From: rpc@moscom.com (Robert Colbey)
Newsgroups: rec.games.board
Subject: Re: A&A Game Balance
Date: 25 Jan 93 05:37:32 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., E. Rochester, NY
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.3 beta PL7]

Patrick Menard (pmenard@cse.unl.edu) wrote:
: rpc@moscom.com (Robert Colbey) writes:
: 
: >Keith Allan Schneider (keith@cco.caltech.edu) wrote:
: >: rpc@moscom.com (Robert Colbey) writes:
: >: 
: >: 
: >: 
: >: >f12008ad@triton.unm.edu writes:
: >: 
: >: >A quick summary of my game-balancing rule modifications:
: >: 
: >: >NO new industrial centers. This favors the Axis because it keeps the Allies'
: >: >lines of supply longer than the Axis', at least until the Axis has expanded
: >: >it's territory.
: >: 
: >: I think this tends to favor the Allies, actually.  Most Japan players
: >: end up building a few ICs on the mainland.  The only allied IC that seems
: >: to be commonly built is perhaps an English IC in India.
: >: 
: >: keith
: >If America and/or Britain build ICs in asia, Japanese expansion is severely
: >hampered. 
: 
: Unless Japan can take the IC and then things go REAL bad for the allies.
: 
: >An IC in South Africa coupled with American transports to the
: >northwest african countries effectively knocks Germany completely out of
: >africa in a couple of rounds.
: 
: The US can still do this from the Mainland and not have to waste 15 IPC on an
: IC.  Not having this factory doesn't hurt them that much.

South Africa is a British territory. That IC would be British. I would certainly
not advocate the US wasting money on an African IC. An IC in Finland-Norway,
on the other hand, is a different story.

: 
: >With transports, Japan's lines of supply
: >are shorter than anyone's, including Russia, who is also constrained
: >to place most, if not all of its new troops on the european front. Thus
: >Japan can expand almost at will in asia, once it has defeated the Allied
: >forces there at the start of the game.
: 
: Hehe, well, germany can expand almost at will in asia, once it has defeated the
: Allied (Russian) forces there at the start of the game.  Seriously, Japan has
: to commit all it can on the offensive, which means lots of tanks.(unless you 
: like plodding along at 1 per turn)  Tanks mean 1 per transport, or 3 on the
: mainland(from an IC) and the transports are free to ferry troops across(2 per
: transport) or even more tanks, or help the rest of the fleet crush the US
: flotilla.
: 
: >Attrition is on their side.
: 
: I (of course) disagree with this.  The Axis have to strike hard and fast to
: get the Allies below them on the income scale. Axis start with 57, Allies
: with 90 hardly a situation I would just "sit and wait".  If the Axis do,
: soon there edge in units will not exist and the Allies will still make more
: each turn.  Also, Russia just needs to build 3 turns worth of men in Karalia
: and with 2 planes of its own, and 2 planes from Britain, its impregnable and
: can concentrate on Japan.(It might even take Ukraine and Eastern Europe for
: good measure if Germany will just sit there)  Also, Britain and the US can be
: bombing the hell out of Germany so the Axis will have even less money.  The US
: can send its fleet (beefed up with 5 or 6 Subs(or 2 or 3 subs and a carrier))
: and attack the Japanese fleet.  The US will lose, but Japan will either lose
: all its transports,(and effectively halt the invasion) or lose expensive naval
: units it cannot afford to replace.  Either way, the US has enough money to re-
: build its fleet in 2 turns.(or A fleet anyway, it won't be anything to be 
: proud of :) and attack again.  This will kill lots of transports again, either
: the ones left from the first attack or the ones Japan just built.
: 
: The Axis cannot just sit back and wait, unless they get VERY lucky.(on the order
: of 10^9) or the Allied players are indept.(in which case you could have Germany
: declare war on Japan and the axis would probably still win)

When did I ever suggest that the axis sit back and wait? When I said that
attrition favored the Axis, I was referring to local attrition, in Asia and
Africa, where the supply lines of the Axis are much shorter than those of
the Allies if no new ICs are built. The Axis should grab as much land in
Asia, and possibly Africa too, as possible early on.  German victory against
the Allies on the Eastern front is by no means assured. All-out attack on
Karelia on the 1st round puts all of the Axis' chances of success on the
roll of the dice in a single battle. This is the strategy I choose if I
don't have all night to play, and don't mind terribly if I lose.

Yes, after several rounds, the US can attack the Japanese fleet with enough
to destroy Japan's transports, and maybe a couple more pieces besides. But
this will be only a 1 round interruption in Japan's ability to ship units
to he mainland, and will cost the US a great deal. And the US will not be
there to do it again for several more rounds. The biggest loss to the Allies
in this the the opportunity cost of not having the wherewithal to get into
the European an African theaters if all its money is spent in a futile 
attempt to destroy the Japanese navy.

: 
: >And
: >Germany, similarly, with a modest Mediterranean fleet, has the shortest
: >line of supply to africa.
: 
: But cannot afford to supply Africa with too many units.( unless Russia plans
: on becoming REAL friendly towards them.)

If Britain doesn't have an IC in Africa, and the US is fighting a naval war
against Japan, as you suggest, Germany would not have to supply Africa with
many units to have control. And in fact, I have, on occasion, been able to
move those African forces through the middle east to flank the Russian
defense and link up with the Japanese in Asia.

I have found that the best Allied strategy against competent Axis opponents
is for the US and Britain to get as many ground troops into the European
theater, while keeping Germany from overrunning  Africa. A US fleet off
Britain allows the British to have a navy which can't be destroyed by the
Luftwaffe. Germany becomes caught in the two-front war. This is inevitable
against competent Allied players. Germany must be prepared for this eventuality.
I prefer the Fortress Europe approach: grab as much land in Africa as you can,
keep the Brits and Americans out of the war as long as possible by destroying
there navies, and tie up as much Allied resources as possible, while Japan
wins the war in Asia.
Newsgroups: rec.games.board