Game favors Axis and is unbalanced

[nnason]

All,
I hope the developers focus on game balance for human players.
This is a game where both sides should have a balanced chance of winning. This will mean there will be some historical inaccuraciesHopefully not many.)
The AI is a training device to prepare players for each other. Developer time is precious and in my opinion should be spent forst on "bigs" and second on Balance.

Remember WiE has had 18 months of hard work by Bill and Hubert and the community is still wrangling over balance versus historical accuracy.

4 of us are in a 4-way game using hotseat. We would really like the "bug" that doesn't allow turn start decisions to be fixed.

[Hartmann]

ORIGINAL: nnason

All,
I hope the developers focus on game balance for human players.
This is a game where both sides should have a balanced chance of winning. This will mean there will be some historical inaccuraciesHopefully not many.)
The AI is a training device to prepare players for each other. Developer time is precious and in my opinion should be spent forst on "bigs" and second on Balance.

I knew that something like this would be coming. I disagree about the AI being just a training device. If that be the case we actually wouldn't need an AI at all, like in "World in flames". Some people need the AI because they can't make the commitment to reliably deliver turns to a human opponent on a schedule. Some people also like to play within a "world" where they can watch AI players duking it out (that's part of why I love "Crusader Kings 2" so much).

I'm playing computer wargames since the 1980ies, but today wouldn't buy a game without a strong and competent AI anymore. I also wouldn't buy a game where "hands off" gameplay would not on average give roughly historical results. That's why I quit HOI (even though I used to be a betatester for HOI1/2). But of course it's Hubert's and Bill's decision what to do with their series.

[BillRunacre]

Good points Hartmann, this is what we constantly struggle with - balancing the game no matter how it is played. [:)]

[Wahhim]

I might as well add my 2 cents to this topic.

I'm playing mostly as Allies, but recently as one of my two games was concluded I've accepted an open challenge created by sveint, whom chose to play as Allies. I don't really think that I'm that good of a player, but he's definitely a great one. In early game he hindered my economy by making a really smart call (but it is his to share with publicly) with a potential of dealing even more economic damage later on. He was a little late when it comes to USSR's infantry weapons level 2, but I guess that was the case bacuase he invaded Finland and I did not annex Lithuania, which makes USSR's tech investments somewhat problematic. He's reached it though, before the huge fights happened. But it didn't help at all. My tanks at lvl 3 just cut into him like a knife through a butter. He wasn't really able to counterattack, because of insuffiecient forces. It's now spring of 1942 and I'm on the verge of getting to panzer's at 5th level with all of the tanks, including heavy and minor's tanks coming into action soon and the doors to his capitals lie open. I don't believe he has enough to stop me, but it remains to be seen. In China I believe I was a bit slow, but I don't think he can recover as well. He was really unlucky with his diplo investments though.

On the other hand in my other game, in which I play as Allies against quite good player, pcolin, he decided to invest more into German units, than into tech. As I never invade Finland to keep USSR's income as high as possible, I always have infantry weapons lvl 2 and have or I'm close to having tanks at lvl 2 and armored warfare done, if Axis player decides to annex Lithuania. Pcolin also had his tanks on lvl 2, and as I've decided to heavily defend Dniepropietrovsk, to buy time for my engineers to finish 2 fortifications on the hills near Rostov. He concentrated most of his combat-valuable units in the South as well, which put a lot of pressure on me. When he tried to encircle the city from the North, I had my counterattack forces made of 2 tanks at lvl 2 and 2 mechanized units attached to Zhukov (rating 9 at this point) destroy 2 of his tanks and one mechanized unit, which all had ok supply from Cherkasy (4-6) and still was able to retreat with most of my attacking units to safety. He was able to destroy only 1 tank in his countermove.

With this comparison I wanted to show what kind of difference can tech make. I believe that one of the solutions to improve USSR's situation may be to give it way more MPP's at the start of the game and by doing so force the player to decide what to do with them (invest into tech or buy units) or perhaps give it more initial investments in tech fromt the get-go.

[zzmzzm]

Tank T-34 is more advanced than any German tanks in 1941, and produced from 1940. But in this game, German tanks are always in the lead.

[HamburgerMeat]

The USSR does get heavy tanks earlier than Germany though

[PanzerCro]

ORIGINAL: ThunderLizard2

ORIGINAL: elxaime

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater



It might be that the supply rule changes are not having enough of an effect on the Japanese, but I would be interested to hear what the situation in China is like a bit later on in when the Japanese have pushed a little further as they'll likely need a bit more careful supply management (when there is typically lower occupational supply for them) to be successful.

I'd guess against a skilled Axis PBEM player the Chinese still have zero chance. The Japanese have two years to concentrate on them with a tech advantage. Due to its early weakness, the US is really no threat until 1943 or so in terms of advancing into the Japanese home areas and the extra economy Japan gains from conquering most of China reduces the MPP gap considerably (not to mention the experienced 12 and 13 strength Japanese armies that can be thrown against India). In the two PBEM so far post patch as Allies, the Japanese more or less are in position to attack the USSR from behind by mid-1942. Usually a good guide to whether a strategy is perceived as a winner is that each opponent adopts it, and the all-in to squash China seems a low-risk high yield approach.

What might be looked at are two aspects.

First, an early all-out Japanese advance into the depths of China would not just have alarmed the Communists in Yenan, but also Stalin and the potent "China Lobby" in the USA, which was an exception to the general pre-war American isolationism. Thought might be given to impacts on their war readiness. Second, it might be worth considering similar "backs to the wall" type events that could trigger, similar to how the UK gets US tanks if Cairo is approached or the USSR can move industry in land. A deep advance and serious threat probably also would have led to the collapse of the Chinese Nationalist government and its replacement by some sort of salvation front. China was no match for the Japanese in WW2 but they were also not the pushovers they often seem to be in the game. The Japanese had more problems with supply and partisans than seem portrayed as well. Whether the Yellow River flood of 1938 has significant impact (aside from civilians) is debated, but it shows the lengths the Chinese were prepared to go. If China wasn't the USSR, they also weren't France 1940.

The idea is not to make an all-China approach impossible, but to make it more of a trade off than currently. Consequences to USSR and USA readiness and some additional triggers may be what is needed.

I've held China in all my MP games. Here's a few ideas:

* Focusing on double investments in infantry weapons, infantry warfare and command and control. Add one level of AA after others
* Pull back two units defending ChangSa on turn 1 even though they are behind fort walls. Otherwise they will be destroyed quickly.
* Put units on both sides of Nanning - an opponent did this in my last game and completely jammed me in the South
* Move an HQ down south ASAP (I just read about fighter trick so will try it next game)
* Move 1-2 corp south to help defend ChungKing and Burma road (varies depending on how aggressive Japan attacks in North)
* Rotate and upgrade units when tech level reached. Double down again on infantry weapons after level 1 is done.
* Use engineer to fortify south of ChungKing

I always lose ChangSa and Nanning by April/May 1940 or so but by late 40/early 41 lines have stabilized after I have level 2 infantry with 1 AA level. By then Japan needs to start focusing on upgrading ships and launching LTAs for eventual entry of US/DEI etc. into the conflict.

What trick is that ?

I find chinese front most challenging in this beautiful game

[PanzerCro]

ORIGINAL: Wahhim


On the other hand in my other game, in which I play as Allies against quite good player, pcolin, he decided to invest more into German units, than into tech. As I never invade Finland to keep USSR's income as high as possible,

So if I don't invade Finland (I am playing as Allies against AI) USSR income will be bigger ? Because USSR is really low on the MPP's before they get attacked by the Germans.

[taffjones]

Hi Bill/ Hubert

In the 1.03 games I have got going at the moment 3 x PBEM add 1 V the AI.

The supply changes are working, even advancing slowly in Russia the spearhead units are struggling for supply. With a similar situation in China.


Once these games come to a end (will be some time as most are in 42/43). I will try a different approach as the Axis and see what effect that has.


It will be prioritising Logistics tech and building HQ units to try chaining HQ's to see what effect on supply to the spearhead units that has.

[BillRunacre]

Thanks taffjones, that'll be useful. [:)]

[smckechnie]

Here are a few moves that the Allies can do to stop the axis.

1. Invest in diplomacy to USA before and right after fall of France. If India is in the war, they get 2 chits to put towards US mobilization, the Brits get 5. Get a few diplomacy hits and Axis are screwed. Messes up entire Japanese time line in the Pacific for expansion. Tons of MPPs going to Russia with convoys right at the start of axis DOW of Russia. Have to test this out more, but think it is a decisive allied move. If axis put MPPs to counter USA diplomacy, they weaken their Russia invasion force.

2. Royal Navy defends DEI. Royal Navy sends 2 subs and puts them next to DEI capital before the Japs get there. This halts Japan from taking DEI on first turn unless IJN sends enough forces to scatter subs. Royal Navy carrier force positioned to wipe out overstretched IJN who is engaged at Pearl Harbor. British mobilize Malaysia, put HQ, fort, and naval bomber. This can be countered by the Japanese, but it is costly.


3. Allies prepare landing force to take Norway right after Germany takes it. Oslo Corps is weakened by DE, French Navy helps with endeavor. Strategic bomber with carriers later hit Copenhagen port from Oslo to 0, allied Navy then gets into the Baltic and wipes out Kriegsmarine surface forces, subs not so much.

4. When the BEF goes to France send the BEF to Marseilles, French Corps there goes to defend Paris area. Evacuate BEF to help defend Egypt before France falls (easy to do as Italian Navy is usually in port till France falls). Build engineer in England to send to Egypt after no Sea Lion to fortify El Alamein. Have India build HQ's, tank unit, and Army unit to send to defend Egypt. Build new HQ's unit in England, send the Gort HQ's to Egypt rather than back to England. 2 British HQ's, 1 India HQ's and units that come that pop up there will make it very hard for Axis to take Egypt. The 2 British HQ's there make the place tough to take. Send British Strategic bomber to Egypt to hit supply at Tobruk and axis HQ's as they try to move towards Egypt.

5. A few things on Russia. Swap out the Russian HQ unit around Leningrad to more experienced commander right away. Current unit that starts is only at 4 leadership level, can sack him to a 6 or 7 level leader right away. Critical to get Russian tech to level 2 infantry ASAP. Keep tank research always at 2 chits. Get armored and infantry warfare chits ASAP too. After these you need command to level 2. Invest at least one chit into air defense. Unlike many players I think the Russian Air Force can hold its own if done right. Put one research chit to air warfare and one to fighters (would have 2 chits to fighters) Do not use the Russian Air Force until you get to level 1 or 2 fighters, have air warfare and command them by Zukov. I usually put Zukov in Southern Russia. The Russians get two experienced fighter units, plus them up and they will do more damage to the luftwaffe than the stupid 1 or 2 level air defense that ground units get. Axis are stretched for fighter units across lots of the Russian front. If your Russians are holding their ground pretty good, purchase a strategic bomber and put research at level one. I know this sounds crazy, but most of the captured cities in Russia only provide the axis with 5 supply. A Russian strategic bomber at a level 1 with 2 attacks with fighter escort will be able to level all the axis supply sources in front of Moscow. The Axis advance will grind to a halt. I know this because Hamburger did this to me with US and British bombers. Allies have to keep Murmansk convoy clear.


I think China is lots harder to conquer now with new 1.03 update.

[HamburgerMeat]

Lots of great ideas from smckechnie! I will have to incorporate these into my Allied plans.

Allies have too much going on for me to keep track of all the possibilities. I prefer the simple land-based brutality of the axis

[sveint]

1. I've done this. It's a gamble, you are betting on the dice gods. If it works out it helps but in reality all you are doing is spending X MPs and forcing Germany and Japan to spend the same X MPs. Not enough to make a difference in Russia.

2. Invade DEI from the south, 2 landing forces is enough. Those subs do not matter.

3. I've done this and if I will encounter this as Germany it is great news. This critically weakens the UK efforts to defend Egypt. It is also a big diplo hit on the US so less/later support from the US for the Allies.

4. This is good advice. The UK must reinforce Egypt and blockade the Italian ports.

5. I'd love to have the MPs to do all that research.

How to win as Germany in three simple steps (makes for a very boring game):
1. Max tank research
2. Build all tank units
3. Overrun the Soviets with your superior tanks
(side note, don't waste MPs on naval etc, focus on things that helps in Russia)

[Sugar]

It is also a big diplo hit on the US so less/later support from the US for the Allies.

Is that the case? In WiE it wasn't afaik.

I`d guess a possible Axis' "counter" would be not to take the DE or to DoW Norway. The benefits are limited anyway, since the only income you'll get is that of the convoy, and that's rarely more than none against most opponents.

Reducing all possible supply sources by strat. bombers is a viable tactic though, I guess the new supply rules need some urgent rebalancing. I really wonder who's idea that was?

[smckechnie]

In reference to sveint's comments.

1. The British in this game are not starved for resources like they are in previous games. You put 4 chits to USA and you will hit something on "dice Gods". Put USA max on industry, which is always a given as US player. If axis do any other invasions that increase mobilization of US. US will be able to build like crazy before war breaks out, 2 carriers, 2 light carriers, 1 maritime bomber. Can ambush Japan at Pearl Harbor, knock out at least 2 jap carriers. Done this on 3 games.

2. Japan doesn't have the forces to attack DEI from the South. 2 British carriers, 1 light carrier, plus surface ships, and Allies will crush the IJN even if they are able to take DEI. Remember the Japanese still have to deal with Pearl Harbor and the rest of the Pacific.

3. It is only a diplomatic hit if allies invade Norway before the Germans! What you do is invade Norway at Oslo right after the April turn where the Germans take Norway. The DE gives the allies the exact time of the invasion of Norway. At the end of the German turn where they take Norway the decision event hits all the garrisons and corps at Oslo strength. The garrisons and Corps get hammered on strength per the DE. Allies then invade and take Oslo. Axis player is then screwed out of the 100 MPPs that they paid for the DE and have to decide if they want to expends resources to attack Norway.

4. First priority for the British is to avert a Sea Lion event, after that defend Egypt.

5. The Russians should have the MPPs if the western allies have cleared the Murmansk convoy route and have done industry chits.

[zzmzzm]

Yes, smckechnie have some good ideas, but these are only ideas. Allies have not enough mpps to achieve these goals.
In the game between I(axis) and ThunderLizard, Japan alomost conquered china in 1942(taken chongqin and lanzhou, kunming), and invade India with elite japan army. Though India use all mpps to build many troops(india does not invest diplomatic), but it is still cannot hold on. If india put 300 or more mpps in diplomatic, surely it will be conquered soon. And Japan teken Vladivostok and deep-going Soviet in 1941 end。
As in Ger_Su, German taken Caucasus and Stalingrad in the latter half of 1942. German have near 900 mpps a turn now. Japan have more than 400 mpps a turn. There is little chance for ALlies.
It seems Axis is obviously dominant at the end of 1942.

China is still too easy to be conquered for a experienced Axis player. This is the most disadvantage for Allies now.

[EarlyDoors]

I do think the T34 does not reach its true glory. How about giving it a mobility advantage over axis mech in snow conditions?

[zzmzzm]

My advice is give tech some time restriction， such as in 1941 we can only research less then 3rd level armor tech . Just like in HOI series game .
So you can not have 5th level tank in 1943.

[Rising-Sun]

There a lot of things in this game is unbalance. For one should have multi ships in a single hex.

So having a hex, put a multi hexes inside of it, like up to seven hexes per hex on the strategic map. Should have been like that for all engagements.

So having capitol ship in the center and screening around it.

Sorry I didn't like the way things are setup in this game. Look nice though.

[Hartmann]

SC always had the "one hex=one unit" basic rule, and that's part of what made it appealing to me (maybe because I was coming from chess to grand strategy). If the series would suddenly introduce stacking of multiple units in one hex (like e.g. "Third Reich" did back then), I would switch to other games.