Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

War Room» Forums » General

Subject: Axis too strong economically at start (late summer/early fall 1942)? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mark Lindberg
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Assuming the start date is August or September of 1942, based on the territory held by Germany in Russia, and the presence of American troops in the Solomons, it seems like the Axis are almost as strong economically as the Allies, when that wasn't really the case. Totals for both sides (if I'm reading the cards correctly) are (Allied listed first): Oil - 18 to 16, Iron - 29 to 25, and Others - 48 to 41.

Japan seems particularly strong here, especially when compared to the US: Oil 8 to 7, Iron 11 to 10, and Others the same at 16.

Nearly all historians would agree that by September 1942 the Axis could no longer win the war, but this is a game that needs to be balanced, so perhaps this is just done for play balance purposes? Or is it possible for the Allies to very quickly and rather easily interdict some of the Axis resources?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Stonemark
United States
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mclrecon wrote:


Nearly all historians would agree that by September 1942 the Axis could no longer win the war, but this is a game that needs to be balanced, so perhaps this is just done for play balance purposes? Or is it possible for the Allies to very quickly and rather easily interdict some of the Axis resources?


Historians have the advantage of hindsight and potentially looking at things that make it easy for them to put into a history book. I am not necessarily disagreeing with that opinion, but the cool thing about any historical game is that you can play the what if's.

War Room gives you a starting point and 1942 is a usual selection for global WWII games in that the Axis was at it's historical high point. Now the month of that "high point" may vary, but it is in general, that year is a fairly balanced era of the war.
The Germans Operation Barbarossa had not succeeded, but Germany had two more years of offensive ability on the east front. Japan had suffered setbacks at Coral Sea and Midway, but at that time in history was far from being defeated.
A turning of the tide has to be considered after the fact.
Suppose Japan had repelled the U.S. led operations on Guadalcanal?
Suppose Germany had won the battle of Stalingrad(Which was not determined yet at that point in time) and seized the Caucasus' rich oil resources?
The beauty of this map lends itself to being able to customize scenarios and develop your own set up for different points in time, or to tweak existing ones.
The game itself has 4 different scenarios to play as it is. Global, Europe, Pacific, and Eastern Front.
As a matter of perspective, I have been of the opinion that once Operation Barbarossa failed, and Japan brought sleeping giant of the United States into the war, that the Axis really did not have much of a realistic chance to win.
But that is just the opinion of a history buff and avid war gamer looking back through 70 plus years of history.

So long answer short, yes there is probably a bit of game balancing going on, that is to be expected. And the Allied strategies had better have one looking at limiting and reducing the Axis resources.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kilian Lydian
Germany
Munich
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
As has been the case with Axis&Allies, the Axis are much stronger economically than they would have been in reality.
But if you based the income and production capability on history, the you'd have to do something like Third Reich, the Axis player wins by holding up long enough, and not actually by beating the opponont.
If you want to have a WW2 game with both sides actually having a chance of winning (and not just by avoiding losing for some time) you'd have to level the playing field, and especially Japan needs a bost to be able to compete.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dust Path
msg tools
There could be other ways of balancing the game, like giving Axis more command tokens for the first turn, certain axis units, e.g. german panzers, japanese cruisers, having better combat capability etc... I in general dislike the notion of "balancing by overpowering economic might".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald M.
United States
flag msg tools
redblackmonkey wrote:
mclrecon wrote:


Nearly all historians would agree that by September 1942 the Axis could no longer win the war, but this is a game that needs to be balanced, so perhaps this is just done for play balance purposes? Or is it possible for the Allies to very quickly and rather easily interdict some of the Axis resources?


Historians have the advantage of hindsight and potentially looking at things that make it easy for them to put into a history book. I am not necessarily disagreeing with that opinion, but the cool thing about any historical game is that you can play the what if's.

War Room gives you a starting point and 1942 is a usual selection for global WWII games in that the Axis was at it's historical high point. Now the month of that "high point" may vary, but it is in general, that year is a fairly balanced era of the war.
The Germans Operation Barbarossa had not succeeded, but Germany had two more years of offensive ability on the east front. Japan had suffered setbacks at Coral Sea and Midway, but at that time in history was far from being defeated.
A turning of the tide has to be considered after the fact.
Suppose Japan had repelled the U.S. led operations on Guadalcanal?
Suppose Germany had won the battle of Stalingrad(Which was not determined yet at that point in time) and seized the Caucasus' rich oil resources?
The beauty of this map lends itself to being able to customize scenarios and develop your own set up for different points in time, or to tweak existing ones.
The game itself has 4 different scenarios to play as it is. Global, Europe, Pacific, and Eastern Front.
As a matter of perspective, I have been of the opinion that once Operation Barbarossa failed, and Japan brought sleeping giant of the United States into the war, that the Axis really did not have much of a realistic chance to win.
But that is just the opinion of a history buff and avid war gamer looking back through 70 plus years of history.

So long answer short, yes there is probably a bit of game balancing going on, that is to be expected. And the Allied strategies had better have one looking at limiting and reducing the Axis resources.


There was a less known battle in Mongolia in which the Soviets defeated the Japanese and a truce had settled. That meant the Soviets could divert most of their Far East troops to stem the German advance into Russia. The Axis didn't have a coordinated plan which was one of their downfalls. The China theater diverted a large portion of the Japanese army way from fighting the other allies too. Americans were largely against getting involved in WW II until attacked at Pearl Harbour. Many what if's.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dust Path
msg tools
The skirmish between Russia and Japan has happened before World War 2, late 1930's IIRC.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
AF Davis
msg tools
Avatar
I suppose one would have to do a lot of tweaking with this game, but I would like to start the war earlier, or even allow for a change of alliances altogether. Some of the most fun I had with A&A was adding a diplomacy variant and then having WWII go completely off the rails. Hmm, this or Cataclysm...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
jamie erskine
Netherlands
Amsterdam
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
At the end of the day, we are playing a game here, so it needs to be balanced somehow.

I would wonder why it wasn't balanced further as the Allies actually have more territories, more strategic value (SV), more land troops, more air units, more ships, more oil, more iron, & more OSR. Or in other words, more of everything.

That may be relative to history, but on a game aspect, wouldn't it mean that the Allies are going to win most of the time? I would find that somewhat of a shame if the game didn't offer some better balance.

Perhaps the game does offer early opportunities for the Axis, perhaps the Axis are in prime position on the map to topple those numbers early on. If not, some might struggle to want to play a 6-hour game as the Axis.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dust Path
msg tools
I think we all agree on that Axis needs to have a fair chance to win. OTOH, that can be adjusted based on the "rules of winning for Axis" or by giving them more initial fighting capability representing better trained troops, better commanders etc... (at least until 1943 or so)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.