Do the Germans ever lose?

[Rudy]

Hello, Ive played SC about ten times, with different players and in every game the Germans won! I played both sides, started 1939, and the axis won every time. Have any of you guys had the same experience? Just a thought here, I find American and British prodution money to low.

[Archibald]

In the last four games I've played TCP/IP I've won three times as the Allies. The time I lost I was playing the Axis! It seems to be the other way round for me.

Before v1.06 I would have agreed with you, but the new research rules seem to have robbed the Axis of their early advantage.

[zappsweden]

in my opinion, axis DO win. The USA should have more MPP especially later in the game. The UK should also have slightly more (Spain or Iraque has roughly the same MPP as UK, what a joke).

The axis can dominate the map when Russia and USA are neutral. Axis can then take every nation except Turkey and when Russia and USA joins there is nothing that can turn the tide.

Axis has higher MPP than the allies instead of the opposite. After siberian transfer there are no good new left for the allies. The high axis MPP begin to take its toll.

[Liam]

I agree if the Axis get into Egypt, Vichy and Iraq. You're trouble! A smart Axis player can cut off Gibraltar & Spain if the Allies pull a Dutch Gambit and fail. Then you're really bad off.

I maxed out production at 512 mpp for Germany in my current game and I'm losing. Takes a good defensive player in Russia a strategist. Proper spending on the right equipment hit the right places. Maybe Normandy isn't the best place to fight.

Try taking out Poland, Low Countries/France. Then move into Norway and slowly prepare to cut off British supply in Egypt, the Suez. Hit them from both sides after you destroy their fleet. Develop a good tech for fighters/industrial tech and prepare a force to counter anything the Allies through at you in the North Sea. That's the long goal against US entry... Move up corps through Caucas via Iraq and cut him off if he doesn't protect his oil. What I've found key and been failing to do, is get AHEAD in Russia. Take those units down! Before he has much of a chance to develop tech. Always surround and cut off those units, get 3 striking hexes and beware of disasters! It hurts your HQ experience level which is your major advantage vs the Russians as well as Airpower. If you get level 3 AC by the time you attack Russia, it's probable to kill a Russian fighter in 1 turn.

At some point rally your forces, wipe out Moscow and prepare strong Italian Army for any arrivals from the US. Max them out with 2 good German fighters HQ and some armies. Usually I smash up the US if I have the #s

[Jollyguy]

Exactly. After the shot in the arm provided by the Siberian Army, it's downhill for the Allies. The Axis temporarily slows their advance due to the Siberians, fixes their lines, then within a few turns resume the push. The Axis has accumulated a massive force by that time, and begins to tilt the economic battle of mpps in their favor. Eventually the tilt becomes an Axis flood. As more and more players figure out how to do this, there won't be many people willing to play the Allied side.

In the ZappSweden vs Rambo match, when I saw that ZappSweden took Iraq, and had Sweden also, I knew that was it. That probably gave ZappSweden on the order of 800 mpps per turn, to a combined 650 or so for the Allies, with the disparity getting wider with every resource hex taken by the Axis.

I'm looking forward to this being addressed in SC 2, but would LOVE for something to be addressed in SC 1 with another patch. I continue to think the easiest fix would be increased US and Russian readiness, but I'm sure there must be other ideas out there on how to deliver additional mpps to the Allies later in the game (I think balance is okay the first couple years, and fairly represents Axis dominance up to that point).

What it boils down to is the Axis becomes an economic powerhouse, a super heavyweight, while the Allies are stuck being stunted wannabes, middleweights at best.

It's also off balance when you think with a good sized minor or two under their belt, Italy basically matches US production, and out does England!

[JerseyJohn]

How much of this is due to not having seasonal changes causing breaks in the action?

Especially the Russian Winter which closed down the German war machine at least three months a year with a month of mud at the start and finish of the freezing weather.

[ January 04, 2003, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[zappsweden]

Jollyguy.

I just lost a game (my first loss on the 1.06 patch). My opponent (Terif) had axis and he conquered all neutrals except Turkey and Finland. he did it before Russia and USA entered!

There is no way to prevent axis from doing that. The mediterranean is dominated by Axis air and axis easily lands in vichy France and Greece and keep on pounding on Egypt. Spain, Portugal and Iraque is next.

[ January 04, 2003, 09:13 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[zappsweden]

the sadest thing is the options in the game. If there were any option you could switch on/off to make allies stronger but the default options are already allies biased.

Read my post "Hubert. Axis cannot be stopped" where i state my unhappiness with the current game balance

[ January 04, 2003, 09:17 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Augustus]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

How much of this is due to not having seasonal changes causing breaks in the action?

Especially the Russian Winter which closed down the German war machine at least three months a year with a month of mud at the start and finish of the freezing weather.

JerseyJohn:

Gotta say that's one of the better suggestions...I think slowing down Axis (and Allies) in appropriate climate zone would be a brilliant addition to this game or in SC 2.

Say, movement 1/2 points from Jan. - Mar. on eastern front, north, central and southern sections, plus 1/2 attack strength (remember, most of the stuff froze up anyways, both soldiers and materiel)

Cheers, and a very good suggestion...would really balance the game.

[JerseyJohn]

Augustus

Thanks for the good word, I think the idea was thought up long before I started pushing it, probably by either dgaad or Bill Macon or Immer or any of a bunch of guys who've been in this thing longer than myself. But it does seem awfully obvious that weather accounts for much more than just slowing down or speeding up the action. Hopefully Hubert is incorporating it by now as many posters have made entries about it. Especially in this situation, where terms like General Winter were so closely connected with the war as a whole.

[ January 04, 2003, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[kenfedoroff]

What do you guys think of an increased cost for Axis transport/operate?

Double the cost, or more!

Has anybody playtested this?

Maybe Hubert can explain.

Sincerely,

Ken

[Augustus]

Originally posted by JerseyJohn:

Augustus

Thanks for the good word, I think the idea was thought up long before I started pushing it, probably by either dgaad or Bill Macon or Immer or any of a bunch of guys who've been in this thing longer than myself. But it does seem awfully obvious that weather accounts for much more than just slowing down or speeding up the action. Hopefully Hubert is incorporating it by now as many posters have made entries about it. Especially in this situation, where terms like General Winter were so closely connected with the war as a whole.

JerseyJohn;

Thanks for passing credit on to earlier pundits of this notion...

Yes, General Winter would be a welcome addition.

Cheers...

[Archibald]

I still don't think the Axis have a clear advantage under v1.06. In the current Christmas Tournament, six out of the nine games finished so far have been won by the Allies.

It'll be interesting to see how the remaining three games go, and perhaps even more interesting to see if Hubert takes the Allies when he plays the winner.

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by Archibald:

I still don't think the Axis have a clear advantage under v1.06. In the current Christmas Tournament, six out of the nine games finished so far have been won by the Allies.

It'll be interesting to see how the remaining three games go, and perhaps even more interesting to see if Hubert takes the Allies when he plays the winner.

I told you it is like a soccer penalty, It all depends on the shooter (axis). If Both the shooter and the goalkeeper are world class then the shooter scores about 85-90% of the times. If they are not professionals that percentage might be below 50%.

[Jollyguy]

I agree with ZappSweden. An accomplished Axis player is simply going to bowl over ALL competition.

Saying X% of the tourney games were won by Allies, therefore there is no imbalance, is comparing apples and oranges. I'm a good player, and when playing as the Allies, can consistently beat average Axis players who don't have enough games, and thus experience under their belts.

But pit me against a very good Axis player like Zapp or Rambo, and I'll lose virtually every time.

It only takes so long to figure out how to win as the Axis. Every determined player should be able to figure it out eventually. Kind of like opening Pandorra's box. Once opened, the secret escapes, and can't be put back in...except in this case it can. It's called another patch.

[jon_j_rambo]

Jolly --- Want to play? You can have either side.

Rambo

[Jollyguy]

Rambo (Ken);

No, but thanks. I enjoy SC as a diversion now, generally after a getting something done, through a series of chores, a hard day at work. I like to put a game on in the background and SC.

With the Axis imbalance, it's no challenge to play that side. With the Axis imbalance, If I played the Allies, you would win.

What I like to do now, while waiting for another patch or SC 2, is when I get the urge to game, I play as the Allied side against less accomplished players. They can throw some real curves, and also win X% of the time. They end up being good games, because even an average Axis player makes it tight in Russia, and things do get tight. I had one recently where the Axis was one hex from Moscow, and pressing in the Caucuses, before I turned the tide. In short, I only want to play games where BOTH sides have a chance to win. The only way I can do this now is to play as the Allies against Axis players of average or above average ability, but not top notch like you, Zapp, or Arby.

In short, I don't mind losing, as long as I had a chance to win, and the game was challenging and fun.

Plus, as a CPA, tax season looms. I wouldn't have time for the marathon games you and I knocked heads over in the past. But I'll tell you, the games you and I did have were some of the best. I learned a lot, and it improved my Allied play.

See Ya

Bob

[jon_j_rambo]

Jolly --- Yeah, I understand the work & life balance issue. And the axis & allies balance. I'm starting out on a new firmware project at work myself. Girlfriend is sick of me sitting on the computer all the time. In the summertime I play golf all the time.

Keep in touch

[Archibald]

Originally posted by zappsweden:

So the problem is a lack of world class players in the Christmas Tournament... Hmmm... I hope you're prepared to put that to the test in Otto's New Year Tournament.

[ January 08, 2003, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Archibald ]

[Archibald]

DOUBLE POST - IGNORE

[ January 08, 2003, 08:34 PM: Message edited by: Archibald ]

[Scorpion_22]

The allies won 5/6 of the in the last tourney?

(With the Rambo thing being a bit fuzzy)....interesting.

Still, you could provide a slight readiness increase to the U.S. - 10% is about correct imho (to put the entry to Christmas 1941), some more chits for the U.S. to start with, and perhaps some M.P.P.s (say in the region of 1000) while the soviet may have their initial mpps and tech levels looked at (say anti-tank and heavy armour research, for historical and gameplay reasons).

Then just distribute this very slightly modified scenario as the official tournament scenario.

With it, the U.S. will have an earlier and more meaningful entry, and the U.S.S.R. might hold a bit better.

[stahlwolf]

Limited/more expensive transport for the Axis would be more historical (esp. for seatransport), also would balance the game, but is hard to include & test i think. But considering sea lion, it should be nessecary, because Germany was never able to do a massive invasion via sea, due to simple lack of transports.

Perhaps the US should get + 30 MPP every year, that makes 210 Points + in '47, also forces the Axis to conquer faster (esp. in Russia as nothing else should be left!).