Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Discussion of GameTable Online's version of the classic strategy game. Strategy discussions, feature requests, bug reports all go here!

Should the allies be forced to play in the Pacific?

Yes, and the set up should stay the way it is
2
7%
Yes, but the fleet at Hawaii should be pulled back to sz 55 (coast of W USA)
2
7%
Yes, but with some other option
4
15%
No, I like the game the way it is and I don't care about historical accuracy.
19
70%
 
Total votes : 27

Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby kemal81 » Tue Sep 21, 2010 9:57 pm

I think many of us get annoyed when USA simply puts all its fleet to Atlantic and ignore the Pacific. Then 3 powers focus on Germany and kill it. We all know that USA couldn't afford to do something like that in the real war since this would have open the door for the Japanese invasion. I have a suggestion how USA can be forced to play in the Pacific so the game can become more realistic. If Japan accomplishes the Pacific dominance (that is Japan controls all the islands), then Axis should automatically win the game before they conrol the required number of victory cities. Now with this requirement USA can't ignore the Pacific anymore, and we can have a good all Pacific War. I think this will make the game more fun too. Personally I would like to see more naval battles in this game which in my opinion doesn't happen a lot.
So let me know what you guys think. I am open to opinions whether you agree or not.
Last edited by kemal81 on Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:01 pm, edited 4 times in total.
AKA theTurk
User avatar
kemal81
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby smalldog47 » Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:31 am

Cool idea...something like japan controls all its original territory+a certain ipc# around 46 ish ..Maybe throw in that it needs to control 3 of the following 5 also haw/midway/aussie/ak/nz..
smalldog47
Swordsman
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:11 pm
Location: Oxford Massachusetts

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby whooper » Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:50 am

I've not played the 1942 edition yet, but from the posts that I've read, it sounds like there will be a lot more naval battles. Maybe that will be close to what you're looking for.

I agree that it could use more naval battles. It's hard to win with US if you try a Pacific war, but sometimes it's fun trying.
whooper
Squire
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby whooper » Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:57 am

Feel free to challange me in PBE sometime. If you leave my Pearl fleet, then I'll wage a Pacific War with US (or vice versa).
whooper
Squire
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby kemal81 » Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:32 pm

whooper wrote:I've not played the 1942 edition yet, but from the posts that I've read, it sounds like there will be a lot more naval battles. Maybe that will be close to what you're looking for.

I agree that it could use more naval battles. It's hard to win with US if you try a Pacific war, but sometimes it's fun trying.


I think the game is more balanced when USA plays in the Pacific. It becomes unbalanced for the Axis when USA goes only to Europe. In AA 1942 it allows Germany to have subs in the Atantic I think (I haven't played that game against a human). Which is good since then you have battle over Atlantic just like in the real war. But still most of the games are missing the Pacific War. This is like missing half of the actual war. I played many times in the Pacific even after losing my Hawaii fleet and won about 50% of the time.
Most of us agree that the game is set more in favor of Allies than Axis. Forcing US to play in the Pacific will make the game fair for both sides. I simply want the game look more like the actual war but not necessarily to end most of the time like the actual war.
And no I can't play a game if you know what I'm going to. Other than that I will be happy to play against you an ordinary game.
AKA theTurk
User avatar
kemal81
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby dgss1 » Fri Sep 24, 2010 8:42 am

Round 1 moves by allies set up the Pac strats.

Round 1 moves by axis can stop it and make allies/usa go Atlantic. Sometimes it the dice to-

I dont like the idea, the game is not broken as is.

Is there room for changes and different objectives, Yes, But you need to be able to edit the board/rules and set up.

dg
User avatar
dgss1
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 457
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:42 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby rockismyreligion » Fri Sep 24, 2010 12:44 pm

This necessitates some add-on optional victory conditions, much like how A&A CD had used.
Image
My Rockstar Name is Ace Neil.
http://rockstarname.com/index.php

-Founder of Team Rock
-5th Member of Team Kitty
-Member of the Gentlemen's Club
User avatar
rockismyreligion
Superhero
 
Posts: 1573
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:06 pm
Location: MD

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby kemal81 » Fri Sep 24, 2010 9:46 pm

dgss1 wrote:Round 1 moves by allies set up the Pac strats.

Round 1 moves by axis can stop it and make allies/usa go Atlantic. Sometimes it the dice to-

I dont like the idea, the game is not broken as is.

Is there room for changes and different objectives, Yes, But you need to be able to edit the board/rules and set up.

dg

I didn't say the game is broken as is right now. It's almost balanced with allies have slightly more advantage. I was just thinking about making the game more like the real war, that's all. But I thank you for sharing your opinion.
AKA theTurk
User avatar
kemal81
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby Yoper » Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:44 am

The ftf tournament that I run (World Boardgaming Championships) has different victory conditions than the OotB VCs, which helps to drive more action in the Pacific.

I developed my system for use with the Revised game but since that map is virtually the same as in the AA42 game, it can be used there too. It isn't an option for use here on GTO, but you can take the information and use it at home.

Adjudication System-
The determination of who wins a game will be based upon the control of Victory Territories (VTs). The Victory City method of determining a winner will NOT be used. Each side controls 12 Victory Territories at the beginning of the game. The Victory Territories are listed below.

AXIS POWERS

GERMANY
Germany
Western Europe
Southern Europe
Eastern Europe
Ukraine SSR
Norway

JAPAN
Japan
Manchuria
French Indochina
Philippine Islands
East Indies
Borneo

ALLIED POWERS

USSR
Russia
Caucasus
Archangel
Novosibirsk

UK
United Kingdom
India
Anglo-Egypt
Australia

USA
Eastern US
Western US
Hawaiian Islands
Sinkiang

If a player holds 18 (or more) VTs for a full round of game play (From the end of a country's turn to the beginning of that same country's next turn.), then that player automatically wins the game.

In the event of a VT tie at the end of the game, whichever side increased its IPC total is the winner. If the game is still tied after reviewing the IPC totals, then the GM will make a determination of the winner based upon the game situation at the time the game ended.

If a player chooses to concede a game before it has reached the 18 VT automatic win threshold or the game time limit (4.5 hrs), a default score of 19 VTs and +30 IPCs will be awarded to the winner.
IL is the Donald Sterling of the A&A community!
Yoper
Veteran
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:43 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby TexasToast » Sun Oct 17, 2010 10:03 am

Yopper,
Maybe we could get a permanent post on the info you provided, in the hopes it drums up some more interest & this info doesn't end up on pg 4 by next year!
TexasToast
Squire
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:21 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby Yoper » Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:21 am

TexasToast wrote:Yopper,
Maybe we could get a permanent post on the info you provided, in the hopes it drums up some more interest & this info doesn't end up on pg 4 by next year!


I don't see this being a fix unless there is a way to actually implement it into a game people are playing.

At least on a site like Triple A, you could come up with a variant and get it added as a choice to be played. I haven't done this, but one could do it.
IL is the Donald Sterling of the A&A community!
Yoper
Veteran
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:43 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby rjscmk » Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:39 pm

Sitting here at Jiffy lube, so I figured I'd check the forum.
First, you saw my reaction yesterday to turning tail the old fashioned way in the Pacific with 1942 rules. Shhhh, I'd like each new op to learn the hard way ;)
But on to your suggestion. Thanks for opening a discussion on balancing or historificating (to coin a term) the war. I'd love a chance to win a war as axis starting the game along more historic lines allowing for the fact that our allies have better communication and our "Hitler" isn't a complete nut job.
So far, I've had pretty good success against the "abandon the pacific" move.
An unmolested Japan can wreak havoc on Russia and China (also not historical). At this point if Germany can hold everyone else back, before you know it Japan is sitting in cauc or moscow. Dice can help!.
I'd love to hear from the real AA game developers that frequent GTO. Does the anniversary edition support a more "realistic" war progression? I'd try any variations or tweaks. Non aggresion pacts, different starting units, anything at all. I have optional additions to revised somewhere that allow for russian prodution elsewhere non aggreSsion penalties etc. Keep it going folks.
rjscmk
Warrior
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 4:24 pm

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby kemal81 » Thu Oct 28, 2010 10:32 pm

So, I decided to make a poll. Let's see what happens. I realized for this to work Japan should not be able to attack Pearl Harbor since in the real war they did not have a second attack. It is Spring 1942 and Japan already did their attack few months earlier. Probably then we should have less of UK Navy's presence there.
Don't get me wrong. I am not saying the game is unbalanced or anything. I only want to see more historically accurate game. Maybe slightly in favor of Allies in Revised Edition and in favor of Axis with 1942 edition. I loved that we actually have battle over Atlantic in 1942 edition. But that one really eliminates Pacific War. I have played only few games and I dont see how USA can afford to put any ship there. Then this means maybe we need a stronger UK fleet in Atlantic.
Right now we pretty much have European theatre as being close to history in Revised edition and may be somehow Africa, too.
1942 added battle over Atlantic to that.
If we have Pacific War and Japanese-Russian non-agression pact (at least for the first few rounds of the game), then we can have a complete WW2 game.
Does Anniversary edition make it possible to have all of those major theatres btw? I am sure they don't have Pacific dominance requirement but may be the set up there makes the Allies player to stay in the Pacific. I assume you must have Battle of Atlantic since subs have the same rules as in 1942 and I read somewhere that presence of China as another power forces Japan to focus on them and not attack so much to Russia which in a way you have the non-agression pact.
AKA theTurk
User avatar
kemal81
Swashbuckler
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:03 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby DJ_Slick » Fri Oct 29, 2010 10:30 am

kemal81 wrote:So, I decided to make a poll. Let's see what happens. I realized for this to work Japan should not be able to attack Pearl Harbor since in the real war they did not have a second attack. It is Spring 1942 and Japan already did their attack few months earlier. Probably then we should have less of UK Navy's presence there.
Don't get me wrong. I am not saying the game is unbalanced or anything. I only want to see more historically accurate game. Maybe slightly in favor of Allies in Revised Edition and in favor of Axis with 1942 edition. I loved that we actually have battle over Atlantic in 1942 edition. But that one really eliminates Pacific War. I have played only few games and I dont see how USA can afford to put any ship there. Then this means maybe we need a stronger UK fleet in Atlantic.
Right now we pretty much have European theatre as being close to history in Revised edition and may be somehow Africa, too.
1942 added battle over Atlantic to that.
If we have Pacific War and Japanese-Russian non-agression pact (at least for the first few rounds of the game), then we can have a complete WW2 game.
Does Anniversary edition make it possible to have all of those major theatres btw? I am sure they don't have Pacific dominance requirement but may be the set up there makes the Allies player to stay in the Pacific. I assume you must have Battle of Atlantic since subs have the same rules as in 1942 and I read somewhere that presence of China as another power forces Japan to focus on them and not attack so much to Russia which in a way you have the non-agression pact.


Anniversary Edition includes optional national objectives. When the national objectives are met, the power is rewarded with bonus IPC's in the collect income phase. Sometimes one power benefits from a team (Allied or Axis) accomplishment of the objective. Certain Pacific island groups are included in some of these objectives (I would have to dig out the rulebook to remember which). I believe that both the US and the UK can benefit from the Pacific objectives.
User avatar
DJ_Slick
Swordsman
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:59 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Suggestion to force allies to play in the Pacific

Postby stevieejay » Mon Nov 15, 2010 6:07 pm

You don't have to force me I love crushing the Japanese in the Pacific. However, in 1942 since the set up is such that the UK loses basically all its navy on turn one Russia has a difficult time holding on against an unhindered Germany.
stevieejay
Squire
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 3:38 pm

Next

Return to Axis & Allies

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests