Blitz Carnage

[Cybvep]

-Italy: Perhaps the best candidate for a slightly buff in any way. Although well played, the lack of IC and tech seemed to leave them no chance to play an important role in the offensive. Even with the help of the Japanese in the Med they didn't score a point.
-Japan: hard to guess, as we haven't seen much of them. The last update of UK made me feel pity for them.

IMO both Italy and Japan failed in the Med. The Suez part of the plan was good on paper, because Japan should try to bring sth to Europe, but the execution was too chaotic and the HR breach was a quite bad miscalculation on their part. I'm not sure about Gibraltar, because ATM it looks like it's virtually impossible to take in MP without naval superiority in the Atlantic, which is ultra-hard, considering that Germany must do it on its own...

And again, if they move to TFH, then balance will be changed again, so discussing HRs is a bit pointless unless the group decides to stick to FTM.

 

[kelestra]

IMO both Italy and Japan failed in the Med

When I look at the odds, beside arguable game play the didn't have a real chance. The superiority of RN in the Med was overwhelming... The one Japanese CTF wasn't strong enough, was it?

 

[Lamahorse]

Seems the UK has been rather successful in the Naval war. Without their doomfleet in the Pacific, Japan seems to be really suffering and the Americans aren't even involved yet.

Other than a surprise Italian Sealowe, I think the Allies will edge this even without the USA. It's just a matter of time before Germany really starts to hurt manpower wise.

 

[kelestra]

even without the USA

Yup! My main argument. There's no point to have a WWII game without the US. As the skill of the players is very similar, the advantage of UK/FRA/SU is to big.

What major changes of TFH will influence this (in any direction)?

 

[Cybvep]

When I look at the odds, beside arguable game play the didn't have a real chance. The superiority of RN in the Med was overwhelming... The one Japanese CTF wasn't strong enough, was it?

Well, the RN was kicked out of Med. I guess that the ENG player didn't want to lose too many ships and focused on areas outside the Med.

There's no point to have a WWII game without the US

Many MP games are decided before the USA can bring many troops to Europe...

What major changes of TFH will influence this (in any direction)?

New amphibious assault rules, new LL mechanics, new armour penetration rule... Major changes which can affect balance. Some modding will be necessary, e.g. the LL can easily get out of hand.

 

[kelestra]

Well, the RN was kicked out of Med.

I wouldn't say it that way. The RM lost few ships and was damaged in all fights. The RN just made tactical retreat as there is no need to fight constantly in the med. But, most important in terms of "being kicked(aka forced!) out of med", they managed to defend both: Gibraltar and Suez with ease. And also the constant harassment of Italy proves a strong advantage. The UK has just to wait and stretch combat, as they have more IC/LS than Italy and far more starting units. So bringing Japanese forces in was the right move, but you obviously can't force UK in high casualty battles if it don't want to.

Many MP games are decided before the USA can bring many troops to Europe...

Which proves that the games are over before they even began. No clash of titans... But of course a good prove for the original argument of a certain unbalance.

New amphibious assault rules, new LL mechanics, new armor penetration rule...

Yea, the most important changes mentioned. I want to add the capped stacking penalty. I was very interested in your opinion of HOW these changes will influence balance. To my mind there is nothing in there that might be good for the Axis. The changes with amphibious assault will likely making any early landing a bit harder. This may lead to a more impossible sealion. On the other hand any British invasion in Germany will be a bit harder. LL has to be restricted in a way, considering the SU outproduced the Axis anyway and UK wasn't really threatened at all. Also no option for the Axis, as they are limited to resources anyway. Armor penetration might be good for German tanks, as they might be better than early SU units tech wise, but perhaps I am completely wrong with that.

 

[Lord Curlyton]

Honestly, they enjoy the rules they have, they are able to put on an entertaining show for us peanut gallery AAR readers, and they are all rather skilled. I don't see a need for drastic HR revisions until the switch to TFH is made. RN didn't tactically retreat from the Med, they were flat out beaten there, assuming the UK player isn't downplaying his own choices (he did mention in his update that his chances against the JAP/ITA naval combo were basically nil when he pulled out after losing a CV and started the "defend Suez/Gibraltar at all costs" plan). While the UK could have continued to contest, it was a ship losing proposition at that point. Feasting on the rest of the IJN was an easy decision at that point.

If there is any real issue its that Italian and Jap ground forces haven't really been able to achieve significant success against the British. I was expecting a little more there. But then I credit the UK player for keeping them unable to make the gains necessary for the Axis to have a real shot of winning.

 

[Traks]

Yup! My main argument. There's no point to have a WWII game without the US. As the skill of the players is very similar, the advantage of UK/FRA/SU is to big.

What major changes of TFH will influence this (in any direction)?

In TFH USA can join much faster, 2 DOWs by Axis and USA joins Allies.
Usually in 1939 or latest in 1940, which makes it more active player in game.

 

[Cybvep]

I must say that watching the UK being on the defensive was a bit refreshing. It basically removed the Flying Circus on its own, simply because the UK was under intense pressure - sub campaign, Sea Lion threat, the IJN in the Med etc. I'm still wondering whether things would have turned out differently if that HR wasn't breached and the Axis attempted a Sea Lion. It seems that there was a point when the UK was stretched thin.

 

[red_KLG]

I don't understand how everyone seems to be scarred by the "flying circus", while apparently it is ok for a Barbarossa Operation to relate to the pirate Barbarossa and not the Emperor. That is, plunder Moscow and then just leave, while all the raw materials magically appear in Berlin overnight.

Anyway, great game, and I am glad that Ztalin recovered from such an exploitative game tactic.

 

[Berlichingen]

Ah damn, oh well, another try for the Axis powers in the next game eh?

Odds do seem stacked against the Axis, but it was that way in real life. I would suggest to make the game more dynamic and interesting to move more VPs / Victory Locations into the Pacific. This would increase value of Japs to Axis, stretch out British more and make USA more impactful. Right now these MP games seems so German-Russian focused, everything else is a sideshow.

 

[Baltasar]

I don't understand how everyone seems to be scarred by the "flying circus", while apparently it is ok for a Barbarossa Operation to relate to the pirate Barbarossa and not the Emperor. That is, plunder Moscow and then just leave, while all the raw materials magically appear in Berlin overnight.

Anyway, great game, and I am glad that Ztalin recovered from such an exploitative game tactic.

That is because these two things are very, very different. The flying circuis can attack anywhere at any time, retreat and repeat the same insane operation on the other side of the world within short while the temporay capture of Moskov was anything but surprising. Millions of Axis forces creeping towards it giving you ample warning time. It really only was Zids mistake not having sufficient forces around to stop this.

On the other hand, it doesn't do much to sap Soviet strength while the flying circuis forces the Axis to have ready troops around basically everywhere at the same time. If the Allies do landings somewhere, it's all good and well, but the tactic to attack somewhere, destroy some units and rush out just to repeat the same thing very quickly in lots of different places is what makes this tactic so unrealistic (and boring).

 

[Baltasar]

Ah damn, oh well, another try for the Axis powers in the next game eh?

Odds do seem stacked against the Axis, but it was that way in real life. I would suggest to make the game more dynamic and interesting to move more VPs / Victory Locations into the Pacific. This would increase value of Japs to Axis, stretch out British more and make USA more impactful. Right now these MP games seems so German-Russian focused, everything else is a sideshow.

Wouldn't change a thing in these MP games since the Allies and Comintern will eventually outnumber and outtech the Axis. You'd have to add timelimits on the VPs to make it worthwhile.

 

[Baltasar]

I must say that watching the UK being on the defensive was a bit refreshing. It basically removed the Flying Circus on its own, simply because the UK was under intense pressure - sub campaign, Sea Lion threat, the IJN in the Med etc. I'm still wondering whether things would have turned out differently if that HR wasn't breached and the Axis attempted a Sea Lion. It seems that there was a point when the UK was stretched thin.

I don't believe it was due to pressure on the UK but due to the UK losing a whole army corps in the opening stages of the game. If gamla had saved these units, he would have had sufficient good and fast troops for such a thing.

 

[Gen. Marshall]

I don't believe it was due to pressure on the UK but due to the UK losing a whole army corps in the opening stages of the game. If gamla had saved these units, he would have had sufficient good and fast troops for such a thing.

I highly doubt the loss of an army corps alone would have prevented Gamla Stan from going Flying Circus on Germany. I think the constant air campaigns and the Mediterranean Campaign played a greater role in this.

 

[Lamahorse]

What would be really interesting would be if a player could actually hold out as Nationalist China.

 

[CptEasy]

BTW guys, if/when you switch to TFH, you should be careful about the maximum stacking penalty. It gives ridiculous results when the players stack air units or CVs. Just look at North America Series Game #5 AAR.

I saw that. It seemed dodgy and very boring for a realism-nerd as me. We'll have to discuss that.

I would like to hear some suggestions on the possible way the Axis may have scored a victory in this game. Before we suggest some changes in their(!) house rules we should be sure that the Axis had no real chance to win. So let me start:

Nice reflections there . In any case, other commenters are quite right. We will shift to TFH after this game and will have to make a serious go-through of the current HRs which has been tailored for this specific version.

New amphibious assault rules, new LL mechanics, new armour penetration rule... Major changes which can affect balance. Some modding will be necessary, e.g. the LL can easily get out of hand.

Feel fre to contact me personally (not in the AAR) and give a sugestion on how LL-mechanics can be handled in MP.

Honestly, they enjoy the rules they have, they are able to put on an entertaining show for us peanut gallery AAR readers, and they are all rather skilled. I don't see a need for drastic HR revisions until the switch to TFH is made.

Right. Also, it is an impossible task to perfectly tailor HRs. You tailor it judging your last game, but maybe a specific players brilliance/error changed ballance in the way you did not realize, and when tables are turned in next games, you adjustments really can make your game more unballanced, or open for a strategy you did not think off. But we try... And as said before. I think this one was pretty good. I don't blame the HRs for how things turned out... so far.

That is because these two things are very, very different. The flying circuis can attack anywhere at any time, retreat and repeat the same insane operation on the other side of the world within short while the temporay capture of Moskov was anything but surprising. Millions of Axis forces creeping towards it giving you ample warning time. It really only was Zids mistake not having sufficient forces around to stop this.

On the other hand, it doesn't do much to sap Soviet strength while the flying circuis forces the Axis to have ready troops around basically everywhere at the same time. If the Allies do landings somewhere, it's all good and well, but the tactic to attack somewhere, destroy some units and rush out just to repeat the same thing very quickly in lots of different places is what makes this tactic so unrealistic (and boring).

I must agree. Although its odd that stuff just teleport away, you need to protect your capital or take the fall. Amphibious rules, as discussed many times, are not logic at all. But with adjustments in this version I am quite satisfied.

I don't believe it was due to pressure on the UK but due to the UK losing a whole army corps in the opening stages of the game. If gamla had saved these units, he would have had sufficient good and fast troops for such a thing.

Ouuh. He lost more than an army-corps in Holland *evil grin*

What would be really interesting would be if a player could actually hold out as Nationalist China.

Not possible in TFH with a -38 start due to low unity.

 

[Paglia]

Not possible in TFH with a -38 start due to low unity.

You could adjust that by editing the 1st savegame... then reload to launch the campaign

 

[Traks]

Dunno why my comment did not add.
TFH is much better with threat of USA, aggressive Axis draw USA into Allies much faster.

There are two unbalancing things:
Military espionage is as good as lvl10 radars everywhere, especially for naval forces. Slightly worse for land units, but if you put in proper minister...
Reduce national unity is too powerful and should be forbidden too.

 

[unmerged(471099)]

Don't forget about raise threat.. With some threat raising on Germany, European Allies can go to war economy right after Anschluss. Lowers USA neutrality much faster too.