Game Balance Now

[battlevonwar]

I am now well into 1942 in my 4th game as Axis.(I am partial to the Grey and Green Horde but I can see how very interesting the Allies will be in this game) My first two opponents were new as I was. My opponent over the past 2 games is of some 'level of experience'. These are my current thoughts after 250 plus game turns in Multiplayer...

Axis vs Allied(if the Allied Player doesn't know how to stall France and The USSR) things get one sided. If the Allied players knows how to pressure both East and West at the same time pushing into '42 which is a requirement if there is no Sea Lion you can have a pretty entertaining game if you like a classical approach. The Soviet Armies can gain XP and size(as well as their Airforce) into '42 and can fight though not alone. They must have Allies in direct confrontation and North Africa alone isn't good enough.

I would say if you do not do a gamey move like say Gibraltar/UK that the game is tipped to the Allies depending on how much of a perfectionist both players are in their builds, losses, covering each and every little location that must be covered and exploiting every error possible.

All this being said I haven't really gone for the Axis to Sea Lion/Spain/Gibraltar then Mideast Minor Avenue. That does appear to change the whole game. It does not look hard currently ...

[AlvaroSousa]

The Med strategy as it is called in board games is a very hard strategy to beat as the Allies. They must be vigilant and have strategic objectives using concentration of force to advance and put pressure. You mentioned that the USSR needs help from the Allies pressuring them elsewhere. That is a given in any game. As the Allies if you pose zero threat to the Axis they are free to take out the USSR at will.

As the Allies you should be looking to take back Gibraltar in 1942 and give the USSR as much help as possible if the Axis go for a med strategy. If you are vs a good Axis player you can't stop them from taking Gibraltar or Egypt.

As the Allies your goal is to delay, delay, delay as much as possible the Axis until the full arsenal of democracy comes down blasting German front lines.

As for invading England it is the same thing. The idea is to delay as much as possible. If Sealion was accurately historical a German player would never invade and the English would always have a free hand. But this isn't a historical recreation. If you make the rules where England can't be invaded if the UK does X that gives less options to the Axis.

As for France.... no you can't just hand it to the Axis. You MUST 100% FIGHT FOR IT!! Every WIF game I play as the Allies I always go for a big B.E.F. Longer France holds the better chances I have. Buying 1-2 extra turns at the sacrifice of a corps is worth it. Germans conquering France in July of 1940 vs August of 1940 is a large difference in game play and their options.

As the players keep playing they will find more strategies. Very likely someone will find a gamey mechanism in the future to exploit. I already had to correct one. It is inevitable just like Thanos.

[Franciscus]

IMHO, and in the testing games I have played as Axis vs (historical) AI, what strikes me more is british passivity.

In the game I am playing with the beta, it's late 1940 and I gave decided to invade Yugo and Greece, and advance my paltry italian units to Egypt. There is no action by the british AI. No counter attack in Egypt. No helping Greece.

Maybe some scripts would help the AI

Regards

[AlvaroSousa]

Very difficult to get A.I. to go special things without itself being exploited or outright cheating for it.

[AlvaroSousa]

Take what you did in France. A human player can take advantage of it with precise play and an understanding of attrition at a certain point. A.I. has a hard time with that. But what you did and telling me lets me adjust the French A.I. to do something different if the USSR is Allied. Which I will include in the next scenarios.