks near Cairo the Italians seem to havd lost faith.

The Allied player placed his tech in Armor and built armour. His armor was unstoppable by the Axis.

He attacked with both France and Britian bringing everything they both had to France making France a difficult and costly battle.

Congradulation to the best played Allied game I have seen so far and the only win anyone has reported todate.

After patch we must try this once more.

[SMK-at-work]

Mid 42??  So what you're saying is that the allies can win easily.....

[IainMcNeil]

I am a little confused! Does this effect your opinions on the balance?

[Hard Sarge]

Tounge in cheek and all,

but it looks like we need to up the Axis a bit here now, if the Axis can't make it out of 42 something is wrong

(of course, he did say, he gave up, it could of taken months if not years to get the war to end)

but still

[IrishGuards]

I have 1 win as Allies .. and a few more on the way by the looks of things .. [X(]
Axis got mauled .. France held .. I mauled an Arm in Poland ... 2 Inf Corps in Low countries .. and the French counter-attack destroyed 2 Inf corps last turn in the Low countries .. [X(]
The 2 German subs fell victim to allied navy .. Air war was a mess for the french ftr .. but ... vive la whatever .. cant afford to repair him anyway .. [:'(]
Caught a Corps trying to go for Norway .. Norway invasion .. operation below the sea commenced .. [X(]
Nay a good day for dolph ...
Maybe the OKW should have a little campfire and get there ducks in order ... [:D]
IDG

[targul]

No it does not change my opinion one victory on the board by the Allies in all this time that seems to me to assure game is incorrect. 
 
First guy beat me which as Axis in most games is easy.  I hate playing axis.  Second I made two major mistakes.  But I will not dwell on these as excuses.  The player beat me fair and square. His tactics where superior and his play excellant.
 
Also no I do not consider the Allies can win easily because if they could there would be more then ONE victory since the release by the Allies.
 
Had I played on game would have ended in early 43 but result would have been the same.
 
Looks like Irish has a second victory.  Dont know who he won from but congradulations on the victory.  That makes two. 
 
 
 Now we should maybe count the Axis victories and see if we really have balance.
 
I have 8 Axis victories. 

[Hard Sarge]

I am not so sure your view is overly correct, just because there are not many reported wins as the Allies, does not mean it can't happen, most games of these types, the players tend to go for the Axis side, they on the attack, they get to pick and chose and force the war from the start

the Allied player on the other hand is in a defend mindset and knows most of the time he is just going to be fighting a delaying action, until later on, and is not so much of a fun thing

plus in most games like this, it is easier to learn how to be agressive, then to learn how to defend and delay

as time goes on, more Human players will be learning and playing as the Allied and getting there fair share of wins

plus again, in these types of games, it is the Axis game to lose, not so much the Allied game to win

[IrishGuards]

I still have lots of games on the go ...
But my record so far ...
5 Axis victories .. at least 3 games still playing ...
1 Allied victory .. and 2 games still playing ..
IDG

[targul]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

I am not so sure your view is overly correct, just because there are not many reported wins as the Allies, does not mean it can't happen, most games of these types, the players tend to go for the Axis side, they on the attack, they get to pick and chose and force the war from the start

the Allied player on the other hand is in a defend mindset and knows most of the time he is just going to be fighting a delaying action, until later on, and is not so much of a fun thing

plus in most games like this, it is easier to learn how to be agressive, then to learn how to defend and delay

as time goes on, more Human players will be learning and playing as the Allied and getting there fair share of wins

plus again, in these types of games, it is the Axis game to lose, not so much the Allied game to win

You maybe correct but in the thousands of games I have played with dozens of different companies and systems. Not one has had such a poor record as Allies as this game.

Most games require the Axis to learn someway to defeat the Allies. But this one the Allies need to find someway to survive.

I have seen no comparible record in almost 50 years of play. Now in the last 3 months I have purchased SC2 which seems to operate correctly. Making History which is really a joke but game wins and losses seem correct. This one which is heavily Axis biased todate.

So you maybe correct people will eventually figure someway to beat this bias. Since I am a really awful Axis player, in most games, I was simply amazed at my number of victories in this game. But I also became equally amazed at my losses on the Allied side since I am usually very good as a Russian.

They said they tired to make the game balanced and they did in favor of the Axis. Patch should fix it though since the problem is not immense as I have said many times. Small tweaking can balance this game along a correct path. That tweaking I hope amounts to giving some of the units that actually existed to Russia and UK. But I will accept anything that brings the game into a more historical basis.

[Vypuero]

In my opionion the area most affected was the US economy - but I can run some figures by you.  I will post some later.

[targul]

You could be right they really are way behind but I maintain that Russia is shorted both the veteran units from Siberia and the income.

The veteran Siberian troops are there largest problem though due to the need for some units with combat experience.  These supposed mytical troops were instramental in the defense and push back at Moscow in winter of 41 and Battle of Kiev in 42.  Without these troops the line of winter defense is pretty much as it was in the war green troops ready to fight but without combat experience.

UK seems pretty much okay lacking an air in Africa and an infantry corps but if they just provided them air even if not at full strength it would make a world of difference for Africa.  I would also like to see them recieve one more destroyer.  I really have a problem with the one destroyer concept for the largest navy in the world at the time.  But I also feel they have one too many aircraft carriers.

I also feel Italy should recieve an additional air unit.

With a major increase in USA funding small unit additions I feel this game would not only be accurate historically but a much better game.  Yes that would mean the Allies is a little more powerful then the Axis.  But lets take a glance at history and that was the way it was.  Efficiency levels can be used to balance play and keep it all fun.

I prefer a subjective item like econmony or efficiency to equalize play over a known quantities such as number and kind of units.

[Vypuero]

Maybe I will design a more historical scenario for us if you wish.  In fact - I can post my figures and come up with some ideas on that.  I believe the thought was that they should buy some of this stuff but no one ever does is the problem!  I think an extra air force for Russia would be good too.  In any case I have all sorts of stats from my many attempts at making my own PG II grand campaign game (which I still work on).  What % of the US war effort must go to Japan?  I figure it should be about a 1/3 vs. 2/3 split.

[JudgeDredd]

Well I don't see what nthe difference is, Targul. Both affect gameplay in one form or the other.

tbh, I don't care what they do....increase allied forces, decrease Axis...increase allied economy, decrease Axis....just so long as they do not turn this into another "lets repeat history" game.

In fact, on the basis of what you suggest, I can pretty much guarentee I will hold off on installing any patch until

• I feel the need to have the game rebalanced (I do not as is)
• I see that the game is just as balanced or hasn't swung in one way or the other

I already posted, I had my ass kicked by the Allied AI...if they strengthen the AI, it's going to spoil my game.

It's fun as is, and that's what it should be. I have no need to delve into the history books and see what units were where...especially when the game is so abtract anyway!

[Vypuero]

Yes my lost game as Allies was when my opponent created 2-3 lines of units along the Belgian border with every allied unit he could find, I think.  It was like WW I and combined with some other costly errors it make it impossible for the Axis.  In despair I started to hammer at the Maginot line. 
 
I think this can be countered, but that seems to be an Allied strategy that works.  Question is, what is the counter and if it is ahistorical where are we falling behind?  For instance, we could make transports more expensive, but does that make D-Day too hard for the Allies?  Currently they cost 4 PP - should they cost 5,6 or even 10 instead?

[Hard Sarge]

Judge

I think the trouble is, not for the people playing the game vs the AI, I think it is good fun game this way, but when playing human vs human, it is may be biased too much to the Axis side (trouble with all the units being basicly the same, IT troops are the same as everybody else, if they could balance out the units for each nation, so they reflex on that nations strong and weakpoints, I think it would be balanced much better)

France should have more troops, more Armor, but not when French Armor and Germen Armor have the same stats, Russia should have lot more Airpower (1 unit ? maybe more like 10) but no way should it be as good as the Allied or Germen Air at the start of the game, and it should be in postion, so it can be killed on the opening attack

the IT should have more troops in the desert, but it shouldn't be able to stand toe to toe with the English

fine balance at this scale that is HARD to do

[Copper]

I think there's some issues at hand in this game. In my current game, it's quite the near run thing, my opponent has improved his Russian tanks to a level beyond my tanks, they do three anti tank damage! I have 5 now 6 labs in Armor, and I'm only at level 1 at the end of 1941!

I think the Russians should have more men then the Axis for sure, but their technology is rediculous. I dont think they should have anything near that effective against German Tanks.

Up the amount of troops, tone down the research for Russia.

[gmothes]

Well Rob, now I know how much Armor research you have, ha ha. The only point I would beg to differ on is the technology aspect of the tanks. In late 41 the T-34 was playing havoc with the Panzer Mark IIIs and IVs. I await your next turn,

Gerry...

[targul]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

Judge

I think the trouble is, not for the people playing the game vs the AI, I think it is good fun game this way, but when playing human vs human, it is may be biased too much to the Axis side (trouble with all the units being basicly the same, IT troops are the same as everybody else, if they could balance out the units for each nation, so they reflex on that nations strong and weakpoints, I think it would be balanced much better)

France should have more troops, more Armor, but not when French Armor and Germen Armor have the same stats, Russia should have lot more Airpower (1 unit ? maybe more like 10) but no way should it be as good as the Allied or Germen Air at the start of the game, and it should be in postion, so it can be killed on the opening attack

the IT should have more troops in the desert, but it shouldn't be able to stand toe to toe with the English

fine balance at this scale that is HARD to do

I pretty much agree here. AI is not that bad other then it is lost south of France. Tweaking the forces would be the best way to keep the balanced and fun for me at least.

[targul]

ORIGINAL: Copper

I think there's some issues at hand in this game. In my current game, it's quite the near run thing, my opponent has improved his Russian tanks to a level beyond my tanks, they do three anti tank damage! I have 5 now 6 labs in Armor, and I'm only at level 1 at the end of 1941!

I think the Russians should have more men then the Axis for sure, but their technology is rediculous. I dont think they should have anything near that effective against German Tanks.

Up the amount of troops, tone down the research for Russia.

The T34 tank was far superior to the Axis tanks in 41-42. The Axis was caught by surprise at how the T34 operated. Without these tanks the Soviet Union would not exist today. They were critical to stopping and turning the tide in Russia.

[JudgeDredd]

Well, I have no problem with the developers "balancing" the game for head to head...I don't play that anyway, so they can do what they like there. In fact, if there is iverall evidence that the AI v human is "unbalanced", then they can fix that too...but I've not seen, as yet, any evidence of that...I have only just finished my first game (all you other buggers must not have anything else to do in your lives!! [:'(])...so it may well be...all I'm saying is the patch, when it comes, can stay off my PC if they have "rebalanced" the game until I decide it's unbalanced...

Anyway, is the game not "editable"? I thought you could tweak the settings...I know that doesn't satisfy Targuls requirements as it appears the editor may help his situation...but in terms of balancing, can't "we" make battleships cost more and subs cost less etc?