Take the 2-minute tour ×
Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Because of the historical strength of the Allies, Axis and Allies is somewhat Allies favoring, despite numerous attempts to "balance" the game. I was wondering if curing the Axis' "achilles heel," the German navy, would complete the job.

Props to Scott Mitchell who inspired the "Tirpitz (house) rule":

  1. Subdivide the UK sea zone at the 57th parallel (above Scotland) into the UK sea zone proper (south) and the Norwegian sea (north).
  2. Place a German battleship unit there in the Norwegian Sea (the Tirpitz and the battle cruisers), while giving the UK a SECOND battleship in the new UK sea zone to compensate.
  3. Move the German transport and sub from the Baltic to the Norwegian Sea to prevent "cheap" Allied attacks.

This looks "even" but it's not. Because of the ship synergy (and the first attack advantage) Germany comes out about 12 IPCs better than before, according to my simulations on the AA combat simulator. Put another way, the "Tirpitz" cancels out not only the second UK battleship, but an additional Allied fighter. Together with the "no Russian first turn attack rule," it seems to erase the "consensus" estimate of a 22 IPC advantage for the Allies.

In his question, Adam Wuerl implied that Germany could use the help in the Mediterranean instead. Could this be the locale for the naval "fix?" Or could Germany be given another submarine somewhere with additional rules for their use?

In the game, the key issues are 1) whether the Allies can get reinforcements to Russia in time to save it from the Axis, or 2) whether Germany can hold onto Africa long enough for the Russians to be defeated. These issues appear to be decided in the North Atlantic and Mediterranean.

Could naval units giving Germany a better shot in these waters (together with the no Russia first attack rule) induce players to finally be willing to play the Axis "straight up"? And could the "Tirpitz rule" (together with a house rule saving German fighters in Finland and the Ukraine) produce this result even if Russia is allowed to attack the first turn?

share|improve this question
    
Are we speaking 1940, 1941, or 1942? That would be helpful to know. –  Joel VanZanten Sep 12 at 1:14
    
@JoelVanZanten: Added 1942 to title. –  Tom Au Sep 12 at 13:36

1 Answer 1

I assume you are referring to 1942 2nd Edition. If so, I don't think you need to fix the German navy at all - I think the Axis have an advantage in this game to begin with.

MM

share|improve this answer
1  
Welcome to boardgames stackexchange! Your answer is pretty short, and challenges the premise of the question, which doesn't quite fit the SE model. You might be better off challenging the premise in a comment on the original question, offering data to support your point and asking if the author has any data to support his premise. –  Andrew Vandever Dec 16 at 22:17
    
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post - you can always comment on your own posts, and once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post. –  bwarner Dec 17 at 14:27

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.