Making the end game exciting.

[rasmus]

After two games of allied victories I feel a bit disappointed about the endgame. After the axis looses their shot at total victory, it seems to me that there is precious little to fight for. The axis will crumble (and faster than historical) and there is nothing much to be done about it. The hope of hanging on to enough real estate to achieve a draw or a minor victory seems to be nonexistent. Even staying alive until 44 is very hard.

Have others had the same experience?

Is there suggestions as to what can be done to keep the endgame exciting for the axis as well as the allies?

My suggestions would be to give the axis a realistic chance at keeping the allies from an OV. This could be perhaps be done by allowing the axis to go to a full war economy (as they did in 44) earlier. It could also be achieved by giving the axis VP bonuses (and extra replacements) for hanging on to real estate. Sort of the same way that board games like third Reich gave the conqueror half of the resources of the conquered territory as long as he held it.

As it is taking a lot of russia without conquering it, just means expending more ressources to no gain. If there were a economic benefit to grabbing territory (more than just Maikop and Baku), maybe the germans would have more staying power in the endgame.

Comments?

 

[Veers]

After two games of allied victories I feel a bit disappointed about the endgame. After the axis looses their shot at total victory, it seems to me that there is precious little to fight for. The axis will crumble (and faster than historical) and there is nothing much to be done about it. The hope of hanging on to enough real estate to achieve a draw or a minor victory seems to be nonexistent. Even staying alive until 44 is very hard.

Have others had the same experience?

Is there suggestions as to what can be done to keep the endgame exciting for the axis as well as the allies?

My suggestions would be to give the axis a realistic chance at keeping the allies from an OV. This could be perhaps be done by allowing the axis to go to a full war economy (as they did in 44) earlier. It could also be achieved by giving the axis VP bonuses (and extra replacements) for hanging on to real estate. Sort of the same way that board games like third Reich gave the conqueror half of the resources of the conquered territory as long as he held it.

As it is taking a lot of russia without conquering it, just means expending more ressources to no gain. If there were a economic benefit to grabbing territory (more than just Maikop and Baku), maybe the germans would have more staying power in the endgame.

Comments?

I intend rewrite the VP situation for 4.0; make it so the Germans have to hold on to MUCH less to get the draw/victory. You will find discussion here.

 

[rasmus]

I intend rewrite the VP situation for 4.0; make it so the Germans have to hold on to MUCH less to get the draw/victory. You will find discussion here.

A great read, but:
If the VP are located in Germany, why should the germans ever leave their homes?
Staying at home using every available unit to defend while accumulating replacements for the inevitable slugfest would seem to be a solid if extremely boring strategy. Their need to be some incentive for them to attack.

 

[Olorin4]

A great read, but:
If the VP are located in Germany, why should the germans ever leave their homes?
Staying at home using every available unit to defend while accumulating replacements for the inevitable slugfest would seem to be a solid if extremely boring strategy. Their need to be some incentive for them to attack.

I think this strategy is bound to lose, since the Allies will also build up their pool and no matter how strong your line looks there are ways to push you back. You need space and time to defend well.Just my opinion though.

 

[El Cid]

"The only way to win is not to play" -Joshua from the movie Wargames

 

[rasmus]

I think this strategy is bound to lose, since the Allies will also build up their pool and no matter how strong your line looks there are ways to push you back. You need space and time to defend well.Just my opinion though.

I agree it is not a perfect plan. But if you take out France and just sit tight, it will take forever before Russia and the US can DOW you. As many of their reinforcements are timed to their entry it will also delay their gearing up for war.
As losses are normally higher for the attacker and the germans normally wind up rather worn out by 1942, there is just not that big an incentive to move out if all the VPs are in germany.

PS my goal is not to make the game more boring, but rather more exiciting for the germans once the tide starts turning.

 

[Veers]

Yeah, I'm toying with making 'victory' for the Germans require the taking of Moscow and/or Stalingrad and/or Lenningrad and/or Paris and/or London. Therefore, the most the Germans would be able to hope for by keeping all of Germany would be a draw. And if a player is wanting to play for a draw...Well, ****, I wouldn't have a solution for that...

 

[B-snafu]

How bout something like the Germans holding onto Minsk, Lenigrad, And some important railroad network centers past a Given date enables them to hold onto a shock bonus longer or some such thing or able to raise a few extra Corps.---That way one could fight on as the axis in hope of obtaining a minor victory by the end time--dunno--over my head in terms of balance which is a tricky thing.

But don't worry Rasmus---I plan on giving your Allied side an exciting end:devious::laugh:

 

[Mark Stevens]

Maybe - to force Germans to attack in the early game - victory conditions change over time, e.g. 1939 Axis lose if don't capture or make German allied any one Allied capital; 1940 if don't capture or make allied any three Allied capitals; 1941 any four + Leningrad, Smolensk, Odessa, Kiev; 1941 any five + same USSR + Stalingrad?

Then start reducing requirement through 42, 43 and 44, so by 1945 lose if don't hold Berlin + one other?

Haven't really thought this through, but you get the idea.

 

[Veers]

Maybe - to force Germans to attack in the early game - victory conditions change over time, e.g. 1939 Axis lose if don't capture or make German allied any one Allied capital; 1940 if don't capture or make allied any three Allied capitals; 1941 any four + Leningrad, Smolensk, Odessa, Kiev; 1941 any five + same USSR + Stalingrad?

Then start reducing requirement through 42, 43 and 44, so by 1945 lose if don't hold Berlin + one other?

Haven't really thought this through, but you get the idea.

It would take a lot of events, but certainly worth looking at.

EDIT: I wish we had a second EEV...Or third, ect.

 

[rasmus]

How bout something like the Germans holding onto Minsk, Lenigrad, And some important railroad network centers past a Given date enables them to hold onto a shock bonus longer or some such thing or able to raise a few extra Corps.---That way one could fight on as the axis in hope of obtaining a minor victory by the end time--dunno--over my head in terms of balance which is a tricky thing.

But don't worry Rasmus---I plan on giving your Allied side an exciting end:devious::laugh:

I like the idea of extending shock effects as afunction of cities held, not sure it can be done though.

 

[Mark Stevens]

Hi Wyatt - I wasn't thinking of making it an Event driven thing: more of a House Rule, if you like. If the Germans (Axis?) don't hold, say, Berlin + five Allied capitals or Leningrad, Stalingrad, Cairo, Smolensk or whatever at the start of 1944 they lose. As I say, needs a bit of thought and both players to agree.

 

[Veers]

Hi Wyatt - I wasn't thinking of making it an Event driven thing: more of a House Rule, if you like. If the Germans (Axis?) don't hold, say, Berlin + five Allied capitals or Leningrad, Stalingrad, Cairo, Smolensk or whatever at the start of 1944 they lose. As I say, needs a bit of thought and both players to agree.

I see...Could work. As you say, it'll require some more focused throught.

 

[L`zard]

I see...Could work. As you say, it'll require some more focused throught.

Guys;

Just out of curiosity, how many events have been used in total vs how many might be 'reclaimed' thru rewriting/editing same?

Just a thought, eh?

 

[Felix]

One possibility would be to make VP bonuses for capturing important locations. So if Stalingrad falls, the German player gets a one-off VP bonus. Even if the Soviets recapture Stalingrad (and reclaim the hex VPs), the Germans still have that bonus.

Multiply that across the rest of Europe, and you have an incentive for the Germans to attack. They might win the game, even though they end the war with two streets in Berlin and a small hill in Bavaria.

If you have the events, VP bonuses for destroying HQs or some other valuable units would give both players an incentive to attack (2 events per HQ, so it can be quite expensive in event slots).

 

[Veers]

One possibility would be to make VP bonuses for capturing important locations. So if Stalingrad falls, the German player gets a one-off VP bonus. Even if the Soviets recapture Stalingrad (and reclaim the hex VPs), the Germans still have that bonus.

Multiply that across the rest of Europe, and you have an incentive for the Germans to attack. They might win the game, even though they end the war with two streets in Berlin and a small hill in Bavaria.

If you have the events, VP bonuses for destroying HQs or some other valuable units would give both players an incentive to attack (2 events per HQ, so it can be quite expensive in event slots).

Yeah, this coupled with the vast majority of map VPs being in Germany could really work!

 

[Veers]

Guys;

Just out of curiosity, how many events have been used in total vs how many might be 'reclaimed' thru rewriting/editing same?

Just a thought, eh?

520-ish...I dunno if we'd get much from editing the events, though.

 

[L`zard]

520-ish...I dunno if we'd get much from editing the events, though.

Obviously not at this point...:laugh: