Matrix Games Forums

The Allies have a definite edge in this game. Although it's probably best to wait for the next patch and reassess - I thought I'd mention that play balance is definitely an issue. This can of course be solved by giving the Axis supply bonus - but I'd like to see a little closer "natural" balance for victory purposes. The ability to initiate early war with Japan is a problem, but even without it I think the Allies are in good shape. I would propose at some point making a list of tweaks that could help balance the victory conditions. For one, I think that surviving until the end of the game should be at least an Axis marginal victory.

I agree completely. at a very minimum having the axis survive till the end of 1946 should be a victory and not just a draw. thats three years of full x4 USA production. If done right the WA can usually win by 1944 anyway, which I would say happens at least 40-50% of the time when allies have beaten me. its to the point that there isn't much reason to draw a game out that I know isn't going to be considered a victory if I try to turtle up and last the duration. I suspect allied players don't necessarily enjoy amassing the men when the outcome is clearly a victory of logistics, not strategy and tactics into 1946.

Surviving means atleast a Draw for the Axis. There is always a reason to stay alive.

Personally I would like to tie the end season with how early the Axis engages both Russia and the USA as posted earlier.

so if you do better than history, its a tie?

IMO if you do better than history, its a victory. otherwise if we're not taking history into consideration, there are a lot of other changes we can do to go outside of history. a late 1945 should be a tie, since thats history. early 1945 or earlier is an allied victory. 1946 should then be some form of axis victory.

aleteledo

I didnt comment on the issue of balance - rather I commented on your claim that there was no reason to play on part late 44. I strongly disagree about the latter as I have seen several games go right down to the wire between a marginal allied win in Fall 46 or a draw.

If anything I consider it a larger problem that the Axis will delay war with the US till late 42 / early 43 in 99% of all games. Thats the main reason the war needs to be prolonged till late 46.

Well 1st of all I disagree that the Allies have an edge in this game. True, if the Allies can discern early enough what the German intentions are they have the advantage; but this is a big IF (sound familar aletoledo). The Axis are the ones who decide where the war will be waged, when the Russians will enter the war, when the US will enter the war, etc. With the rule changes I believe the Allies will be at even more of a disadvantage. Having said this I repeat my earlier suggestion that the game end date be 16 turns after the date the Russians or US (which ever is later) enters the war with the levels of victory adjusted accordingly. This way if the Axis attack Russia in SU41 and the US in W42 (as historical) they only need to hold out until W46 to win a marginal victory. At the present time the rules do not encourage the Axis to either play a survival strategy (as opposed to a variation of the AV strategy) or attack the US (or possibly Russia) until W43. Now they will have that incentive and we might get more variety in the games.

I didnt comment on the issue of balance - rather I commented on your claim that there was no reason to play on part late 44. I strongly disagree about the latter as I have seen several games go right down to the wire between a marginal allied win in Fall 46 or a draw.

sure the game can been drawn out, but its not a cakewalk for the axis to even survive to 1946. are you suggesting that you outplay the allied player and despite this you fail to achieve an AV, so the best you can hope for is a draw? your comment Jan is suggesting that a draw is really an axis victory.

thats an interesting suggestion Harrybanana, it might address the issue that Jan mentions about the axis never activating the US till 1943. however I don't think that rule will encourage the axis to activate the US any sooner, there isn't any real incentive to give the US a x3 multiplier. also its hard enough for the germans to fight population to population against the russians and britains, let alone adding the US before the very latest. increase the german population pool when the US is activated and I'd activate them in 1941 every game.

True aletoledo. But even with the US multiple at only x2 (as they are from W42 on) the allies are are still out producing the Axis. By attacking in W42 (or earlier) the Axis will shorten the War by 4 turns and overall Allied production will be much less. The Axis will also probably be able to catch the US with it's "pants down" before it has geared for war. I know that for myself I generally hold up my US naval builds so that everything comes on on the F42 turn and is ready for action W43. If I was worried about early US intervention I would have to reconsider.

In my opinion most games between equally skilled opponents should end in either a draw or a marginal victory for 1 side or the other. However of the 12 games completed to date there have been 10 Decisive Victories (7 Allied and 3 Axis) 1 marginal Allied Victory and only 1 draw. The reason for this (in my opinion) is that the Axis player realizes that there is little or no chance to hold out until 46 to win a marginal victory and therefore almost always opts for a high risk strategy to win an AV. I would like to see the Axis have a reasonable chance of winning the game by playing a conservative and perhaps even "historical" strategy. I would not want to see this every game, but once in a while would be nice.

I think the reason so many games end in a decisive victory is two-fold.

One is that the Axis (and Allies to a lesser degree) go for a high-risk approach rather than play safely as you mention.

The other is inexperience leading to large errors. I am losing a game badly right now as the Allies as my opponent pulled a splendid trick I had not seen or considered - something I will be much less likely to fall for next time (I hope). Hence experience will cut down on the complete overruns.

Well, and possibly some Axis players give up rather than tough it out to reduce the Allies to a marginal victory once the tides have turned.

In my experience, the game is skewed about 1 factor in favor of allied victory, maybe a little more. In other words, the best odds are for something approximating an ally marginal victory. In this respect, I have played several games where the Axis fights it out and didn't go entirely for broke in the early game. Also - going for broke doesn't necessarily hurt if the Axis knows when to switch to defense..... IMO, making it to early '46 is possible but making it to the end of the game is very very difficult. I don't necessarily mind this, but I think the victory conditions should approximate it - with decent chances of a draw or a marginal victory either way. I think the reason some Axis players give up, is that they are looking at fighting on with the main hope being about a 50-50 shot at a marginal defeat or a decisive defeat and a slim chance of a draw at best. It would be nice if they had more to hope for than that.

I do like harrybanana's suggestion about changing when the game ends based on US entry. But as the game is now configured - I think Axis survival until the end (Fall of '46) is a (marginal) Axis victory in game turns - and, as aletoledo notes, is much better than the historical Axis performance.

The other is inexperience leading to large errors. I am losing a game badly right now as the Allies as my opponent pulled a splendid trick I had not seen or considered - something I will be much less likely to fall for next time (I hope). Hence experience will cut down on the complete overruns.

I don't suppose you'll let us in on the trick?

Not so much a trick as a tactic - and I vastly prefer showing those in actual game rather than just posting them