Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
4 Posts

Axis & Allies Europe 1940» Forums » General

Subject: No to NOs rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
John Griffey
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Many of the National Objectives are just absurd. Paying attention to all of the fiddly, often absurd MOs is what I like least about the game.

E.g., Germany gets more IPC for controlling Leningrad, Moscow, Stalingrad that USSR gets. (And then there's the already brutal punishment of losign a capital.) USSR gets more IPC for controlling German homeland territories than Germany gets. Germany gets IPC for having a unit in Egypt. (Say what ? Afrika Korps was romantic, but a drain on the German war effort.) +5 IPC for New Guinea, New Britain, and Solomon Is., and +3 IPC for all ANZAC territories Allied controlled exaggerates the importance of Australia-NZ even more, and it is already exaggerated (8 IPC for Great Britain and 12 IPC for Australia-NZ: Psshaw!)

Some NOs make sense. Germany should get extra IPC for remaining at peace with USSR. Britain should get points for purging the Atlantic of all Axis warships (not just German subs, as in the game).

Some NOs which should have been included were not included. I notice only Germany gets points for German -- USSR peace, although both sides benefited from it. Germany/Italy should get some points for having sea access to Argentina/Chile (the only neutrals of economic value), a break in the blockade. Japan should also get points for linking up with the Axis.

I think the major reason Germany is weak in this game is that the German IPC territories are ludicrously weak: 5 + 5 + 4 = 14 PC for the three Germany territories, while Australia-NZ is worth 12 IPC. Say what?

(I would add that Hungary and Romania were merely "Pro-German," not active, until Germany defeated France.)

In Rise and Fall of the Great Powers by Kennedy he cites a table in which the great powers' "war potentials" were estimated by our War Department in 1937 as approximately as follows:

USA: 40% of world total.
Germany: 14%
USSR: 14%
Great Britain: 10.5% (not sure if this included all the Empire). France: 4.5%
Japan: 3.5%
Italy: 2.5%

Note that Germany is rated as equal to USSR even before German annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia.

I'm not saying the game should express the above values exactly. There are other factors such as morale, the bigger bang for buck of low tech armies such as China's, etc. But if Germany is considered under-powered in the game a better remedy was upping its IPCs and/or lowering its adversaries' IPCs. rather than adding the fiddly NOs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
flag msg tools
badge
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For all aspects of the game you can find specific details that make no sense historically, but on an overall level I really like what NO's do for the game.

Just like the rest of the game system, NO's are not meant to precisely model the historical situation. They represent each nation's critical strategic objectives. These objectives might not all be strictly "control territory X that could generate Y tons of iron ore or oil, or contain some important industrial area". It could also be "gain the initiative on that front to maintain public support for the war effort". The capture of Moscow would probably have given a huge morale boost to the German people and war machine in general, and a major corresponding setback for the Allies. As such giving IPC rewards that are not proportional to the industrial potential of the territories in question could be reasonable.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Appel
United States
Cumberland
Maryland
flag msg tools
They are also used to encourage certain actions, like the US NO's regarding islands in the Pacific. Without these there is even less of a reason to spend money on the Pacific as the US.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Sallot
United States
Fort Leavenworth
Kansas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I attend to agree with the thesis of this thread. The NOs are not very relevant to the game or history. Perhaps they were placed there for play balance but there are better options.

To support my arguement I will post the following thoughts.
1) 30 extra IPCs for the US not being invaded; really? just ajust the production capacity appropriately to reflect increased production.
2) Having increased production because of achieving a psychological advantage seems a bit of stretch.
3) IPCs represent the potential to contribute to the war effort in a materiel way. The IPCs represent natural resources, labor (skilled and Unskilled), infrastructure, industrial capacity and management of said factors. Most NOs are already preexisting conditions (Swedish Ore, US production capacity, Russo-German trading, etc.), so are the add ons?
4) Perhaps, some of the terroties are devalued? NOs are used to offset.
5) More sinsiter, is there a political agenda behind the IPC value of the terrorities?

oh well just a few quick thoughts and an attempt to capture some of dissoance with NOs.
 
 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.