Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blashy

Increasing USA join % instead of bid system.

Recommended Posts

I figured in doing so it would provide a more accurate feel of how WW2 Germany was.

By that I mean, it would have to take on Russia without having conquered via cookie cutter. Or if CC was done you would most likely be short of troops for barbarosa and USA would be ready for invasion sooner than usual.

I just find the bidding system too "gamey".

You could also play with increasing USSR join % as well.

I'm sure a good join % could be accomplished that could eliminate having to bid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, IMHO it recreates more of how WW2 happened.

With a higher join % the Axis will not have time to conquer everything on the map before they have to take on Russia.

So they would be in an MPP deficient instead of having equal or better. Plus for those that play with the luck tech system, Axis tech would not be so high (most likely).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is better because it restricts the Axis ability to conquer all of Europe in 1940-41. I've been playing games where both the USA and USSR start with a higher %, and I prefer it to giving out thousands of extra MPPs.

One thing that bugs me with the bidding system is that the huge amount of MPPs the USSR starts with prevents the Axis from launching a historical-style Barbarossa. Instead there is usually a huge wall of corps that have to be bludgeoned down, something that gets a bit dull with time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh really ...

how about the 'average' barbarossa russia is facing regardles of the bids? They lose 9 armies, 2 tanks and 1-2 AFs+1 cruiser in 1-3 turns. Doesn't it resemble with the 'historical' one?

Guys, the game is not all about respecting every aspect of ww2 - ok, getting sweden, switzelrand, spain and all those minors are indeed unrealistic BUT I am not Adolf , I shape the world as I see fit. I don't have to play exactly how ww2 was 'played'.

OFC, I don't see a problem with folks wanting to play it the 'historical' way. But, IMHO, the actual bidding system provides us with a fair and balanced gameplay, where both sides really have their chances. Well, sometimes you lose games to luck but that's it, you bitch about it in the forums, everybody will say 'OMFG, indeed that sucked' and eventually you'll get over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It just seems silly, seriously, if Germany had started to go after EVERY country, USA joining would have been much faster.

Plus one of the key elements of WW2 was Germany being industrially disadvantage. With the current system you really don't have to deal with that. MPPs are equal by the time barbarosa starts.

I'm playing a game vs. the dumb AI with 30% USA and 50% russia, so far it is looking interesting. AI is dumb but I can't take spain, portugal and egypt. I think I might be able to take sweden and I have troops on their way to Iraq, I have no tech investments because I'm building up for barbarosa which is about to start with having conquered Sweden and Iraq. And my minors have not joined yet, they will in about 2 turns.

There is this sense of "hurry" just like the Germans had it in WW2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hellraiser wrote:

oh really ...

how about the 'average' barbarossa russia is facing regardles of the bids? They lose 9 armies, 2 tanks and 1-2 AFs+1 cruiser in 1-3 turns. Doesn't it resemble with the 'historical' one?

But that's the whole point of trying out other systems. I don't want a historical game every time, far from it, but there's something wrong when we never get anything approaching history.

The Axis can smash a lot of Russian units in turn 1, but that's because the game itself allows them to conquer all of Europe first so that they've got the forces to do so. The problem is that smashing all the forward armies is immaterial when the USSR is starting off with X thousand MPPs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it is not. Russia really needs a lot of cash to try to do something in this game (especially when faced with axis cookie cutter).

Now, the optimized axis strategy (i.e. cookie cutter) is another 'what if' scenario. Could it be done in the '40s ? I doubt it. But this is only a game where both players want to make the best use of the resources to win.

Sometimes I play games where i do not complete fortress Europa prior to Barbarossa - either I want a different game or the allied player already made it too difficult for me to do it in the due time. But I still have to face the 1/5/30 bidding system so Russia will be tough if my Barbarossa is weak. The 1/5/30 is designed to counter the cookie cutter. Any other strategy is risky to use under 1/5/30 unless you develop a good industrial tech.

IMHO this system is a good one. It is a game and it needs balancing so both sides have a chance to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So being stuck in the hurried position the Germans were in, would not be a better feel of the situation?

Sure it is a "what if" , but you still have to be in the same situation in terms of essentiels. And that was the biggest thing with Germany, get to those russian oil wells in the south to cut off Soviet supply and get your own. Because Germany no matter what it did knew it was at a disadvantage in terms of production vs. UK and USSR.

Plus all these MPPs on both sides just creates the most ridiculous line all accross USSR. There is no room for movement or some sneak counter attack by the Soviets.

Getting all of Europe and Africa North before barbarosa is not what if, it's unrealistic. USA and USSR would have been more aggressive instead of just sitting back watching them accumulate all that wealth, knowing full well the NAZIs were not about too settle fore piece after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly Blashy!

Hellraiser it seems that you're stuck on the bidding system. You don't seem to have understood that this suggestion (something I've already tried out) is a different way of balancing the game without bidding.

I don't like cookie-cutter and I don't play that way (pretty much), therefore the type of game I'm happy playing with as Axis must have the minimum need of doing a cookie-cutter strategy.

I don't want to play a game where Germany either can or needs to conquer all of Europe before Barbarossa. Raising the percentages takes away Germany's ability to do so, and removing bidding takes away the need to do so. It balances the game (just as long as you get the percentages right!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far 50% russia and 30% USA is not good enough.

I still got everything except egypt, spain and protugal. (not counting turkey).

And had over 15 units defending for D-Day.

Although I did not have all of russian, I had to use tanks only to blitz for the MPPs, 10+ tanks and 6 AFs instead of the 8+. Only 5 armies.

Had it been a human player, I think it would have been different. The Soviets never mounted good counters and they had a few ares to try and do so.

I would like to try it vs. a human, maybe 50% Soviets and 40% USA. I`ll try 50% USA/Soviets next game vs. AI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blashy, even increasing the join % won´t change much until you cange in a most radical way. Either you rise it so high that whatever Germany does the Allies join or if not simply all out war will start July 1941 instead of Sepetember -November 1941. Even if you rise the KB though high that Germany can do nearly nothing my tactic woukld be conquering as much as I can . (Norway Sweden at least. Wait until last possible moment to conquer all minors even if I have to delay Barbarossa. SC is a long term strategy game where the side with most MPS will most likely win.

To win this game the most viable way for Germany simply is to conquer all industrial resources and try to build up a superior force to crush the enemy. It is nearly impossible to "Blitzkrieg " the UDSSR.

The flaw in SC is that minor nation and town etc are simply to valuable. Afrika and Iraq is as valuable as the whole USA. If conquered France puts as much money in your income as Germany... eetc.

Declaring war in Sc is a resource conquering war not for superioar attack / defense positions. The conquered resources are much to valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sombra, I've been playing with it and it works a whole lot better IMHO.

You can blitz Russia, you just have to choose a path, you can't go after every city. It changes the way you play the game with Germany. I'm in a 50% join USA/USSR vs. the AI and had it been a human player it would be a much more intense game.

I used 10 tanks, 8 AFs and 4 armies with the rest being non german corps so my generals would supply the proper troops. I raced to 3 cities and 2 mines.

I've already got the west trying to land but the AI is dumb at that, were it a human it would be more intense. I have 15 units in France but no HQ at this time to support them.

I could not get Spain, Portugal, Egypt (suez yes) and Iraq.

So far I see a much more realistic picture of Germanies "achilles heel" in WW2 which was resources and the allies joining faster because of over aggressive behavior early on (Sweden, Vichy and Greece)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blashy, the game would be cookiecutter still because you can´t leave the resources for your enemies to grab.

Game against human opponent will be. France will surrender around June 1940. Most important minor grab... July 1941 USA joins.... Barbarossa kicks off. Iraq, Greece, Spain same round or two turns after if you wanted to knock out Rusia .... MP advantage for Axis as usal . Rusia will have nothing!!!

Can´t threaten anything this situation is even better for the axis then before because Neitehr Rusia nor Allies have troops to start any succesful action on their own. MP advantage will shift later but more permanently in the favor of the Axis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quite well balcanced game is "Fall blau" . IF you don´t want to play the boring cookie cutter. Zap developed a risky but interessting other strategy.

Still you will always face the Problem that Alexandria has the same value to Germany then Hamburg or even Berlin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could also ban any Axis attack on Switzerland, Spain and Portugal. Increse the war readiness for the USSR to 45% and the US to 10%. Use a less extreme bid system like say....1:1:10.

Hard to say how it will turn out but could be worth a try?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go after the minors Iraq, Spain and Portugal and Egypt you'll be facing USSR without enough troops to press on and by the time you do have enough you have UK/USA doing DDay and Russians can mount some type of offense because they are not being annihilated each turn.

I would definitly like to see an experience player take Axis with USA/USSR at 50% and see what he can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PBEM move though slow and there is always the doubt about reloads.

But if you want please tell me exactly what kind of game you want. Starting join percentage on 50% for US and Rusia thats all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...