Let's get your questions answered!

[WotC JW]

Hello. My name is Justin Webb and I'm the Axis & Allies™ Miniatures editor. I read these boards everyday and spend waaaay more than three minutes doing so. I've always thought that, while we have really superb web rules support (thanks to the ever-excellent Steve), we don't communicate very well with you, the players, on other topics. And I've been noticing a bunch of asked questions on these boards that perhaps don't really fall within Mons', Bob's, or Steve's areas of expertise. However, these questions were really good, and it was obvious from the fact that since no one from the AAM team was answering them, that some of our players were getting very frustrated.

So I mentioned this during one of our team meetings. The team liked the idea I had-even the “higher ups”. As such, I've been “enlisted” as a, kind of, “Community Manager” for AAM. What does that mean? Well, what I want to achieve is to give you guys an avenue to ask whatever questions you want. I've been given “clearance” to answer questions beyond just rules stuff. So, over the next week or so, I want to gather up a bunch of questions in this thread. Then I'll put together an article answering some of them, and that article will get put up on the website, hopefully the week after that. Then I'll do it all again the week after that.

So, are you curious as to why the point costs seem weird, or why some units are just really bad? Or perhaps interested in our design philosophy or the development process? Do you wonder or have questions about some of the sculpts or unit choices? Or are you just curious as to why we wrote the rules like we did? If you have a good question, stick it in this thread and I'll do my best to get an answer for you.

Thanks

[Sniper45]

Why can mortars and snipers attack planes?

[Cruizin2000]

Justin,

When, if at all, will be see correct molds for the Hellcat, US 3" AT gun, Flak 38, and the Spitfire?

When, if at all, will new maps be available for purchase in stores?

Thanks in advance!!

C2000

[Lotus]

Hi Justin,

Thanks for stepping up. The community needed this.

I'd like any updates on the Messerspitt and the Hellcat sculpts.

Also, thanks again to the whole staff for coming through with erratta. There's always something more to do, but you guys do a great job with that.

[NEVjr]

when will we see a non-boring paint scheme on a german tank?

[shadowhooch]

Wow, you WotC guys are coming out in force today. It's very much appreciated. Here's my ponderings:

COST....all the following are are extremely hard to play with considering there are much better alternatives out there. Could you reveal your thinking on the following units:
Nashorn: 45 seems high considering its weak defense and lack of AI.
PIAT: 7 points for a one use, no range unit?
Lebel Grenadier vs MAS: Same cost, same year, but Lebel is MUCH worse.
Tiger I vs Vet Tiger: No real need for Tiger now. I understand Vet Tiger should be better; but should it actually replace another unit?

I think those are the main ones I don't understand. I accept the PG vs SSPG due to the year restriction (1939 vs 1940).

And any info about future sets and maps are always welcome. Love the game and LOVE this thread. It will go a long way to restoring this AAM internet community's attitude.

[Sharpe]

Why did so many units from Set IV not get an SA? (e.g.: Free French Infantry, Canadian Infantry, Defiant Paratrooper, FW 190, Firefly)

I don't want earthshaking SA's like CRACK SHOT, just small situation specific SA's for flavor. I can provide several examples of possibilities, but it alarms me that WOTC couldn't come up with anything. It seems like a lack of effort and imagination.

P.S.--Since you, Bob and Steve are obviously competent writers, why are the scenarios so poorly written? I've been taking them to class so my junior high students can use them as exercises in proofreading and editing.

[emmatig]

Cool!!!! :D

Can we have some Scottish Highlanders and British Home Guard in a future set.

Thanks

Emma

[Predator666]

I would like to know why the Lebel Grenadier is so bad. Why didn't it have some other type of SA that didn't make it a horrible choice for a unit. It should either be 2 pts or not have innacurate as a SA. It has 2 SAs and both are negative. It is not a good unit to use except for sacrifice with a commissar.

[Domhnall101]

any word on the next set? My credit card is burning a hole in my pocket....

[Colonel_Coo]

I was wondering what the design teams thinks in regards to the War Pie (stealing a MTG term of magic pie) for the major combatants.

Major powers and their
Costs, advantages, disadvantages and expected year of transition from Good to bad or from Bad to Good (again on a cost versus abilities).

I also was wondering if they even care to make a balanced game? Is the game supposed to reflect industrial productivety advantages? Is the game supposed to reflect Naval Advantages and the impact of NO SUPPLY on combat effectiveness? (Pacific theatre)

[Autarch]

Justin,

In addition to the good questions you posed as an example, I'd also like to know why there is such a distracting variation in unit scales. Not only between unit type (ie vehicle to vehicle) but even units based on the same chassis or hull.

In addition, I'd like to know if this will be remedied in upcoming sets.

[ayeblackbart]

I too would love to know when and if we get a set V.

Keep up the good work.

Any thoughts to making a Korea, Vietnam, Arab-Israeli, and or Desert Storm
units?

[Huey 290]

Any thoughts to making a Korea, Vietnam, Arab-Israeli, and or Desert Storm
units?


Ya, what he said. Make something like a "Cold War" version (Vietnam up till today) you would cause me to spend gobs upon gobs of money.

P.S. If you do.......better make a Huey helicopter model :D

[NumberCruncher]

Mr. Webb

In light of the much of the ongoing and increased recent dissatisfaction with this game, and the previous lack of qualified response to legidimate concerns, many of us have become rather vociferous in our condemnation of this game and the company that produces it.

If it is your intention to answer these questions, and take on at least some of the well intentioned criticism with an eye toward producing a better product more in line with the desires of it's enthusiastic supporters, then sir, I owe you and your company a sincere appology. I was begining to believe that we would be ignored entirely.

For now I will leave it to others to detail the exact issues, as I share many of the ones already listed, but the fact that you have made this effort at all may be the difference between this game rapidly losing it's player base {and profitability} and becoming a thing of lasting fun, use and elegance.

I myself have found it a means to bridge a widening gap between my father and I, and I'm sure it's helped interest a lot of young people in one of the most important conflicts in history.

These are things that don't show up on a monthly profit and loss report, but they are important to us, and I think you will find the overwhelming majority of players have similar reasons to want this game to achieve it's full potential.

Thank you for your time, consideration and vision.

[TomServo]

In addition to the above questions, I'd like to know why on earth you would release a DDay/Amphibious assault themed set and make the three minis most important to recreating amphibious assaults (Higgins, Amtrack, Sherman DD) rare? IMO the Ka-Mi is a much better paint job, and it's an uncommon.

[shadowhooch]

How about this:

How many Sets have you planned out for the future and how many themes do you know yet?

(You don't have to divulge set names, just lookin' for a number) ;)

[Kaufschtick]

Mr. Webb

In light of the much of the ongoing and increased recent dissatisfaction with this game, and the previous lack of qualified response to legidimate concerns, many of us have become rather vociferous in our condemnation of this game and the company that produces it.

If it is your intention to answer these questions, and take on at least some of the well intentioned criticism with an eye toward producing a better product more in line with the desires of it's enthusiastic supporters, then sir, I owe you and your company a sincere appology. I was begining to believe that we would be ignored entirely.

For now I will leave it to others to detail the exact issues, as I share many of the ones already listed, but the fact that you have made this effort at all may be the difference between this game rapidly losing it's player base {and profitability} and becoming a thing of lasting fun, use and elegance.

I myself have found it a means to bridge a widening gap between my father and I, and I'm sure it's helped interest a lot of young people in one of the most important conflicts in history.

These are things that don't show up on a monthly profit and loss report, but they are important to us, and I think you will find the overwhelming majority of players have similar reasons to want this game to achieve it's full potential.

Thank you for your time, consideration and vision.

Wow, couldn't have put it better, "what he said".

[Stojakovic]

Can you send me a few cases of AAM?

[Stojakovic]

when will we see a non-boring paint scheme on a german tank?

Second that one!

[shadowhooch]

At what point do you consider an erratta for something...... or another way to put it.......what spurs an errata?
Are they caused by complaints/questions/suggestions from these boards?
Are there any errattas you are "kicking around" right now or considering for the future?

Just trying to get a better understanding of how this process works and at what point you decide to make one.

Thanks again.

[shadowhooch]

Ok, One more post and I'll stop buggin' ya for today.
Here are the top three suggestions from the Suggestion box I created awhile back:

1) Will there be maps for sale in the future?
2) Will minor countries be "rounded" out so they are playable as stand alone?
3) Would you consider volunteer playtesters from these boards to give their opinions on new rules or units before release?

Thanks again.

[Lotus]

Syracuse-Binghamton Alliance is very interested in playtesting. Please contact me or Hornet 69.

[FSSF]

Why are Canadian Infantrymen so bland?

Why did you give "Tough" to Buffalo Soldiers?

Why aren't they any bland 3 points US soldier?

Why do the game designers have a US bias? (aside from the M3 Lee that has Tall Silhouette, why aren't they any bad SA on US units? I can give you more exemples if you want! Start with comparing US half-tracks and German half-tracks)

Why aren't they any transport for japanese army when their strength (their only one!) is to go hand to hand?

[LoeweAusNorden]

Hi,

Want to begin by saying that it´s nice to see that you take responsiblity for this Mr Webb...

Ok, where to start?

Firstly I must say that I enjoy this game very much, and that it has given me hours of fun gameplay. Saying that, I don´t mean it´s flawless. Our gaming group has put down house-ruleing covering the areas of the game we don´t find historical authentic, realistic e t c...

I have some questions though:

1. Why hasn´t there been any map-packs? I lack maps with desert terrain, djungle, snow and so on...It seems a bit cynical that you only release the minis and no maps. Sure, you can download maps for free (and that´s a good thing), but the quality on these maps are much worse than original maps (and maps from combat zone is really hard to get outside of USA)...Please release a map/ scenario pack...

2. To me it seems that American units are bit tougher than the other nation´s (maybe excluding some german minis, like the SSPG). The american mortar from the newest set is the latest in a row of "über-americans". What were you guys thinking when you came up with this guy (and only charging one more point for including him in the army compared with other mortars)? And why are the americans tougher and more cost-effective (if they´re not, then please explain why and how)...

3. I´ve read the designers note on the heroes, and understand why they are included. But to me it seems like the hero units are a step towards a more un-realistic and "super-hero like" type of game (and maybe more appealable towards a younger generation?). Also some of the new units have "hero-like" SA´s (like the vet Tiger). Is this how the game is going to be in the future? Will the game evolve from a decent "try to make a realistic and fast WWII mini-game", to a "power-creeping" game with minis with supernatural SA`s?

4. Please don´t tell me that you´re planning to make Vietnam or desert storm packs. Stick with WWII...otherwise to much politics I think (some discussions on the forum are bad as they are)...

5. Are you going to make the minor nations (Italy, France e t c) more playable by giving them more than one or two minis each set?

I woun´t go ´round asking questions about certain minis or qualitycontrol. This doesn´t mean that I don´t care...only that others will ask these...

Finally I want to say that I will stick to playing this fun game...hopefully through many more sets...

[Muenchausen]

Justin,

Will there be a new rules book produced incorporating all the rules/errata changes? Will modified cards become available correcting SA's?

Will A&AM interface with the War at Sea game being designed? When is the projected release of War at Sea?

How many more sets are projected for A&AM and what are the themes for those releases?

I'd really like to see a resized Hellcat, M5 3" gun, a new spitfire etc...

Thanks

[DocD]

WoW....great questions guys. I think these have already been covered, but felt the need to ask them again.

1). Any new map sets.....the kind you can purchase from a LGS.

2). Will we see a new T34/76 in the next set or two.

3). What will WotC do about the Spitfire messup?

Thanks.

[Kaufschtick]

My question is for Justin. Is that Clint in Where Eagles Dare in your avatar? :)

[Sean]

My only question is "Will maps be for sale?"

As for future sets, I'm sure you wouldn't just surprise us with one.
It would be nice to know what's next, though.

[Tico303]

Hi! It's a good idea to open this thread and it will probably be worth spending 3 minutes here ;)

Okay, here comes my buch of questions for now:

1.) Will there be any rules for interaction between Axis & Allies: Miniatures and the planned "War at Sea"-Game?

2.) Do you really think "Improved Indirect" Mortar SA fits the WW-II-Theme? Any(!) U.S. unit on and above the field being able to instantly call in mortar-fire - this feels very 21st-Century-Warfare to me. Any chance of erratum for this one?

2b.) Is this game biased towards U.S. units for any reason or is this "conspiracy theory" just forum nonsense-talk? :rolleyes:

3.) What do you think about "Secret Weapons" and how they would fit into the AAM-concept?
I ask because I read many threads requesting them. Personally, i'd NOT like to see Secret Weapons in AAM, because most of these "projects" were never used in the war or made little sense economically...
If they were to be released, I'd suggest incredibly High Point costs for these units and/or negative "unreliable"-like SAs.
Any ideas on how to restrict them, apart from making them "1946"?)

4.) First paratroopers, then heros and traps.... do you think "insta-spawn" is a sound game-mechanic that we will see in future sets? (P.S.: I like the paratroopers!)

5.) In a few words - what is the target audience for AAM?

Thanks.

[Michael Hayden]

1) When will the U.S. get a machinegun team? (.30 cal anyone?)


2) Will there ever be a chance to buy additional maps?


3) Will we ever see Trucks... Just plain ol "duce and a half"s, and their german and british cousins? After all, not everything that went into a combat zone was armored (and i'm just thinkin of the Red Ball Express senarios by putting 4 maps in a row, end to end!

[protevangelium]

Two questions:

1. Is is possible a rulebook can be developed for more complex games? That is to say, ones that involve point totals larger than 100 or 150 points. The game's base is good in that it is very adaptable for adding new rules, but it would be nice to see some made consistent and codified. Something like this could be posted online perhaps, for download.

2. Personally, I like the development of more detailed, region-specific terrian features. For instance, the hedgerow is a nice addition to Normandy bocage-style scenarios/battles. I think this is something you should consider developing even more in the future. The addition of hedgerow, shellholes, etc. faciliates some suvivablity for infantry in the game, especially in the armor-rich world of AAM. Something like this need not be overly complex, but I think terrain remains one of the best ways to reduce the uber-weapon effect some units tend to have.

[Roter_Teufel]

Hey, great idea from WOTC, its great to see

Here are my burning questions,

Why is the Easy Eight have armour that is almost as good as a Tiger.

Why do the USA Tank Destroyers get a bounus when attacking the rear of an enemy unit, when Axis tank destroyers do not.

Why do German units like the King Tiger which had three Machine Guns roll much less infantry dice when compared to their allied counterparts.

Some units seem to be 'missing' SA's. The Stuka could have had some sort of fear SA. Also, why release units like the Free French or The Canadians and not give them any SA to make them worth using. All the US troops seem to have some sort of SA, so why not with the other nations.

These questions could be viewed as 'whining' but I am very curious as to where these stats come from and what WOTC base these figures upon.

Thanks

[boersma8]

1.) Why is the improvisation SA the way it is? ( would've been better using the vehicle's defense...)

2.) Why does covering fire work without even causing disruption and why does it even work against units in pillboxes?

3.) Maps in stores please ( better quality!)

4.) Why are the Katyusha's stats the way they are? ( Compare to HHR, they seem much more realistic and just as playable...)

5.) How can planes attack snipers???

6.) Why would you use a jagpanther ( 57 points) if you can get a much more lethal weapon such as the jagdtiger for only 3 more points or even a " regular" panther for 8 points less, which is a much more allround weapon???

7.) Why does an SS stormtrooper cost more than an SS panzergrenadier?

8.) Why is the hero deployment method the way it is?

9.) Why does a hero cost (much) less or the same as e.g. Wehrmacht oberleutnant,Piat gunner(!), inspiring lieutenant, whereas it's clearly obvious that they're much better units?

10.) See other questions already asked... ( new molds, future sets etc.)

[FlyingDutchman]

Great initiative!

- Will the promosets for the shops also be made available to players? (I live on the beautifull island of Jerset, 88,000 inhabitants, and I am lucky to find players, let alone the item I need to run a tournament...)

- Why are the card colours so different? Since I put them in an album, it now looks rather chaotic...

Regards
Rob

[lozmoid]

Ok, I'm really loving this game and here a few questions please:

1: Why does the Mitsubishi A6M Zero have 3/3 defence, when all other Aircraft have 4/4?

2: What was the reasoning behind the cost design of the SS-Panzer IV Ausf. F2, when comparing it to the Panzer IV Ausf. G?

3: Will WotC please please please release a new concise rule book as either part of a new starter/scenario box or as a file available to download?

That's all I can think of for now. Thanks very much again!

[Halcyon]

Wouldn't want to take thunder away from the WoTC crew, but I'd think the reason why the Zero is a 3 defense is that historically it was really fragile. Whereas many aircraft could take a few hits, every source on the Zero that I've read indicate that a mere small burst from your guns could shoot it down. So although it had a great turning ability, it took little to nothing to shoot it down.

My questions are as thus:

1) Are there any plans in the future to expand on the Italians? The Italians could use some quality armor, such as the Semoventes, and I think the Macchi C.202 Folgore and C.205 Veltro, which were just as good as the Spitfire V, Mustang, and Lightning, should be a mini. Also, newer Italian infantry units would be great, such as Folgore/Nembo paratroopers, and Bersaglieri.

2) Why didn't the Zero have any ability that represented it's mobility? Although engine wise it was inferior to US planes, but it had better mobility and turn radius than most allied planes it fought against. I feel it was a disservice to the plane, not having a representation of it's mobility.

[Stojakovic]

Will we get another errata soon?

What will the release schedule be for The war at sea? What I mean is will there be 4 booster lauches a year for it as well as AAM? Meaning 8 booster sets in all each year?

Will there be a night witch plane? Say yes please

Will there be any map packs to buy?

How about better quality counters? Such as having them made of plastic and a nations symbol on them???

When will there be info on set 5 and the war at sea?

What type of units do you have planed for the future?

[Dr_Strangelove]

This is very impressive on the part of WotC! Now it will be even more interesting to see how many of these questions they can answer and what the answers are.

[simonr1978]

Still waiting WotC :rolleyes: . When will people see the corrected Spitfire Sculpt? :confused:

[ArmyVet]

Here are some questions I have for you;

When will the German's and Canadian's get Paratroopers?
When will countries like Poland, China, Italy, Romania, and Canada get more units so we can play them as stand-alone countries?
How about a set with extra pieces like Tree's, Buildings, Foxholes, trenches, ect ... to make the map more 3D?
Map's .... we need new map's. The base set map's are old now. How about some new map's?
What's the next set and how many pieces are in it?

Thanks for everything!

[Stojakovic]

Still waiting WotC :rolleyes: .

Just give it some time :)

It is a sat. and I am sure he has a family, and you also know what tomorrow is... :D

[CommisarNikolai]

I only have three questions:

1 Why is the Panzer II Flamingo an Uncommon and a T-34/76 a rare?

2 Why after four sets is there no Russian MG ?

3 Why after two sets with aircraft is there no Russian unit with Antiair?

I think you guys are biased for the Germans and Americans. As it standes now playing a pure Russian Army is not possible in competive play.

[Arpathapius]

Agree with the need for more Russion units and lets see more Canadians and their counterparts, South African, New Zealand, and Newfoundlanders, (Infantry)

Go Oilers :D

[PatrickWR]

Justin, here's something no one's mentioned yet:

What is WOTC's current analysis of AAM's target audience? The sentiment on these boards has long been that you guys "missed your mark" by trying to market this game to the SWM and DDM crowd. I play neither of those games (though I did play Heroclix back in the day); I'm a normal, socially-adjusted 24-year-old and I consider myself at the YOUNG end of the spectrum. The guys I game with are all my age or older.

The members of this online community (who admittedly represent a small fraction of the gaming population) have agreed in the past that, by giving a little more respect to history scaling back some of the "gamey" special abilities that smack of video games and Hollywood, WOTC/AH could compete with a true light wargame. The HHR has stepped into this perceived void, producing universal house rule cards for free distribution by players. Has the critical praise received by this and other house rule projects prompted WOTC/AH to re-examine their target audience?

Thanks in advance for your thoughtful answers.

[fifleche]

Please define what WOTC means by "fun".

When is the next set due? Not the ship game, the AAM game.

When will maps be available for purchase?

What is the development philosophy behind AAM? What to you envision for the future? ANY answer would be better than NO answer. Even if most possible answers would dissapoint me, at least I would know where WOTC stands, and could react accordingly.

-Are you making Dungeons & Dragons with tanks?
-A competition game that is loosely WW2-flavored, with over/under-priced pieces that will dominate the tourney scene?
-Or are you -trying- to stay true to your "historically correct" statement?

Again, what exactly is meant by "fun".

[357FTG]

Justin

Thanks for stepping outside the box and in front of this firing squad. I have been trying to push this game and have been frustrated with the support from WOTC.

My questions is, this months league kit is pretty good, will they continue with maps and decent promotional material and units.

[wpchen]

Thank you for taking some time to answer some questions.

1) I know no one loves them, but will we see any more Chinese units (especially infantry)? You can only make monotonous armies with 1 commander, 1 infantry, and 1 tank.

2) In the rulebook, you mentioned scenarios for AAM (not the big pdf ones with preset units) like the "standard" (100 points, objective) and the "assault" scenarios. You also described how we could make our own. Can you provide other "scenarios" along these lines?

[Arpathapius]

Can the staff ensure that the quality of units will not continue to decline,
in other words will there be any more saggy barrles as seen in the Firefly and The Marder II, if so please tell me and I will sell everything that I have as it will be a waste of time for me to continue my collection

These pieces are not just a game to me they are collectables as I am what u call a ww2 buff, awaiting reply :confused:

[Predator666]

I have some more questions

1) When will we get a German Paratrooper

2) When will we get, even a makeshift russian AA gun

3) When will we get a russian and american regular machine gun.

4) Will they give the Italians good armor, Romanians good infantry, Polish good infantry and make them all easily playable on there own?

[ArmyVet]

Predator666 - I'm telling mom on you because you copied my questions......LOL :D :p

I have to agree with you on your point about russian AA gun's and russian/ american regular machine guns. When are we going to see them?? :confused:

[Argyle]

It is quite obvious this game is made for an american market. As a result of that many in Europe doesn´t want to play US, do you have any plans to correct this rather sad fact?

[killermuppet]

Justin,

Even though WotC has not "fleshed out" the other minor powers. (Yet, hopefully) I would love to see some more in the way of early war and especially the Winter War timeframe. In addition, Poland and the Northern European units need to be more represented. While the mid to late war units are what most remember, I would love to be able to play the complete war from start to finish.

I would also like to see larger maps made. While combining smaller maps to make a larger map is interesting to keep variety, it would be nice to not have to worry about keeping maps straight every time you move a unit. Also could WotC also consider making maps on a heavier card stock. Some old time gamers might remember FASA making their Battletech maps on a very heavy card stock that was split on one side that would allow the map to fold in half then the side with the split would flip back and then back on the map. Great way to keep your entire map set safe.

I would also like to see corrections made on all the "incorrect" units (spitfire, Hellcat, etc.) Just want everyone to know this is a very sore spot with the AAM community.

While I know that Avalon Hill and WotC are trying to make a nice product and "stuff" happens it is what they do to correct those problems that determine if customer will continue to patronize the product.

[lybo]

Firstly PLEASE guys no arguing here.

I have to chime in and agree about the machine guns.

1.) When are we gonna see a US machine gun team and Russian AA? .30cals were everywhere :p We could just use the M-16 for the Russians, they did get them from us.

2.)Why is it the Germans have more units with extended range? The Sherman Firefly should, the Russian T34/85 and JS2 should. I understand the Germans had better guns and superior range, but there were more then 2 allied guns that should have extended range. Right now it's just the US M-26 and M-36, and the British 17 pounder and Archer.

3.)Corrected sizes on the miscast minis as replacements. You can easily replace them at conventions on a per mini basis. We can bring our "bad" mini to the convention and you guys can replace it with the corrected one, just a thought.

4.) Maps maps maps :)

5.)I think the design team should go back and reconsider some of the units and their SA's............the US Easy Eight come to mind, it's too expensive and too gimicky. Unless it's a "JUMBO" Sherman it's armor should NOT match a Tiger!

6.)Hedgerows and brush cutters on the "RHINO" Sherman. Why can it move through forest without a roll, but it needs to roll to get through a hedgerow??? Everything i've seen in books and on TV indicates they were so effective at cutting through the hedgerows they never had any trouble. As far as going through a forest i'd think a tree would stop them quite effectively!

7.)Fighters and SA's. Seems to me the ZERO should have gotten "AGILITY" as it's SA instead of the "MESS-O-SPIT"...........speaking of which

8.)The side of the booster clearly shows a "SPITFIRE" so it was made correctly..............how about getting the correct ones out to us.

9.)Targeted audience. I would also like to know the target age group of this game. I'm 42 and the guys I game with age from their 60's to thier late 20's.
All of us like the concept of this game, (we wouldn't be playing it if we didn't) But the power creep and silly SA's are killing it in our opinion. Undercosted overpowered units. The US HERO is just wrong!!!! I guess you guys were thinking of an actual US WWII hero Audie Murphy who did do some pretty miraculous stuff and won ALOT of medals, but a soldier that uses the attack stats from a destroyed M-26 Pershing and kills a tiger 11 hexes away is WRONG!!!!

Well thats all I can think of for now, my brain hurts :eek:

[Skorpiun]

My gaming group and myself range in age from 27-34. We are your typical gamers who find a game we all enjoy and go all out for it. Many of us prior to this game and reading posts could not have told anyone the difference between a Tiger I and a King Tiger. Not history buffs by any means. Therefore the problems we have with the game do not revolve around repainted planes, units on steroirds, or go-karts.

Questions we have:

1) Why is there no balance to the game? Set 3 gave us Russian mortars and a spotter on a KV-1. Nearly unbeatable.... Set 4 now has a U.S. Hero in a King Tiger blasting the Hetzer's and Panzers. "Devastating".

2) Will there be even a slight chance that the "War at Sea" will be able to be incorporated with the mini's we have now? I would like to play battles like D-Day and Okinawa with naval bombardment, 24 hour air plane bombarment, and see the troops riding the Higgins to shore with the battleship in the background.

3) I would really like to hear the idea behind the point costs for Germany. Does the 12 range really mean the unit has to be over 60 points? All of the German extended range versus the allies getting higher SPEED units is not balanced.

Thanks,

Jim

[killermuppet]

Could WotC/AH come up with some rules for a Strategic version of the basic game? I would love to be able to have rules for playing a large in depth kind of game. I love the fact that only certain units can be used in certain times, but I would love a strategic map of Europe to setup protracted games. Just an idea to see if Avalon Hill would consider making the game with a slightly larger scope.

[WotC JW]

WoW! Thank you to everyone who posted their questions. I think I have a pretty good idea of what to write about first.

I'll keep you all posted on my progress.

JW

[Bloody_Brit]

Hey,

Hope I'm not too late but I was wondering if we are going to see some decent Nationalist Chinese Units, and more diversity in them so they might be a stand alone army?

Also is there any chance for a Chinese Communist army?



Jack

[Cruizin2000]

WoW! Thank you to everyone who posted their questions. I think I have a pretty good idea of what to write about first.

I'll keep you all posted on my progress.

JW

My guess is maps, Spitfires, maps, Hellcats, maps, US 3" gun, maps, flak 38, maps, Canadian trooper, and maps.

C2000

[RBloom0566]

I would also like to see larger maps made. While combining smaller maps to make a larger map is interesting to keep variety, it would be nice to not have to worry about keeping maps straight every time you move a unit. Also could WotC also consider making maps on a heavier card stock. Some old time gamers might remember FASA making their Battletech maps on a very heavy card stock that was split on one side that would allow the map to fold in half then the side with the split would flip back and then back on the map. Great way to keep your entire map set safe.


Muppet:

Not presuming to answer for Justin, just offering you one solution. My gaming buddy and I got frustrated with "mobile terrain," too. He invested in a sheet of plexiglass to lay over the maps. We were concerned about static cling, but it turned out to be a GOOD thing! You can lay the objective marker on the p'glass, then the maps (face down) and they stick! Flip it over and VIOLA, no more "mobile terrain."

Warning! Not a cheap solution. Think my friend paid ~$30 for the sheet of p'glass.

Robert

[Photoner Hawkwind]

Hey,

Hope I'm not too late but I was wondering if we are going to see some decent Nationalist Chinese Units, and more diversity in them so they might be a stand alone army?

Also is there any chance for a Chinese Communist army?

Jack

I understood that the Koumingtang are the communists. :confused:

[Moderator Sinister]

Muppet:

Not presuming to answer for Justin, just offering you one solution. My gaming buddy and I got frustrated with "mobile terrain," too. He invested in a sheet of plexiglass to lay over the maps. We were concerned about static cling, but it turned out to be a GOOD thing! You can lay the objective marker on the p'glass, then the maps (face down) and they stick! Flip it over and VIOLA, no more "mobile terrain."

Warning! Not a cheap solution. Think my friend paid ~$30 for the sheet of p'glass.

Robert


Why not just use the poster plexi glass plastic stuff that is in poster frames? Should be cheaper than $30.

[Yakumo_Fujji]

As I've been reading thrue the tread It appears to me there are 2 main streams forming in this game 1 Group liking the game as it is but would like to see some better models and Balance. 2nd group how's by now going more for an tabeltop based Game Like warhammer etc. I for 1 part bought this game because A&A always ended in a Mexican standoff and in this game it's just a couple of turns.
I heard some people complaining about the scale of things whell looking at HBF are making maps on a different scale so they are availible. Other people are asking for more 3 d in the maps Get Creative If seen some good home made hills on this forum.

Having said that here are my remarks:
1. Could it be an option to also expand the game into the next level and make it more of an tabeltop type game.

2. Also Keep the game as it is looking at the base set and expantions to give the newbe's like me A nice entrance into the game and keeping it more like a board game but giving regular new maps in differend scale types.

3. Maybe other ingame battles could be taken onto another map for instance 2 army's enter a town then place those units on a town map en let them battle it out there.

4. Not saying the Games workshop is almighty but mabe take a look at their models and quality controle (how do you wright that), some thing wrong with the model even after opening the package a replacement model is no problem.

5. Hearing it from more European members of this board The Game is more U.S. orieantated than European. Example I called the 3 official dealers in my city 1 I know got it I bought it there , 1 Thought he might have some laying around and the 3th didn't even know what I was talking about.

6. I'd love to get the change to get some Combat Zone Models and stuff. Maybe in smaller packages for The gamers aswel to introduce new guys to the game and be able to give em' a model as wel in the end (Or just keep em for your self. :D )
Mouth to mouth advertising works better then a pushy shop owner that doesn't even hide that he doesn't care about the game.

Just my idea's any body feel free to comment.

Grtz

[V-Disc]

Why doesn't Wizards sell gear/merchandise aimed at the A&A Market? You folks may be missing a revenue stream.

I'd like to get copies of the A&A Minis ad campaign artwork. I'm refering to the ads I've seen in a few magazines and also on posters. They're based on the pin-up girlie images that graced WWII aircraft. My compliments to the artists. Good job to whoever came up with that angle.

How about some kind of foot locker carrying case for minis? Most minis players have had to invest in some kind of storage units. Why not go after that built-in market? Make an item like this limited edition; and you'll appeal to the collector out there. Just think of all the different WWII devices you could turn into a carrying case?

[wpchen]

I understood that the Koumingtang are the communists. :confused:

NNNNNNOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are the exact opposites! (No hard feelings, I'm just a Chinese patriot :) )

The KMT (or actually, Guomingdang, GMD) are Nationalist forces that were under the command of Jiang Jieshi (Chiang Kai-shek, for you who have not converted to Hanyupinyin, the new system). They were an organized army. The GMD was a party started by Sun Yixian (Sun Yat-sen) and by WW2, as mentioned, Jiang was leader. However, the communists were a guerrilla group under Mao Zedong (Mao Tse-tung) and they were all cozy until Jiang came into power whereupon they started hating each other. They decided on an uneasy truce to fight back the Japanese. The Nationalist forces fought a more direct form of warfare whereas the Communists fought a guerrilla warfare. In this way, the GMD bore the brunt of the casualties, however, they still had a bigger army than the Communists. After the war, they fought a Civil War, in which the completely demoralized GMD lost to the Communists, who enjoyed the support of the locals and peasants. The Nationalists were then exiled to Taiwan, the People's Republic was formed, and to this day claim Taiwan to be a nation (however the United Nations recognize it as part of the People's Republic)

Edit: The GMD were democratic, for you freedom buffs :)

[Ewokhunter92]

How about some kind of foot locker carrying case for minis? Most minis players have had to invest in some kind of storage units. Why not go after that built-in market? Make an item like this limited edition; and you'll appeal to the collector out there. Just think of all the different WWII devices you could turn into a carrying case?

I already use a real Rocket wooden crate for my minis. Gives it the real look. I put all my minis in Plano boxes and then put them in this to carry it around.

BUT, an official A&AM footlocker would be potentially a BIG seller.

[ahzad]

Great game for the most part. Like others I would like to see answers on:

Who do AH/WotC think their target audience is, age-wise? I manage a LGS and I've seen more older wargamers come back to the fold b/c of this game, and they all complain about how they think the game is being marketed to the SWM, and DDM younger crowd, with the gimicky SA's, and ect..

Maps, are we going to see map packs for sale? I like that you have them available online but besides poorer quality, there can also be errors, like the D-Day and Pegasus maps weren't sized correctly in relation to the other maps, didn't find that one out until after I got the job back from the print shop with a $30 bill for the printing and laminating.

Contested Skies, and D-Day why make the central pieces to the theme of these sets rares? There should've been a plane in every box of CS, and a higgins boat in every box of DD.

How about an updated and expanded rulebook with the eratta folded into it?

Thanks for the game.

terry

[Dr_Strangelove]

I am going to say a week after he posted this up.

Stoj, I think that a lot of us are just impatient. I think it is important that WotC seems to be responding to all the negative feedback but I really wonder what form this response will take.

I really love this game but do see it drifting in some uncomfortable directions. It would restore a lot of my confidence in the game if I would see some constructive action by WotC.

I'll try to be patient. I work for a large company too ( heck, WotC is one of my customers!) and I know how long it takes sometimes for a company to make decisions.

[Cruizin2000]

More questions -

1. How many more sets does Wizards intend on releasing?

2. How many more units will get redone with different stats and new names?

C2000

[scorpnoire]

I have to second the following question and to ask some new:

- quality control/quality of molds/scales of units: When will this be established/corrected?

- The british Comet tank has a 'one piece mold' turret, while other tanks with large guns have it at least seperated into two parts (gun the soft thing, rest of turret the stable thing) Why? I can understand this technique used for small guns (like Panzer III, Panzer 38t).

- Wich audience is this game aimed at?

- Will the power creep, über-units in general and priviligation of US-Units end?

- Will there be Map sets to buy in Store including new terrain tiles?

- Why the european/non-US players have no chance getting combat zone kits?


Gruß,
Markus

[Stojakovic]

Stoj, I think that a lot of us are just impatient. I think it is important that WotC seems to be responding to all the negative feedback but I really wonder what form this response will take.

I really love this game but do see it drifting in some uncomfortable directions. It would restore a lot of my confidence in the game if I would see some constructive action by WotC.

I'll try to be patient. I work for a large company too ( heck, WotC is one of my customers!) and I know how long it takes sometimes for a company to make decisions.

Only saying that because he said this...

So, over the next week or so, I want to gather up a bunch of questions in this thread. Then I'll put together an article answering some of them, and that article will get put up on the website, hopefully the week after that. Then I'll do it all again the week after that.


frustraighting? Yes. But I am only following his guidlines. And I believe him. I don't think he wants to destroy his reputation. After all he must know how we react to things like this :rolleyes:

[Dr_Strangelove]

Only saying that because he said this...




frustraighting? Yes. But I am only following his guidlines. And I believe him. I don't think he wants to destroy his reputation. After all he must know how we react to things like this :rolleyes:

Stoj, it does look like something is coming together! I sounds like we might see some of the first steps by Wizards tomorrow.

[Lotus]

Stoj, it does look like something is coming together! I sounds like we might see some of the first steps by Wizards tomorrow.

Yup. Let's all see what tomorrow brings. Hopefully it will pacify and satisfy most if not all of us for a reasonable time.

[Arpathapius]

How about scaning all the cards for the sets in to something on the web site like the gallery at actual size, would like to have to have them on the laptop

[Moderator Keldar]

Folks,

A lot of time has been spent cleaning this thread up, especially as it relates to the last few pages. Please refrain from arguing, off-topic posts, flaming, and generally anything other than phrasing questions about AAM. It will be difficult to stumble through the mess in order to actually pick out and record the questions.

Please do not ignore this request. If necessary, further steps will be taken to insure compliance. Thanks for your understanding. I'm sure you all would like this process to go as smoothly as possible.

[Moderator Kayn]

Hello. My name is Justin Webb and I'm the Axis & Allies™ Miniatures editor. ...

I want to gather up a bunch of questions in this thread. Then I'll put together an article answering some of them, and that article will get put up on the website, hopefully the week after that. Then I'll do it all again the week after that.

So, are you curious as to why the point costs seem weird, or why some units are just really bad? Or perhaps interested in our design philosophy or the development process? Do you wonder or have questions about some of the sculpts or unit choices? Or are you just curious as to why we wrote the rules like we did? If you have a good question, stick it in this thread and I'll do my best to get an answer for you.

Thanks

This is the topic. You have a precious opportunity to get some of your questions answered. Please stay on topic. Refrain from flaming, baiting, trolling and complaining in general. There are other places to complain.

This thread is for questions. Use it wisely please.

Moderator Kayn

[RBloom0566]

Cross-Posted from another thread.

We need trucks! If you can make piddly little jeeps, there certainly ought to be trucks! My infantry squads are demanding rapid transport! Seriously! I woke up surrounded by AAM Soldiers, Soldiers: Commanders, and the Screaming Eagles para-dropped on my pillow--all carrying little signs demanding trucks.

OK, maybe it was sleep deprivation, but we still need trucks!
Look at the alternatives.

Jeep –
(US 1942) Cost 4, Speed 4, Defense 1/1, SA: High Gear 2, Transport, AI
0/0/0, AV 0/0/0.
Half-track –
M5 (US 1942) Cost 14, Speed 4, Defense 2/2, SA: High Gear 2, Transport,
Fighting Platform, AI 8/7/6, AV 3/3/3.
M3 (US 1942) Cost 9, Speed 4, Defense 2/2, SA: High Gear 2, Gun
Transport, AI 8/7/6, AV 3/3/3.
Sd Kfz 251 (Germany 1939) Cost 14, Speed 4, Defense 2/2, SA: Transport,
High Gear 2, Fighting Platform, AI 8/7/6, AV 2/2/2.
Sd Kfz 250 (Germany 1941) Cost 8, Speed 4, Defense 2/2, SA: High Gear
2, Gun Transport, AI 6/5/4, AV 2/2/2.

No one except the US has Jeeps. No one except the US and Germany have half-tracks. I guess everyone else will just have to walk! My idea is something like this.

Truck (Generic 1939) Cost 4, Speed 4, Defense 1/1, SA: High Gear 2,
Transport, Gun Transport, AI 0/0/0, AV 0/0/0.

Add brand names to make it nation-specific. The reason for SA’s Transport and Gun Transport is to allow the truck to either carry two Soldiers or carry one Soldier and tow one Soldier: Artillery.

Another point. I'd rather have a Truck (Generic or Common) in each booster than an Obstacle! Much more useful item. Are any of these things attainable in Set V?

Thanks,
Robert

[4242david4242]

Here are some questions I would really like to see answered:

1) Does WOTC, or any one at the direction of WOTC, playtest potential new rules or special abilities before they are sent to the printers?

2) Were ANY play tests conducted in which an aircraft and a flamethrower, sniper, mortar, Sig33, or Brumbar were also used?

3) Were ANY play tests ever conducted in which a unit with the Transport SA and an artillery or cavalry unit were also used?

4) What demographic (specifically, what age group) is WOTC targeting with this game?

5) Now that this game has been out for almost a year, has WOTC done any market research into the actual demographics of the people who play this game? Have they read the "Who Plays AAM" thread?

6) Has WOTC officially decided to abandon their assertions that this game would be "historically accurate," which were made in their initial press releases for this game?

7) If the answer to Number 6 is "no," then what is the historical reference on which the Improvisation SA is based?

8) When the cards for Set I were drafted, why didn't the design team anticipate that aircraft would eventually be incorporated into this game (as evidenced by the fact that there is no aircraft attack dice track and that units must use their anti-soldier dice track against planes)?

9) When the cards were drafted for the Royal Engineer, why didn't the design team anticipate that battlefield obstacles would eventually be incorporated into this game (as evidenced by the fact that the RE has bridge demolition and had to be errata'd to have the Demolition SA added)?

10) When the cards were drafted for the Veteran M4 Sherman "Rhino" (aka "brushcutter") why didn't the design team anticipate that hedges would later be introduced to the game (as evidenced by the fact that the special ability of the Rhino to move through hedgerows is printed on the hedgerow tile and not on the Rhino's card)?

11) Why did WOTC decide to make (most of) the vehicles in one scale, the infantry in another scale, the planes in another scale, and the maps in yet another scale?

12) Can you offer us any real assurance that there will not be any more quality control issues with the scale of minis in future sets?

13) Is WOTC aware that we can buy pre-painted Flames of War miniatures (which are infinitely more detailed) on eBay for about the same price as AAM rares?

14) Do you know whether it is possible for a subsidiary to dilute a trademark owned by its parent (because that's what it seems Hasbro is allowing WOTC to do to the AVALON HILL mark. I know I'll think twice before buying anything with the Avalon Hill name on it, from now on.)?

15) Is your intention to simply lock-up and hide this thread like you did with the Schpitfire Debate thread?

16) Do you realize how detrimental such behavior is to the sense of community and atmosphere of open discussion on these forums?

[Moderator Sinister]

15) Is your intention to simply lock-up and hide this thread like you did with the Schpitfire Debate thread?

16) Do you realize how detrimental such behavior is to the sense of community and atmosphere of open discussion on these forums?

Whoa!

We, the moderator team, locked that thread, That thread in question was NOT locked to hide anything, were the mod team hiding it we could have simply removed it, like we can remove any post. That thread was locked in accordance with the Code of Conduct, see rampant flamming and spamming under the coc. (www.wizards.com/coc).

This matter was NOT handled by anyone at AH headquarters. My door is open, you may contact me via pm on the matter.

Back to the discussion...

[Sean]

Well we got some answers today. :D I'm sure most of us will buy new starters. No dice in the new starters is a nice touch. Probably good for most of us. I know I have way too many dice as it is. :o

So now we wait for news about the next new set. I'm guessing "War at Sea", but I'd be just as happy with set 5. That's my question "What's next?" I'm also eager for some D-Day scenarios.

Thanks for the new maps! Of course you know no amount of maps will ever satiate our maplust. :D

[WotC JW]

Here are some questions I would really like to see answered:

1) Does WOTC, or any one at the direction of WOTC, playtest potential new rules or special abilities before they are sent to the printers?
Yes. playtesting is done as a part of each set's development.
2) Were ANY play tests conducted in which an aircraft and a flamethrower, sniper, mortar, Sig33, or Brumbar were also used?
Yes.
3) Were ANY play tests ever conducted in which a unit with the Transport SA and an artillery or cavalry unit were also used?
Yes.
4) What demographic (specifically, what age group) is WOTC targeting with this game?
12+
5) Now that this game has been out for almost a year, has WOTC done any market research into the actual demographics of the people who play this game? Have they read the "Who Plays AAM" thread?
Yes.
Can't speak for everyone on the AAM team, but I've read it.
6) Has WOTC officially decided to abandon their assertions that this game would be "historically accurate," which were made in their initial press releases for this game?
I don't work in the marketing department, so I can't directly answer that question. I know we don't use it on packaging. Personally, I think the game is "historically accurate".
7) If the answer to Number 6 is "no," then what is the historical reference on which the Improvisation SA is based?
Its based on any number of extreme situations that occurred during the war. The example that I think is most well known and which best exemplifies the "spirit" of the ablity is the story of Audie Murphy's one-man stand at Holtzwihr, which would have been mentioned in the flavor text had there been more space.
8) When the cards for Set I were drafted, why didn't the design team anticipate that aircraft would eventually be incorporated into this game (as evidenced by the fact that there is no aircraft attack dice track and that units must use their anti-soldier dice track against planes)?
Good question. Though to be honest, the attack values in a dedicated anti-Aircraft "track" wouldn't be much different from those already present in the anti-Soldier track. We also don't tend to mention things on cards before they actually exist.
9) When the cards were drafted for the Royal Engineer, why didn't the design team anticipate that battlefield obstacles would eventually be incorporated into this game (as evidenced by the fact that the RE has bridge demolition and had to be errata'd to have the Demolition SA added)?
Partly because we can't (as yet) look into the future, and also because it would be very confusing to mention unit subtypes (or any other game elements) that don't yet exist in the rules text of special abilities.
As an aside, I particularly like it when older units that are considered "trash" can suddenly be much more effective based on the evolving metagame. We added this extra ability to the errata to give Engineers a bit more "oomph". Hopefully, with all the Obstacles floating around, player's will now want to dust off their Engineers and try some new army builds.
10) When the cards were drafted for the Veteran M4 Sherman "Rhino" (aka "brushcutter") why didn't the design team anticipate that hedges would later be introduced to the game (as evidenced by the fact that the special ability of the Rhino to move through hedgerows is printed on the hedgerow tile and not on the Rhino's card)?
The hedgerow hex (now referred to as just "hedges") originated as an OP freebie in a Combat Zone. R&D liked the idea, cleaned up its rules, and added them to the Rulebook. See my answer to 9) above too.
11) Why did WOTC decide to make (most of) the vehicles in one scale, the infantry in another scale, the planes in another scale, and the maps in yet another scale?
If everything was the same scale, it would be very difficult to fit on a table. For example, if the Aircraft were the same scale as Vehicles, they would be over twice as big and wouldn't fit in a hex. And, if the map hexes were the same scale, there'd only be room for a handful of hexes on each map sheet.
12) Can you offer us any real assurance that there will not be any more quality control issues with the scale of minis in future sets?
No. People sometimes make mistakes. However, I can assure you that we're very sorry about the Spitfire et al, and we'll do our utmost to see it doesn't happen again.
13) Is WOTC aware that we can buy pre-painted Flames of War miniatures (which are infinitely more detailed) on eBay for about the same price as AAM rares?
I was not aware of this.
14) Do you know whether it is possible for a subsidiary to dilute a trademark owned by its parent (because that's what it seems Hasbro is allowing WOTC to do to the AVALON HILL mark. I know I'll think twice before buying anything with the Avalon Hill name on it, from now on.)?
I'm not sure what your question is here. I am sorry however, that you feel this way about the current state of AH and AAM.
15) Is your intention to simply lock-up and hide this thread like you did with the Schpitfire Debate thread?
I'm pretty sure we haven't ever locked up a thread on these boards because of negative comments and criticisms from our player base.
16) Do you realize how detrimental such behavior is to the sense of community and atmosphere of open discussion on these forums?
On the contrary, I think our actions on these boards recently has actively encouraged open discussion.
I hope I've been able to sufficiently answer your questions.
Thanks :)

[MyGarandDoesMyTalking]

Rock on, Justin. Rock on.

[Kaufschtick]

Well that was an interesting read. :) I'm saying the avatar is Clint from Where Eagles Dare.

[WotC JW]

Well that was an interesting read. :) I'm saying the avatar is Clint from Where Eagles Dare.

Ding! We have a winner! :)

[Huey 290]

Is this the point where someone would say: "Gee, that sure was alot of words to say nothing and push responsiblity on others." Perhaps some PR courses would work to the advantage.

It seems many of the quality questions were ignored, or is this the point where someone says; "We are getting to more questions later."

Am I complaining? Ya damn right I am.......I haven't been negative until this point, but with responses like that I guess anyone could get a job at WOTC.

I seem to remember hearing from more than one quality source that games are made 3 to 4 expansions ahead (an exucse given when something hits the market in, say , the second or thrid set, and someone claims it was too late to fix it). Now we here that they didnt think of planes in set 1 because they can't see into the future for set 3!!!!!!!!!! Which is it folks?

[118th_MPCo_abn]

How is it that 4242David4242 posted 16 qestions today at 4:05 PM and got answers to all 16 at 7:09PM?

[RBloom0566]

How is it that 4242David4242 posted 16 qestions today at 4:05 PM and got answers to all 16 at 7:09PM?

Squeaky wheel gets the grease? Or maybe Justin was lurking while things were being done to post them here?

[Muenchausen]

Am I complaining? Ya damn right I am.......I haven't been negative until this point, but with responses like that I guess anyone could get a job at WOTC.
I seem to remember hearing from more than one quality source that games are made 3 to 4 expansions ahead (an exucse given when something hits the market in, say , the second or thrid set, and someone claims it was too late to fix it). Now we here that they didnt think of planes in set 1 because they can't see into the future for set 3!!!!!!!!!! Which is it folks?

I'm with you Huey, I've remained positive through out all the contoversy that has arisen in the past. Now I'm getting fed up. I thought we were getting some answers to our questions. I also remember when we were told the excuse that production was two to three sets ahead of the release date.

I asked a half a dozen questions myself. I didn't expect all my questions to be answered but, I thought maybe one or two. Wheres the article? It appears we got shined on one more time. If you don't know what it means to be shined on, PM me and I'll enlighten you.

From here on in. I'll PM 4242David4242 and ask him to ask my questions, since he is the only person out of 10 pages of post's that gets any response.

[WotC Bob]

People, Justin will be putting up an article that deals with certain questions in more depth next week. Articles will probably be the primary way we address questions as it allows us to group certain blocks of similar questions together.

[RBloom0566]

People, Justin will be putting up an article that deals with certain questions in more depth next week. Articles will probably be the primary way we address questions as it allows us to group certain blocks of similar questions together.

Like Justin said earlier, (paraphrased) damned if you do--damned if you don't. Think he was just being nice and trying to answer ~something~, but it wasn't some of ~everyone's~ thing so others got bent. Probably should've not replied at all until the article. Remember Justin - no good deed goes unpunished (least not around here).

<Edit> I support the new open door policy and hope the nay-sayers don't get it slammed in our faces.

[WotC JW]

I was working on the first column this afternoon when I saw 4242david4242's post. (I'm hoping to have the column in Bob's hands by Friday. In the column, I'm going to talk about the Spitfire, Hellcat, and maps. The week after, I'm hopefully going to tackle point costs, "bad" rares, the metagame, and some design philosophy.)

I decided to reply to 4242david4242 because I thought his questions covered a nice range of topics. I also decided to answer because I realized that the time from when this thread got started til when the first column will go up on the web is almost 2 weeks - quite a long time. And I didn't want it to look like nothing was going on.

Also, just due to the frequency of a weekly column, some questions there will take time to be answered. Again, I don't want it to feel like some things aren't being addressed, so I'd like to be able to answer things here on the boards on an individual basis too.

I'd like to answer other emails as well along the way. I'm trying to get as much information out to you guys as quickly as I can. Thank you for your patience and understanding during this transition. And please, keep your questions coming.

Thanks

[Kaufschtick]

Thanks for the info. Don't let the negetivity get to you, it just shows that people care. :) There's just too much good in this game to let the bad issues get the best of us. Nothing's perfect, but overall, this game has alot going for it.

[Kaufschtick]

Mr. Webb

In light of the much of the ongoing and increased recent dissatisfaction with this game, and the previous lack of qualified response to legidimate concerns, many of us have become rather vociferous in our condemnation of this game and the company that produces it.

If it is your intention to answer these questions, and take on at least some of the well intentioned criticism with an eye toward producing a better product more in line with the desires of it's enthusiastic supporters, then sir, I owe you and your company a sincere appology. I was begining to believe that we would be ignored entirely.

For now I will leave it to others to detail the exact issues, as I share many of the ones already listed, but the fact that you have made this effort at all may be the difference between this game rapidly losing it's player base {and profitability} and becoming a thing of lasting fun, use and elegance.

I myself have found it a means to bridge a widening gap between my father and I, and I'm sure it's helped interest a lot of young people in one of the most important conflicts in history.

These are things that don't show up on a monthly profit and loss report, but they are important to us, and I think you will find the overwhelming majority of players have similar reasons to want this game to achieve it's full potential.

Thank you for your time, consideration and vision.

Once again, I think this particular post bears repeating...

[spite48]

My question relates to issues around game design, point costs and “bad” rares, so it may be addressed in one of your two planned columns. However I would like to know more generally about nation balancing.

The game contemplates axis versus allies, but most players I know play single nation armies for greater realism in terms of what occurred in squad level conflict.

It is clear that not all of the nations can be balanced (a pure Australian army cannot challenge a well constructed German army) But, with respect to the major powers, it appears that Japan is lagging behind while the US and Germany surge ahead. The spread is somewhat obvious.

Does this reflect a design philosophy with respect to nation balance, a lack of design philosophy with respect to nation balance, or does it reflect a problem resulting from saving the best Japanese units for a forthcoming pacific war booster?

Thank you.

[Redgar]

Hi Mr. Webb et al,

Here are a few points I thought pertenent to the descussions being brought up here, in no particular order:

1. Is or has WotC, previously, at the present time, or is planning to, actually produce AAM miniatures representing vehicles or devices that did not verifyably see combat in WW II? Perhaps my question is too direct to reasonably expect an answer, but I feel the least I can do is phrase it as succinctly as possible.

2. Would/has WotC consider(ed) including reprints/repaints of miniatures in Combat Zone Kits? Why or Why Not? I've thought up a couple of points for and against, but would greatly like to hear "your" (personally a/o AH) views and rational.

3. Would WotC condider enabling sanctioned play at higher point values than 100? DDM (which has had MANY more releases, and has greater flexibility for "creative" SA's than AAM) has 200 and 500 pt. play, while it started out at 100 pts; might AAM one day do the same thing?

Various thoughts (not so much questions, but musings for you to ponder and, if desired, respond to):

1. Personally, I like the bland Canadian soldier. Blank clay from which to mold, perhaps? Also, I am curious as to why a lying-down sculpt was chosen? It's unique, true, but given the D-Day-storming-beaches theme and the fact the Canuck isn't a sniper, the choice seems odd to me.

2. Additionally, I like having minor nations released in small numbers. It means I can collect all I want from each set without breaking the bank, while managing to collect only a handful of units from factions I don't like. This doesn't stop me from buying a booster, pulling a chi-ro; coming back the next day, buying another booster, and pulling another, but hey....

3. Combat Zone Kits. Personally, I like the fact you can only get them through stores, despite the fact I live in a town of ~4,000 people, >400 km away from the nearest shop. They are a small, but not insubstantial, incentive for owners to promote the game, and players to play at stores. Two caveats: the tiles, maps, and scenarioes become downloadable for free 1-2 months after the CZ kit's release (for poor soles who can't get the kits), and the lack of distribution to Europe seems inexcusable; this is less of a problem with the kits only being distributed to stores as opposed to players, but more accurately US (and Canadian ;)) stores but not others, plus a general shortage of kits.

4. Dice. This is currently a placeholder until I can get back and finish my point.

Anyway, I have to go and collect some duties tomorrow and it's late out here. 'till next time, that was

Just my 2 ep worth (since I can't spend'm on AAM ;))

Redgar

[Muenchausen]

Like Justin said earlier, (paraphrased) damned if you do--damned if you don't. Think he was just being nice and trying to answer ~something~, but it wasn't some of ~everyone's~ thing so others got bent. Probably should've not replied at all until the article. Remember Justin - no good deed goes unpunished (least not around here).

<Edit> I support the new open door policy and hope the nay-sayers don't get it slammed in our faces.
Your absolutely right. Nothing should have been said at all. Or Maybe one or two questions from random posters should have been answered. Maybe a post saying "I'm still working the issue." would have been sufficient. But to answer a dozen questions by one individual and ignore everybody else's post, that completely unacceptable to me. I don't care if my questions go un answered. But what about everybody else's. I have been in this game from the beginning. I joined the "TEAM AAM JUNKIE" movement when the entire site became an anti AAM game movement. But this has gone on far enough. I'm tired of empty promises by Avalon Hill/WOTC/Hasbro about this game. I've put too much money into this game to be treated like some kind of lackey. I'm near the end of my patience. I'm still waiting to see the resized Hellcat that is sitting on the desk of a moderator. If I have to, I'll go back and find the post, if it hasn't been deleted or modified. If this post makes me a "nay sayer" then guess what, I'm a NAY SAYER. I'm sick and tired of lies, half truths and empty promises. How about honesty for a change.

[Sharpe]

Since others have so competently and completely covered my other questions, I want to return to those unprofessional and inexplicable lapses that make me doubt the dedication of some at WOTC.

Early in the forum on rules questions, Steve commented that the phrase "a hex directly to the left or right of a hex is neither in front of nor behind the hex" (paraphrase) in the LOS rules was completely idiotic and should never have made its way into the rules booklet. IT'S STILL THERE IN THE NEW RULES! They can't even change a phrase condemned by the rules guru? Sure, people make mistakes, but how many chances do they get?

It's stuff like this that drains the hope from me.

[Colonel_Panic]

Hello Justin,

here are some questions that I havent seen the answer to, yet.

(1) What is the criterias used when setting the historical year for the units?
Just an example of a unhistorical historical year is the new Sdkfz 250 from set IV, which is stated as 1941, but was mass produced and used heavily during the 1940 assault on France.

(2) What facts are the armor stats based on for some of the armored vehicles? If you look at the Sherman M4A3E8 (Sherman Easy Eight), the A&AM stat card states 7/6 Superior armor 2, but that tanks armor was no better than any other Sherman of the A3 Series, unless you count in the water filled jeep cans and sandbags attached to it by veteran crews, but that should only have given it 6/4 at the maximum, and no superior armor.

There is one version of the M4A3E8 that had extended armor plates welded onto it, but that version was produced by the Israelis in 1947/48. That versions stats might match the A&AM Sherman Easy Eight, but then the historical year should have been set to 1947, or 48.

// Totte - aka ColonelPanic

[Hum_35711]

I've noticed that the set IV models are made with very low quality plastic. Having purchased 18 boosters of set IV (a case and a half) I now have something like 20 pieces that are effectively unplayable. The barrels on all of my 'Marder II' pieces are hopelessly bent. The barrel on my 'Sherman VC Firefly' is bent. One of the wings on my 'Hawker Typhoon' is bent, and the tail of my Me-110 is bent. etc. I never had these problems with sets I and II. Set III had a few obviously low quality pieces. (all of my 17-pounders are bent).

Has this been fixed for set V?

I can say with certainty that if the general quality of the pieces continues to decline going into set V, then I will not be buying cases of that new set.

Please fix this problem.

[Canuck_Captain]

I have a ton of questions but why does German have 2 MG's(well I know why the '42 and '34) but every nation should have their respective MG's...

Why would China get a MG before all the more deserving Factions....

WE NEED MORE MG's for minor Factions...

[NumberCruncher]

I too am concerned about the diminishing return on my A&AM dollar.

First you eliminated elevating barrels. {Those were cool. Even us older, mature, more serious and experienced gamers like to play with our guns. Bad move, no biscuit :( }

Then you started using inferior plastic, the paint jobs dropped in quality, quantity and accuracy and THEN you switched pins for screws.

{At least you appear to have fixed the axis/allies color error on the cards.}

Bottom Line: We're paying the same, but getting less for our money as each set comes out.

I'm worried you will start making units out of credit cards next...

So this raises four big questions with only one possible answer:
1-Are you going to improve/add to the quality features in future?
2-Is the level of quality going to remain consistant with what we get now?
3-Can we expect further cost cutting/savings measures and Dilbert style "added value" devolvement?
4-Will some things improve while other things continue to lose ground? If so, what and why?

The chance of my wallet opening again in your direction hangs on the {honest} answer to this question...

[Thoes426]

Are the Americans and Russians going to get their own MG Teams in a future booster set?

Thoes426

[V-Disc]

Are the Americans and Russians going to get their own MG Teams in a future booster set?

Thoes426

More to the point; are these much-needed units going to be included in the NEXT set? Will "Reserves" contain U.S. and Russian MG units?

[Colonel_Coo]

Do you think you could update the www.wizards.com homepage so that when you place your cursor over the Axis and Allies it would not show CONTESTED SKIES as being the most recent product release?

[Moderator Kayn]

Once again people... this is a thread for Questions. Stick to that please. And while you are sticking, it'd be nice if you remembered civility as well.

[RommeL BombeR 77]

When is this chaos gonna end?

[whitewind]

I feel the rarity issue needs to be addressed quickly. " by next set. " I would ask you why certain mini's are rare but I know the answer won't agree with me so I guess I'll just go to sleep and wonder how best to sell all this stuff.... You mentioned that you personally thought this game was historical. I don't know why but that struck me. Flamethrowers don't shoot down planes. I could not begin to defend that one with my grognard " yeah I know I spelled it wrong " friends.... War at Sea? Not no way not no how.

[Arpathapius]

How about a 360 degree view of the new set booster?? :D

[Bobsalt]

Justin, I want to start off by saying that I appreciate the intent of this thread. Anything that lets players (customers) give their feedback and get answers to their questions is a good thing. I have read through this thread, and I must confess that I’m somewhat skeptical that the concerns of many of us will be answered, but I do think that you deserve credit for posting this. I will be anxious to read what your answers and comments will be, since they will almost entirely decide whether I continue to play (and buy once again) this game, as well as whether or not I buy War at Sea.

My questions are:

1) What is being done to address future scaling issues with units? I do not understand why WotC seems to have such a problem with making vehicles in scale with all of the other vehicles when other companies making WWII miniatures (or even just toys) don’t seem to have this problem.

2) What is being done to address the marked drop in the physical quality of the miniatures? In my opinion the quality dropped sharply with Set III, and now that I have a few Set IV units from eBay I have to say they are much worse than disappointing. Not only are many of the sculpts poor, but the quality of the plastic used is very poor – almost like rubber. Nothing I’ve done (including the boiling water/cold water method) has been able to make the gun barrel on the Marder remain straight. I’m left with the options of having someone with more skill than I have perform surgery on it or not use it.

3) This one is a more difficult question to answer, since I understand the need for protecting proprietary information, but at least some insight into how you come up with the costs of units would be welcome. A perfect example is the Tiger and the Veteran Tiger. Given how much more powerful the Vet is in combat it’s hard to fathom how this is only rated as a 2-point improvement over the standard Tiger. It also lends a lot of credence to those who say that WotC did this deliberately so that each set will outshine the ones before it (power creep).

Justin, thank you for taking the time to look at everyone’s questions and address them in future articles. I do have one final point to make, though. Moderator Kayn made a good point in this thread several days ago reminding everyone that they have a precious opportunity here to get some questions answered, and that we should use it wisely. I agree with her completely, but I have to point out that the reverse is also quite true here. Your responses (or lack thereof) in the coming weeks could very well be the deciding factor for more than a few people as to whether they continue to play this game (as well as buy future products). To borrow from Moderator Kayn’s words, you have a precious opportunity here to demonstrate to all of us who have become quite disenchanted with this game and WotC that you hear us and that you really will do something tangible to address our concerns. Use it wisely please.

[Lotus]

Well said, Bob.

I mimic thee in stressing the opportunity here for mutual benefit.

1) Will quality consistency improve? (some units I think are actually very well sculpted/painted/manufactured...others very much not.)

2) Does Set V indicate accelleration of power or will we see a return to earlier historical units?

3) What's the status of the Spitfire redo?

4) (cough...cough) What's the status of the Spitfire redo?

Thanks.

[U-Boat]

Once again people... this is a thread for Questions. Stick to that please. And while you are sticking, it'd be nice if you remembered civility as well.

Unfortunately all civility has been lost at this advanced stage of poor product and unacceptable customer service.

You the Mods are the front line for us consumers to AH & Hasbro, etc product and the people on these boards are your main customers.

The constant standing behind your shield of the 'Code Of Conduct' is getting this company nowhere as a business and managing to turn many off of this game in particular.

As the company well knows this board has high marketing value.

It appears that the customer is not right, has little or no input and is being treated in the utmost disrespect.

My question is there someone who represents the company that we can talk to as consumers?

Otherwise I would advise people to contact your local Better Business Bureau and mention the state of the bad product & customer service.

[Banor58]

As I rememer from Avalon Hill's SL/ASL series, there were lots of boards/maps. Not to mention various overlays from different sets. Is there any possibility of modifing those existing resources for use in AAM? It might be done with nominal cost, yet a great return from the players.

[budejovice]

There is a question coming, but first I want to say that I really love this game. My buddy and I just played a game on natural terrain overlooking Lake Stuart in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness area in the Cascades that some of you at Wizards may know, complete with Spanish wine from the wineskin and buffalo jerky. It really doesn't get much better than that.

However, it is frustrating knowing just how much better the game could be. We realize, as consumers of a product of corporate America, that it's not about us in the end. But the hole that this game could fill leaves us wanting much more and it seems that the community at large, at least the vocal community on these boards, sees the superiority of the basic structure of A&AM and wants the rest of the game to flow logically into something we really want and can use. Don't leave us to our own devises, because we will ultimately skip right over the middle-man. This seems to be happening to some degree already, and has been since, more or less, the beginning.

The previous posters have asked many of the questions that I would love to hear answered. Thank you for your diligence guys.

What I would also like to know:

Does anyone directly employed by Wizards of the Coast (on the payroll, receiving benefits, living in or near Seattle) work on-site in China during the manufacturing of the miniatures? If not, does anyone employed by WotC travel to China during production to offer any degree of oversight? Would the company consider doing anything like this to help prevent some of the major problems that have accompanied each release?

Thank you for this thread. I hope what we have to say helps Wizards realize what should be happening to this game. Even if the design meetings erupt with applause, is it likely that the next gimmick will make us think it was a great idea? If it's all about profits, why not make us want to shell over the cash?

[PatrickWR]

I would like to volunteer to be the QC person to inspect new models prior to their approval for overseas production. You can ship the proofs or greens or what-have-you to my apartment in Chicago. My pay rate is reasonable.

[lybo]

Sheesh i'm in Chicago too, I will GLADLY help! :D
At this point i believe this game truly needs it.

[RommeL BombeR 77]

Hey I live around Chicago! count me in too!

[Stojakovic]

I would like to volunteer to be the QC person to inspect new models prior to their approval for overseas production. You can ship the proofs or greens or what-have-you to my apartment in Chicago. My pay rate is reasonable.

good luck with that. :)

[DocD]

I want to say thanks for the question thread....looking forward to the answers.
It shouldn't be a shock to anyone that once the questions are answered that many will continue to be unhappy....hope that doesn't discourage WotC though. (This really is a great game).

Anyway, my couple of questions are how much of an impact will the "experimental/secret weapons" play in the next set? Will almost the entire set be composed of them or will only a handful make a showing?

How many more sets have been planned for?

Thanks guys.

[Moderator Sinister]

Unfortunately all civility has been lost at this advanced stage of poor product and unacceptable customer service.

You the Mods are the front line for us consumers to AH & Hasbro, etc product and the people on these boards are your main customers.

The constant standing behind your shield of the 'Code Of Conduct' is getting this company nowhere as a business and managing to turn many off of this game in particular.

As the company well knows this board has high marketing value.

It appears that the customer is not right, has little or no input and is being treated in the utmost disrespect.

My question is there someone who represents the company that we can talk to as consumers?

Otherwise I would advise people to contact your local Better Business Bureau and mention the state of the bad product & customer service.


The code of conduct is in place...you'll have to deal with it. It's not a shield, it's the job function we are required to expected to perfom and it is exactly what we will do.

To answer your question custserv@wizards.com is the place that ALL community members of WotC / AH are directed when they have an issue with a missing piece, questions, comments, etc...

[Cruizin2000]

(edited)

Anyways, another question. How far will Wizards go with "experimental" units?
Should be expect to see some really obscure pieces?

C2000

[Joisey]

Going back to the assertion that WotC was targeting a 12+ year old customer base, I have some follow up questions:

If your target customer base is 12 years old and up, then why don’t you sell AAM at Toys R Us/ Walmart/ Target/ or similiar retail chains along with your other Hasbro products aimed at the same demographic?

If your targeting children as young as twelve years old, then why is your brick & mortar retail distribution network based exclusively in game stores that cater to adult hobbyists?

Isn’t it true that a significant portion of your sales is through internet retailers, where purchases require the buyer to have a credit card account (typically not something that the under 21 crowd has access to)?

And if you don’t sell through stores like Toys R Us, but rely on adult hobby stores and the internet, then where did you get the idea that your customer base would have a significant portion of children?

Finally, what sales data can you cite to that would contradict the customer demographic data created from the on line forum database (Who's Playing AAM Thread)?

These questions go to the credibility of the defense that certain design decisions in the game have been made to cater to the 18 and under crowd. While that sounds like a plausible excuse for sacrificing historicity, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there is, in fact, such a customer base.

[RBloom0566]

With Justin's initial posting on 06/16, his request for a week (or so) to collect questions (~06/23), and his responding to them the next week (~06/30), and being as that date is drawing very near, my questions are -

How's work on that Q&A Article going, Justin? Will it be posted by 06/30 as many of us are hoping?

Thanks,
Robert

PS: Hope you'll be doing rolling articles every week by collecting questions as you go, and not with two-week gaps between them.

[Ewokhunter92]

Going back to the assertion that WotC was targeting a 12+ year old customer base, I have some follow up questions:

If your target customer base is 12 years old and up, then why don’t you sell AAM at Toys R Us/ Walmart/ Target/ or similiar retail chains along with your other Hasbro products aimed at the same demographic?

If your targeting children as young as twelve years old, then why is your brick & mortar retail distribution network based exclusively in game stores that cater to adult hobbyists?

Isn’t it true that a significant portion of your sales is through internet retailers, where purchases require the buyer to have a credit card account (typically not something that the under 21 crowd has access to)?

And if you don’t sell through stores like Toys R Us, but rely on adult hobby stores and the internet, then where did you get the idea that your customer base would have a significant portion of children?

Finally, what sales data can you cite to that would contradict the customer demographic data created from the on line forum database (Who's Playing AAM Thread)?

These questions go to the credibility of the defense that certain design decisions in the game have been made to cater to the 18 and under crowd. While that sounds like a plausible excuse for sacrificing historicity, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that there is, in fact, such a customer base.


Well, according to this

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/102-5273388-1436965?url=index%3Dtoys&field-keywords=axis+allies&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go

TRU does in fact sell them. I do know most B&M stores refuse to carry miniatures due to the simple fact too many packages get destroyed by theft costing them money and it's not cost effective to have to find a lock up for them.

Wizkids used to sell thier stuff en mass at TRU, Walmart, and Target, until the vast amount of theft caused TRU to demand that either theft proof boxes are made or they will no longer carry it. WK made each pack with cellophane wrap of course, sales slumpped anyways.

My 7 year old son plays YUGIOH and I do not, yet I order boosters and boxes strictly from the internet. Therefore, as an adult, and parent, I use my CC for purchases. The same could be said for A&AM and SWM.

[Joisey]

TRU is just a "branding" used by Amazon.com. Ordering online is not the same as going to the TRU brick & mortar store. It's really just Amazon selling TRU merchandize on-line, and lumping a bunch of other items that the brick and mortar stores would never carry under the TRU brand.

[Bobsalt]

TRU is just a "branding" used by Amazon.com. Ordering online is not the same as going to the TRU brick & mortar store. It's really just Amazon selling TRU merchandize on-line, and lumping a bunch of other items that the brick and mortar stores would never carry under the TRU brand.
The brick and mortar Toys R Us stores here do not carry A&AM - nor do any of the nationally-known retail chains that are listed on the WotC website (Waldenbooks, Babbages, et al). I don't know if this is just here locally.

[UnionMan]

I am breaking my vow to never post on these forums again, but heck, I've been a hypocrite before ;)

My primary questions are:

Why did WoTC decide to pursue different scales for the soliders and vehicles?

Why weren't the vehicles designed to a true 15mm standard? WoTC effectively locked themselves out other markets for WW2 15mm miniatures by making their vehicles in an oddball scale. This just doesn't make sense to me. Think of all the other customers you could be getting if you adhered to a normal 15mm scale (bigger tanks also look much cooler!).

What actions are being taken to ensure that future miniatures are appropriately sized and at least consistent within AAM's unique scale?

Are maps with a larger hex a possibility in the future? The current 2 inch hex is too small and looks silly. A four inch hex would look better and would hold more figs.

This last one is more of a comment. This game has gotten me back into gaming after many years, I'm 30 years old and a history geek. Please don't continue to cheese this game out or you will loose me.

Thanks!

[Ewokhunter92]

TRU is just a "branding" used by Amazon.com. Ordering online is not the same as going to the TRU brick & mortar store. It's really just Amazon selling TRU merchandize on-line, and lumping a bunch of other items that the brick and mortar stores would never carry under the TRU brand.

Well, TRU is breaking away from Amazon July 1st so I guess we will see exactly what happens in this regard.

[Huey 290]

Just in case anyone was wondering.......

A target audience of 12 years old and up is NOT a target. No different than saying that your target audience is everyone who is alive, those that are dead, I do not target.

But anyways, now a question:

What requirements are sought for gaming industry employeess that work in this game?

[RBloom0566]

Well, that was wholly unsatisfactory.
In essence, tough luck on the Hellcat and Spitfire.
Expect the same answer on the 3" Gun, quality grade of plastic used, etc.

My question (so I don't get edited out of forum) is: Why can't you guys do a limited run of the correct Hellcat and Spitfire, if you have them, for purposes of an exchange program for those of us who paid good money for bad product?

Robert

[Autarch]

Question: Since the Hellcat isn't going to be reprinted, can WotC include it in the random rare exchange program with the Spitfire?

Clarification: What exactly is the extra step in the QC process to prevent another Spitfire fiasco? Short of having US WotC reps standing on the assembly line for final inspection and looking at test samples from each mold before production begins, I don't see anything that can prevent this from happening again.

Comment: So regarding other nations/themes/missing staple units, there is going to be no adjustment. Four sets in and the major powers are still missing key equipment/units, how does this bode for lesser nations that only get one or two slots per set (if that)? And by the time they can field "standard" units, they'll be facing second or third generation elite/veteran counterparts.

Critique: More detail with some of the explanations would be nice. For example, why did the "running change" for the Hellcat not work? What is the new QC step that resulted from the Spitfire fiasco?

I see the offer of the Spitfire exchange as a positive step. Thanks.

[Kaufschtick]

You've got to dig an avatar the likes of Clint Eastwood from Where Eagles Dare!

Weather the storm and keep the good word coming! There is just too much good in this game not to... "keep moving forward!"

Or, as my Flight Sergeant from the first Gulf War was fond of quoting :

"Adapt and Overcome; damm it!"

That was Clint from his favorite flick HeartBreak Ridge . :cool:

[Ubergeek]

Justin,

I'm glad to see the regular posting you've started on AA:M issues at the AH website for the game. Thanks for the low-down on the Hellcat and Spitfire. Perhaps in a future posting you can address the problem that went wrong with the rifle sized M3 and if anything will be done about it (I was more disappointed with that than the HC or Spit).

The other big discussion I've seen here is what the definition of the "Reserve" units will be in the upcoming set. Without giving away spoilers can you settle the issue of unit types by discussing generalities? Will the special "secret weapons" units be those that were produced in small numbers and were actually deployed and saw some combat or will some be prototype units or something that only saw a blueprint? I'm hoping it's the former with some of the more esoteric variants on the Sherman or AVRE's along with some small production German units that did make it to the field. IMHO, units that never saw combat shouldn't be included in this game (yet). Also, any way to confirm or deny the rumor that a V2 will be included in the next set (please put an end to this one if possible by either squashing the rumor or stating "no comment" in which case we'll know what that means so you don't get in trouble).

Looking forward to more "official" comments and clarifications through your column. Thanks.

[Photoner Hawkwind]

Justin,

1. What is the extra step in your QC process that has been instituted in order to avoid future problems such as the Spitfire, Hellcat and 3” gun mistakes?

2. How are you assuring that the foreign factory is going to stop making future mistakes or stop lying to you about future mistakes?

Sorry about my feelings about foreign business owners, but my dealings with them has shown me that all they care about is their income and will make any excuse to please their income source. Even when caught in lies they continue to lie and yell prove it when it has been proven.

To be fair I’ve only had to deal with some of the worst ones not the average ones.

[Bobgun]

1/. Landing Ship Tank. Couldn't see a question concerning LSTs. Are you going to give us any means of getting vehicles ashore besides the Amtrack, Canadian DD or dropping in the Tetrarch?

2/. Transport Ships. I also could not find anything concerning a "transport" ship where reserves could be held until the Higgins boat or LST returned to pick them up. Can there be a staging area 3 or 4 spaces off shore to hold soldiers/vehicles until they can be picked up? (or until I get enough Higgins boats)

3/. Tank Obstacles and cover. They sure looked good to the guys sheltering behind them on the beaches. Can they be used as cover for soldiers in the same hex?

4/. Obstacle clearing. Usually as the first unit crosses an obstacle they cut or clear a path for the following units. Can the cost for following units be reduced?

[Taisho_Alex]

A question spawned by your first article:

Do you / AH / WotC consider Japan to be a minor nation or a major power.

The reason I ask is that in your first (and so far only :D) article you mention Japan with Canada, France and Italy as nations that will continualle see unit releases. While it is implied that UK, US, Germany and SU will naturally see new releases, why do you feel the need to mention Japan specifically?

The understadning I've gotten so far from reading the WotC responses and articles etc, is that there are 5 major power; US, UK, Ger, SU and JP, and filler nations.

Is it really true that the only major power on the Axis side is considered to be Germany? or is it a misunderstanding of the context (for me) that has caused this.

[OtterSC]

hello, and thank you for the article. i do hope that it keeps going.

my question is how does AH/WotC think up the game mechanics? do you look at other "competitior" games and borrow some of the mechanics or even expand (or simplify) some? i am sure the team has ideas and creates rules based on units existing and future.

i assume too that there is a large list of units that you would like to produce. but need to limit that to the sets being released. i am sure it is easier for you to pick the units with themed box sets. but how do you pick the units? do we on this board have some influence?

so, really, i guess a question to sum it all up, how does the team think of adding to the game in units and rules?

[PatriotUSA]

Going back to the assertion that WotC was targeting a 12+ year old customer base, I have some follow up questions:

There was a beautiful ad for AAM in the inside front cover of this month's History Channel Magazine. I work in the ad industry, "inside front cover" is expensive real estate, so they certainly think or hope they are going to get some return for their investment for that ad placement. The target demographic for that magazine is definitely not twelve year-olds, teen-agers, or even twenty-somethings. It is 30+ with college education and high incomes. If that is the market they are putting their advertising dollars toward, then that is who they think is buying their game.

There is a definite disconnect between the game design (at least how it has evolved since it debuted) and the game marketing.

[grillcookr2]

Will we ever see Glider troopers? The 101st Airborne was represented by the paratroopers. I hope you will represent the 82nd Airborne with Glider troopers and Gliders?

Pleeeeeeaaaaaseeeee pretty please.

[killermuppet]

My Question is this: Will WotC fix anything they have screwed up in the sets already shipping?

This is not a question of "well we are looking into it" or in future sets we won't goof up. This is straight forward, will you finally admit you made a mistake and correct the problem question.

Is WotC is so unethical that they think they can just offer Lip Service to its customers and hope that solves the problem? Justin you offered an olive branch to this community in hopes of repairing the damage the short sightedness of the corporate big wigs dealt to the promising game. Why now does it feel like a sword pointed at my throat telling me to like it or lump it?

I don't want to trade my "Spitfire" in for something else. Right now I want to return ALL my minatures back and get my money back. I am an avid collector, I rarely play the game, but collect the set for the collection. I currently own EVERY piece of all of the sets and usually aim for four of EVERY piece. To this effect I have personally purchased ELEVEN Cases of your product. At first I loved the product now I mourne I didn't pick up Flames of War first.

Again straight answers are demanded, no more corporate double speak. I work in a Corporate environment, and know when I'm being handed a line of .... Will WotC stand behind their product and correct the damage they wrought upon this game?

A VERY ANGER CUSTOMER

[Dugger]

Yes i would like to know if wotc is going to put out a scenarios pack for retail sell?
i seen alot for scenarios but i can't print them and i think with the game over a year old the time is right for a release of these packs.
Dugger

[118th_MPCo_abn]

There was a beautiful ad for AAM in the inside front cover of this month's History Channel Magazine.

They also placed an add on the inside cover of the latest issue of World War II magazine.

[Kaufschtick]

WotC Justin, please don't kick me off the boards for asking this, but are there currently any plans to release a special booster pack that comes with 45 Mosin Nagant figures? :D

Sorry, I couldn't resist. :o

[Cruizin2000]

Justin,

Plain and simple - why won't we ever get a trade in offer for the Hellcat, Spitfire, and US 3" gun? I'm talking about a better, correctly sized model and not a trade in for some other piece or having to buy it from another booster or as a hard to get promo.

Awaiting your reply.

C2000

[RBloom0566]

Justin,

Plain and simple - why won't we ever get a trade in offer for the Hellcat, Spitfire, and US 3" gun? I'm talking about a better, correctly sized model and not a trade in for some other piece or having to buy it from another booster or as a hard to get promo.

Awaiting your reply.

C2000

I second that question! You've said "Hellcat, no," "Spitfire, kinda-sorta," and *woosh* on the 3" gun. Now tell us WHY? You've got the casts, they are correct, a limited run for those who want the correct mini would go a LONG way towards improving your reputation. Hell, I bet most of us would even be willing to eat postage both ways to make it happen!

So a simple thing like a limited re-run, is that so economically unfeasible? You could substitute the three of them for the next run of COMPLETELY USELESS obstacles, instead.

To let you know what your current attitude is earning you? Check e-Bay. Prices across the board on your minis are running at 50% what they were just last week. Your most vocal opponents appear to be the ones with the most cash-in-hand to spend. Pre-orders are going to be in the toilet for Set V based on public opinion.

Fix this, or prepare to lose your market share. That simple.

[Redgar]

Hi Mr. Webb, RBloom, et al:

First comment: While it's true that certain scenarios and historical plays might call for a Hellcat, how many players honestly use the Hellcat for anything other than a bookend or ranting point? Now then, I said honestly.... Seriously, for 1 more point you get the M4A1 Sherman. Furthermore, it's the first set. Give them a break, eh? Since the rare itself is less-than-stellar, it's a first-set release, and does depict a Hellcat, I don't see the point of such an uproar; while it would be nice to have a correct-scale, re-stated model in some future set (hint, hint), I don't work up a temper fuming over how this piece is gathering a massive amount of dust on the shelf.

Second comment: While 3mm Gun is a little rediculous: it's an uncommon for gosh sakes; stop whining already! The sheer number that would have to be produced to resupply everyone would be cost and distribution prohibative. Besides, it balances out the Hellcat. That said, this mini would make a great promo: few would have a greater problem about not being able to get such a promo than any other, most people would only want one or two anyway (unless one is fielding a piece-for-piece battery), it's a decent but not overwhelming piece (compare to new mortar); and did I mention it is an uncommon? :)

Third: eBay prices do not directly reflect market demand for upcoming product, nor do they directly reflect anything close to Wizards prices, profits, etc.. Now that the D-Day craze has passed on, prices can be expected to fall. Admittedly, though, a healthy secondary market often reflects a healthy game....

Fourth: String me up if you will, but I like the obsticles. They add flavour (and something anyone collecting any army(ies) can use right out of the box, and improve the Royal Engineer. I would like to know if there will be reprints of obsticles (particularly the tank traps): while it is obviously clear why the scuplt ended up the way it did, I would like to see some dragons teeth, such as those pictured on the card ;)

Fourth: The Spitfire. Now THIS I am ticked off about. Not only is it a stats-sound, iconic (both for WW II and for AAM) piece, but it was advertized on the box as something completely different than it is. One of the main reasons I, on release day from a brick-and-motar-store, bought a case + extra boosters of this set was because I saw the Spitfire on the side and desparately wanted one. (The other 2 reasons: Canadian Troops and no Japanese rares.) In fact, since I couldn't afford to buy enough boosters or a case to pull a Messershmit (and, truth to be told, wasn't unglued about not having one), I was happy... at first. Upon being show the horrible truth, and looking back at the boxside, I am very, VERY annoyed. Please excuse the capitals.

I haven't ever bought a case (or so many boosters) before. While I can't say I won't again: "You cut me deep, Shrek. You cut me real deep." I'm certain there were no malign intentions, and WotC is (almost) as upset as we are, I'd like to draw attention to two quotes: "this is particularly frustrating for us, since a correct Spitfire sculpt exists"; and "we’ve instituted an extra step in our QC process as a result of this mistake." Thanks for the candid info on both, and good news about the latter, but:"

The Scuplt exists. More than just the paint master, the sculpt. And stats. And paint scheme. I think you see where I'm leading. There is no way that I'm going to be led by the nose AGAIN with the promise of a Spitfire: we were promised a chance of pulling a Spitfire, I paid for 12 + 4 or 5 chances of pulling on, when there was, in fact, no chance of pulling one at all. Kind of playing Russian Roulette, and someone hands you a fully loaded gun. At least in Roulette one can examine the contents before paying their money and taking their chances (it would be over-dramatic to have said "biting the bullet", wouldn't it? :))

If we aren't to have a trade-in, then a quick 15 seconds from some up-and-up's 3 minutes (I understand that Mr. Webb doesn't have / can't release answers for everything) would be greatly appreciated to explain why in the blazes not? The Hellcat and 3" Gun, I can understand: when push comes to shove, the Hellcat and the 3mm gun (along with various "minor" flaws in other minis) all depict the same vehicle: maybe a different model/size/colour/features, but the same model. A paint mess-up on the Spitfire I could have handled. A size mess-up, and I would have grinned and bore it. But to have been lied to (albeat unwittingly) is just slightly infuriating. Slight as in Hitler was slightly nasty. :mad:

Anyway, thanks to Mr. Webb for answering our (slightly pointed) questions, and RBloom et al for questioning answers,

Just my 2 ep worth,

Redgar

N. B.: I just remembered: you mentioned accessories: could "country" dice be amongst the options?

Edits: Well, I didn't know there was a limit on smilies (though I did think more than a couple of SMLEs is excessive) :-). Please folks, if what I said comes across wrong, assume there is a smile. And yes, the "slight" joke is a quote.

[Kaufschtick]

While I agree with Redgar's comments above, on the other hand, if ever there comes a day when WotC offers a trade in or correct sized Hellcat and M3 A.T. gun in addition to an actual Spitfire, I'll definately be thanking folks like RBloom0566, Cruizin2000 and all the others for beating the drum all this time... :cool:

As for beating the drum myself...well, I just think the point has been made quite clear...the ball is in the other court...

[RBloom0566]

Redgar:

Well thought out opinions. Let me respond, so that others may continue to see my points (with all due respect to the thread topic/mods).

First Response: I LIKE my Hellcat (pl) and often use them in conjunction with a standard Sherman or two. They are faster and when the scenario is a race to the objective, I find that with iniative, that puppy getting the jump on the bad guys is a SIGNIFICANT edge. This guy isn't as big a deal to me as the Spitfire and the overall customer service issue. Besides, an oversize Hellcat can be intimidating. *L*

Second Response: While I haven't had opportunity or need to play the US on defense, I would like to point out that the 3" gun is the ONLY US artillery piece and that having a bunch of BB Guns on the board is, well, less than enjoyable. Kind of the reverse of the Hellcat--they make the enemy laugh.

<Edit to 1st & 2nd Responses> Example- I'm selling you an AM/FM Radio sight unseen. You get it and much to your dismay, it's an AM Radio. You demand that I replace it with what I advertised. I say, sorry, while we have the AM/FM model and sent it to the factory, they substituted and made the AM model instead. Send it in and I can replace it with another random piece of electronic equipment.

Hmm...see the problem? You wanted an AM/FM Radio. Why are you *****ing? You still have a radio. It still works. It's just ... not entirely accurate. Why not just be happy with your radio?<End of Edit>

Third Response: INDEED! e-Bay prices do NOT reflect the primary market of the product. I agree with both your statements that they reflect the secondary market and are indicators of a healthy game. So if the price on e-Bay is dropping, the games infrastructure is not healthy. An unhealthy game is probably not long for the world.

Fourth Response: Git me mah rope! Thar's gonna be a hangin' terday! Nothing in the game could've better been countered in than obstacles. Someone's sarcastic comment about the upcoming WAS game sticks with me, and I probably paraphrase: "The Submarine class of miniatures will be represented by a periscope on a blue base," in direct sarcasm of the minefield. Hello? Weren't minefields concealed? This obstacle just escapes all reason for me.

Fifth Response: Glad you're hacked about the Spitfire. Join the club! It's certainly not exclusive membership.

As for your editorial comments, no problem about me being on the soapbox--it's my other hobby. *L* As for hearing from someone from WotC "officially," that's what Justin and Bob are trying to do for us. I appreciate what they try to do, but they're just able to pass on what the "Suits" want them to say. As for all the marketing-speak, they can't pull the wool over me, I was IN Marketing and I know all the talk.

As for beating the drum, etc. I'm done. We've heard the party-line. No amount of outcry will change their minds. They've committed Bad Product & Bad Customer Service and won't do anything to make it right. I'm glad they feel bad for the errors--they should--but they should also fix them. End of story.

[NumberCruncher]

I LIKE Justin. Alot.

This guy has an IMPOSSIBLE job.

He's jumping on a grenade that will NEVER stop exploding, unless he creates a game tailored to each and every individual's eclectic tastes.
I wonder if his company medical covers that.

It's also not his company or money, so he can't effect real change on his own, he has to go begging to some suit or beancounter.

He's having to cope with what I'm convinced has to be an ever tightening budget, yet middle aged cummudgeons like myself keep demanding consistant or better quality from future products.

I want a Kubelwagon, {or better yet, a Swimwagon!} U.S. & Russian MG teams, toned down SEs, better aircraft rules, paintjobs, a return to the better plastic.

Make me happy now Justin.

Sounds like my prom date. Yikes!

I LIKE this game. I just want to CONTINUE liking it.

I formally forgive you for the messospit. Things get bungled. Thanks for promising to try to do better, even though that's what was promised after the Hellcat. Please don't say you are producing a corrected version, then not do it. That would have saved alot of bruised consumer confidence. Please do a different model of the Spitfire sometime in the future.

[RBloom0566]

I LIKE Justin. Alot.

This guy has an IMPOSSIBLE job.

He's jumping on a grenade that will NEVER stop exploding, unless he creates a game tailored to each and every individual's eclectic tastes.
I wonder if his company medical covers that.

I have respect for Justin and Bob. They're people for the people, or at least seem to be. It's not their fault that they can't give the people the answers we want. It's a Suit issue.

Good thing WotC bought out TSR. Now they have exclusive rights to the Ring of Regeneration. He's gonna need it!

[WotC JW]

Thanks again to everyone who has posted. I love the passion of the players on this board.

I just wanted to post a quick note that, due to the upcoming holiday weekend, the next column probably won't be up until Thursday or Friday next week.
Although this is when I said I'd have it done by originally, I got the first one finished and posted early. And I don't want anyone to think that, just because the second one isn't posted by Monday morning, I've forgotten all about it. I havn't. In fact, I had a nice sit down with Mons this week and picked his brain, so I have plenty of content to play with.

To everyone on this side of the pond, Have a happy July 4th weekend!
And best of luck to anyone who's team is in the final 8. Go England!

[U-Boat]

The code of conduct is in place...you'll have to deal with it. It's not a shield, it's the job function we are required to expected to perfom and it is exactly what we will do.

To answer your question custserv@wizards.com is the place that ALL community members of WotC / AH are directed when they have an issue with a missing piece, questions, comments, etc...

Thanks for your reply.

My main question is about Hasbro and the direct line to their customer service department.

This constant going in a circle to direct a complaint to the company (Hasbro) is getting tired.

I hoped that you could show me and other consumers interested a simple path.

Regards,
U-Boat.

[Colonel_Coo]

Hello all at AH.


First off: I broke down and bought a box of D-Day. I got 4 of 5 planes and fortunetly did not get the Spitfire screw-up.

Second: I was thinking about how to economically fix the wrong sized pieces and brainstormed the following...
Please read the entire paragraph below prior to saying that you've thought of it already.


Go ahead and create the proper sculpts (size, unit etc) and put them together in a single pack. Send out a replacement order form with combat zone and make them downloadable on the web page. If the end user sends in 1 of each in a one package, he will get...
The corrected NON-PAINTED replacement pieces. That's right, the replacement piece would not be painted to save cost to AH and make this replacement program affordable to the company. A clip of paper would be included to show the proper paint scheme (also directions on line).

So the cost would be the shipping, print of the return vouchers, and the platic non painted units.

[Moderator Keldar]

My main question is about Hasbro and the direct line to their customer service department.

This constant going in a circle to direct a complaint to the company (Hasbro) is getting tired.

I hoped that you could show me and other consumers interested a simple path.

Hopefully this will help. http://www.hasbro.com/default.cfm?page=cs_contact

[Richter von Manthofen]

Cool!!!! :D

Can we have some Scottish Highlanders and British Home Guard in a future set.

Thanks

Emma

Hello thats a woman of my kind, I wanted to ask the same ;)

[RBloom0566]

About time for another installment, is it not, Justin?

[NumberCruncher]

So my VERY LAST question, {and this is for all the marbles folks,} is having noted the progressive decline in quality features, {Barrels not elevating or depressing anymore, several reductions in the quality of plastic, paint quality and durability, maps being printed on inferior paper stock, etc.} can we expect further cost cutting/profit maximizing efforts in Reserves, or are there any plans to return to the quality levels enjoyed by Set One or improve on them?

{Two questions actually.}

The {honest} answer {or lack thereof,} to this question will determine the amount {if any} of my future spending.

I'm sure I'm not the ONLY one that is concerned and awaits your response with anticipation.

[Sean]

I enjoyed the new article. I agree with you about the powercreep. Of course we want some better units in a new set. It just gives us more possibilities.

[NEVjr]

i just recently noticed my nashorn has these faint yellow-green lines on it, apperently to look like camo, but they are barely noticable, so now im interested, how many deco ops does it take to do a flamingo, a panzer2c, a tiger, a vet tiger, t-34, etc

i ask because the jagdpanzer 4 and brummbar dont seem to follow this scheme at all, they are simpler with less moving parts then a panzer 4g, which in turn looks like it has as much work/paint as a t-34/76, and the king tiger, tiger, vet tiger, jadgpanther/tiger, etc are all dull and grey, whereas the chi ha, and 7tpdw have great schemes

[RBloom0566]

Don't you just love an "Official Response" which raises more questions than it answers?

More Marketing. I now know where they got the idea for the SA: Strike and Fade. It's a variant of the Marketing Dept's SA: Dodge and Evade.

I'm sorry if I'm in the Quality Control/Customer Service Minority here, but I just am. I don't like sub-standard product for my limited disposable money! And each bit of fluff that gets posted as answers that don't really contain answers to those two basic questions (QC & CS) just put another nail in the AAM coffin for me.

This interview with a high up member of the Design Team failed to address the issues of plastic quality, craptastic paint schemes, pins replacing screws, etc. Or did no one else notice that? HE was the one to answer those questions. Whoops!

*Shrugs* Sorry folks, I just can't quit beating this drum.

[Bobsalt]

Don't you just love an "Official Response" which raises more questions than it answers?

More Marketing. I now know where they got the idea for the SA: Strike and Fade. It's a variant of the Marketing Dept's SA: Dodge and Evade.

I'm sorry if I'm in the Quality Control/Customer Service Minority here, but I just am. I don't like sub-standard product for my limited disposable money! And each bit of fluff that gets posted as answers that don't really contain answers to those two basic questions (QC & CS) just put another nail in the AAM coffin for me.

This interview with a high up member of the Design Team failed to address the issues of plastic quality, craptastic paint schemes, pins replacing screws, etc. Or did no one else notice that? HE was the one to answer those questions. Whoops!

*Shrugs* Sorry folks, I just can't quit beating this drum.
I don’t even know where to start in expressing my disappointment with Justin’s latest comments. I’m not going to comment here about the things he said regarding the design process here (there’s another thread for that). I will add my voice to yours, though, regarding WotC’s issues with (lack of) quality.

As one of the loudest voices concerning the really atrocious quality of the miniatures in the last two sets I really would like to know whether or not WotC is going to do something about this. I’ve come to accept that A&AM is most definitely not the game it was advertised to be when it was released. As annoying as it is to have been sucked in by what I can only describe as deceptive marketing, I can live with it. The basic concept of the game is sound, and as I’ve said before, I can rewrite bad rules and poorly thought out design concepts. But there isn’t a thing I can do about poorly made miniatures.

So, Justin, my question is: What, if anything, is WotC going to do about their ongoing issue with out-of-scale and badly sculpted miniatures, as well as the lack of detailing and poor and historically incorrect paint jobs?

As a follow-up, I’d also like to know why I can go to the toy department at Wal-Mart, and buy 1/144th scale tanks that are historically accurate, are correct in scale to one another, and have very detailed and historically correct paint jobs, and only cost $1.97 each, while WotC can’t seem to accomplish any of the above with their “detailed and historically accurate” miniatures.

[shadowhooch]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WotC JW
i'd just like to make a little clarification.
The point costs shown on a stat card aren't derived from a matrix.
However, R&D knows what each unit is worth. Then R&D makes tweaks to that cost depending on whether they want to "push" that unit, or "overcost" it.
I should have been a bit more specific during the cost section. Sorry.



JW,

Question: If R&D knows what each unit is worth, can you release those costs to the gamers looking to balance the game?

It would be IMMENSELY appreciated even if it's not for "official" tournament use.

I read the "bad unit" articles and I understand how a perfect cost is unatainable; but I still don't completely understand why you would purposely skew points (I guess to drive sales?).

Thanks.

[Yakumo_Fujji]

"Big minis obviously use up more plastic and more paint than small ones."
And now we know why the hellcat is so big 1 colour paint, (Common) 3 stars on it (uncommen) just make it big guys..... RARE.

JW tnx for the second article Atleast your putting time in our questions/complains. But I just hope WotC also takes some of our idea's into consideration. Sometimes the view from people not paid by the same company makes a big difference.

Grtz

[Autarch]

Quote:
Originally Posted by WotC JW
i'd just like to make a little clarification.
The point costs shown on a stat card aren't derived from a matrix.
However, R&D knows what each unit is worth. Then R&D makes tweaks to that cost depending on whether they want to "push" that unit, or "overcost" it.
I should have been a bit more specific during the cost section. Sorry.



JW,

Question: If R&D knows what each unit is worth, can you release those costs to the gamers looking to balance the game?

It would be IMMENSELY appreciated even if it's not for "official" tournament use.

I read the "bad unit" articles and I understand how a perfect cost is unatainable; but I still don't completely understand why you would purposely skew points (I guess to drive sales?).

Thanks.

I second that. I'd like to see the base cost of each unit before R&D tried to punish/push a unit by skewing its cost.

[Autarch]

Justin,

Could we see the actual point cost of each unit before R&D did their tweaking?

Thanks

[Arontje]

My question:

- How long in the future do you plan on things. Did you know what Set IV was about when making set II for example. And how does this affect making the sets and units.

[polish_horsy]

This will be my first and only question....

Will you show us the correct prices for each unit?


I would like for 100% of my collection to be playable and not 30%.

[LloydChristmas]

So, Justin, my question is: What, if anything, is WotC going to do about their ongoing issue with out-of-scale and badly sculpted miniatures, as well as the lack of detailing and poor and historically incorrect paint jobs?

Amen, Bob. It seems this question is evaded over and over. I was sucked in as well. I bought a base set starter several weeks ago--- looked great, decent detail, movable turret on the panzer, etc. So my friends and I bought and split up a case of D-Day and a case of Base Set Boosters & 6 Contested Skies boosters to try out the game this past weekend. I had not visited these boards, just looked at the FAQ and the errata on the main site... I wish I had come here before buying. This is your current player base -- a group of people with general gripes and some specific gripes about rules, units, whatever. I know they cannot all be resolved, but intentionally mis-costing units makes little sense to me. Cost should be on the same scale and should be the factor that evens out units, bringing them to a place where they can be compared effectively for building an army. Instead, some skewed-cost units are intentionally useless?? :mad: My friends and I were disappointed. We were frustrated with several aspects in just one day of gaming. We experienced several of the gripes I have since found on these boards, as well as seen evidence of a company that has its hands tied on future quality in order to make more profit. To me, a company should strive to improve their quality over time, without taking shortcuts to save a buck or two.

I think I speak for a majority of players who believe that if you are going to market a game as having "historically accurate, pre-painted miniatures", make them ALL playable, with no units intentionally skewed (especially rares), and make them historically painted, scaled to the correct sizes. The differences in plastic and paint quality from the Base Set to the D-Day set were obvious to this first time player and his friends. Sinking this much money into a game, we expect something with fewer errors, and don't expect to have to immediately house-rule things. I realize that some hands are tied because of a suit somewhere expecting returns, but to see that quality was quickly sacrificed for profit is an immediate turn off for me. I for one will probably not buy any more A&A Minis until WoTC addresses the quality question. Even then, I will be more cautious with my hard-earned $.

Thank you for your time.

[RBloom0566]

Having gone over my collection with a closer eye to details, I came up with some I haven't seen asked (or just missed seeing) -

1. Why is the MG 42 Machine-gun Team a '40s unit, while the Sandbagged Machine-gun Team is a 1939 unit? The Germans were NOT on the defensive and using Sandbagged MG Teams in 1939! What happened there?

2. There are as yet no British armor available for a 1939 game! Why not?

3. Why does the T-34/76 suffer from such a crappy Deco Ops sceme if it is Rare? It is tan with a black wash. Thing doesn't even have a flipping red star on it to denote nationality!

4. Why do I have to combine my British and French units together to even be able to field a 1939 force? Not that it could stand against a 1939 German force anyway, but...just curious.

[NumberCruncher]

I beg your patience in advance, as this is a short question with a lot of hard data.

Accepting for a moment that the design team up or down costs certain units,
do they do any actual research on the vehicles they are creating?

Do they have any experience with these newfangled things called numbers?

If so, how do they justify the lack of equitable numerical relationships between any given two units?

The following example is submitted for your consideration:

Note: I am using two nearly identical weapons systems that cost almost the same in game points.

Tiger I: 63 points, circa 1942
Speed 3
Defense 7/6
AI 7/7/6
AT 17/15/12
Overrun, Extended Range, Superiour Armor 2
Actual Stats:
Armor 100mm {Really GOOD quality steel, mind you, but not sloped.}
Guns 8.8cm kwk 36 & 2x 7.92mm MGs
Speed 24 mph
Range 75 miles {No effect on game, included for completeness.}
Crew 5 {Included as a comparable measure of effectiveness.]
Weight 63 tons {Included as it should have a tactical effect, as it did in combat.}


M26 Pershing: 65 points, circa 1945
speed 3
defense 7/6
AI 9/9/7
AT 17/14/12
Extended Range 12, Superior Armor 2
Actual Stats:
Armor 110mm
Guns 90mm & 3x 0.3" MGs {Probably explains the superior AI stat.}
Speed 30 mph
Range 92 miles
Crew 5
Weight 42 tons {2/3rds of the tiger, but I'll come back to that.}

Now bear with me.

The Tiger has a game speed of 3 and an actual speed of 24 mph.
The Pershing has a game speed of 3 but an actual speed of 30 mph, or 1/5th faster.
Doesn't seem like much, but in tactical terms, that's huge.
Please remember that the Shermans have a game speed of 4 but only had an actual speed of 24 mph, same as the Tiger.
They gave the Cromwell a game speed of 4, but it moved at 40 mph.
An unmodified Humber Scout Car moved at the same speed as the Cromwell, but they gave it a game speed of 5.

Hmm. There seems to be a disconnect between game data and reality.
Not a good thing when this is advertised as "historically accurate".

I won't argue abstracts like penetration values of the various guns against the relative thickness of averaged front/back armor factoring in such subtleties as sloping, {if any} steel quality, {the tiger armor was superior because the QC process at the factory had unbelievably high standards, the amount they rejected would have made 60% more Tigers!} types of specialized ammunition, etc., but these figures are readily available from many sources for every weapon system in the game. {I'm convinced they were not referred to. } I'm sure that you'll even find these figures in a file cabinet in the Avalon Hill basement if you look.

What I will say is that while the Tiger & Pershing had similar armor on the front and sides, the Pershing's back and top armor was 3/5ths thinner than that of the Tiger's.
Yet the design team gave them the same rating.

Hmm. This is getting worse.

The abstaction that are aircraft in this game almost defy any attempt at correlating hard data and game numbers, but I can assure you, for example, that the Bf 109's cannon out ranged the spitfire's machineguns.
Yet the Spit gets extended range, not the 109.
Huh?

To my mind this justifies the marketing vector at twelve year olds.
Unfortunately for the design team, most of the younger players that I knew that tried this game read.
That's why they don't play anymore.
You see, most of these discrepancies were pointed out to me by them.
And believe me, they cared enough to move on to other games {cough, FOW, cough,}that don't pretend to a standard they can't and don't deliver.

Maybe the eight to ten year old market might net you better results.
{Oops, I just remembered Creepy Freaks. Sorry.}

[Cruizin2000]

I beg your patience in advance, as this is a short question with a lot of hard data.

Accepting for a moment that the design team up or down costs certain units,
do they do any actual research on the vehicles they are creating?

Do they have any experience with these newfangled things called numbers?

If so, how do they justify the lack of equitable numerical relationships between any given two units?

The following example is submitted for your consideration:

Note: I am using two nearly identical weapons systems that cost almost the same in game points.

Tiger I: 63 points, circa 1942
Speed 3
Defense 7/6
AI 7/7/6
AT 17/15/12
Overrun, Extended Range, Superiour Armor 2
Actual Stats:
Armor 100mm {Really GOOD quality steel, mind you, but not sloped.}
Guns 8.8cm kwk 36 & 2x 7.92mm MGs
Speed 24 mph
Range 75 miles {No effect on game, included for completeness.}
Crew 5 {Included as a comparable measure of effectiveness.]
Weight 63 tons {Included as it should have a tactical effect, as it did in combat.}


M26 Pershing: 65 points, circa 1945
speed 3
defense 7/6
AI 9/9/7
AT 17/14/12
Extended Range 12, Superior Armor 2
Actual Stats:
Armor 110mm
Guns 90mm & 3x 0.3" MGs {Probably explains the superior AI stat.}
Speed 30 mph
Range 92 miles
Crew 5
Weight 42 tons {2/3rds of the tiger, but I'll come back to that.}

Now bear with me.

The Tiger has a game speed of 3 and an actual speed of 24 mph.
The Pershing has a game speed of 3 but an actual speed of 30 mph, or 1/5th faster.
Doesn't seem like much, but in tactical terms, that's huge.
Please remember that the Shermans have a game speed of 4 but only had an actual speed of 24 mph, same as the Tiger.
They gave the Cromwell a game speed of 4, but it moved at 40 mph.
An unmodified Humber Scout Car moved at the same speed as the Cromwell, but they gave it a game speed of 5.

Hmm. There seems to be a disconnect between game data and reality.
Not a good thing when this is advertised as "historically accurate".

I won't argue abstracts like penetration values of the various guns against the relative thickness of averaged front/back armor factoring in such subtleties as sloping, {if any} steel quality, {the tiger armor was superior because the QC process at the factory had unbelievably high standards, the amount they rejected would have made 60% more Tigers!} types of specialized ammunition, etc., but these figures are readily available from many sources for every weapon system in the game. {I'm convinced they were not referred to. } I'm sure that you'll even find these figures in a file cabinet in the Avalon Hill basement if you look.

What I will say is that while the Tiger & Pershing had similar armor on the front and sides, the Pershing's back and top armor was 3/5ths thinner than that of the Tiger's.
Yet the design team gave them the same rating.

Hmm. This is getting worse.

The abstaction that are aircraft in this game almost defy any attempt at correlating hard data and game numbers, but I can assure you, for example, that the Bf 109's cannon out ranged the spitfire's machineguns.
Yet the Spit gets extended range, not the 109.
Huh?

To my mind this justifies the marketing vector at twelve year olds.
Unfortunately for the design team, most of the younger players that I knew that tried this game read.
That's why they don't play anymore.
You see, most of these discrepancies were pointed out to me by them.
And believe me, they cared enough to move on to other games {cough, FOW, cough,}that don't pretend to a standard they can't and don't deliver.

Maybe the eight to ten year old market might net you better results.
{Oops, I just remembered Creepy Freaks. Sorry.}


Nice work!! I did the same thing myself and compared each piece to each other from FACTS from various sources. It seems that noone did any sort of research on any of these pieces. At first I thought they did by telling us the Sherman is 21 and three of'em equal a 63 point Tiger I. That sort of made sense although it would be more like 6 Shermans on 1 Tiger. After that, things got hazy for'em. It's too bad that this game has gone the direction that it has. It's also too bad that Wizards has shown us the truth about their company. But then again, atleast we know what they're about and can avoid buying any of their new products. Creepy Freaks? That's funny. I remember that - it sold well, didn't it?

Ok, my question to Wizards:

Why?

C2000

[Moderator Kayn]

I hate having to repeat myself, but here it is folks.

THIS is the question thread.

For discussions and complaints you have other threads. Merely posting to browbeat or make snide remarks is just needless and nonproductive, especially on this thread.

Please use this thread for questions only.

Moderator Kayn

[NumberCruncher]

@Moderator Kayn-I am assuming that your post included and referred to my last question.
Apparently, my style of writing is offensive to some, but that does not invalidate the facts or conclusions contained within.
If I have offended anyone, I appologise to you and the members of this board and community.

But not to the designers of this game.
My "browbeating and snide remarks" are justified in the light of recent revelations.
If they are nonproductive, that is only because the design team has painted themselves into a corner that allows no easy fix, solution or correction.

-The quality of the miniatures, number of detail features such as elevating barrels and the plastic they are molded from have decreased. This is undenyable.
-The new maps are printed on less durable paper than the originals.
-The statistics used to represent the various units don't reflect the historical facts, nor bear any descernable consistant relationship to other units, even in abstract terms of game balance.
-The costs of the units are admitted to be skewed to "allow" the players to find with units are competative and which are intentionally hobbled, instead of having any bearing on their actual historical usage. This might reflect their definition of fun, but not mine and apparently not that of many of your intended consumers.

The out of scale, inaccurate or underdetailed miniatures cannot cheaply or easily be re-issued.
The incorrectly statisticed cards cannot cheaply or easily be re-issued.
The rules cannot cheaply or easily be {officially} corrected and distributed, other than through a venue such as this one. All purchasers and players don't read these boards, or download errata. {Some errata is to be expected, but several pages per expansion smacks of the patch-after-purchase mentality that is damaging the videogame industry.}

Telling me to play with house rules is needless and unproductive as I have the stated right to play this at a venue say using your excellent combat zone support using a distinct and unarguable set of rules.

What was and is needless and unproductive is to treat the subject matter and the consumers of this game so disrespectfully and shamefully.

My REAL question is what does your game have to recommend itself noting the diminishing quality but the consistant price, and what do the makers of it intend to do in the future to improve the game.

If the answer is nothing, than you truely deserve the contempt and derrision that have flooded these boards recently.

I continue to praise the author of the H.Q. Dispatches for his honesty.
Based solely on that, {because you've given me nothing else to go on,} I will give this game and the company that makes it a chance to redeem itself.

To quote you "Don't waste it."

[Cruizin2000]

Here's a question -

Who is they attorney for WoTC and how does one get into contact with this person?

C2000

[Colonel_Coo]

I have a question...
I recently obtained a Booster with a "spitfire" in it. I was shocked. I had bought (spent my $15) on a collectible toy to find that the advertised product (see product picture on side of product box) was not the item I obtained.

Has anyone else had this experience? Please PM me your email address, I am thinking of calling an abulance chaser to see what they think of the fraud.

[mlund]

I have a question...
I recently obtained a Booster with a "spitfire" in it. I was shocked. I had bought (spent my $15) on a collectible toy to find that the advertised product (see product picture on side of product box) was not the item I obtained.

Has anyone else had this experience? Please PM me your email address, I am thinking of calling an abulance chaser to see what they think of the fraud.

Please call a lawyer, just so he can charge you $300 - $500 dollars to tell you that your case won't hold up and then you can come back to these boards and rant at everyone how A&A Minis has once again "victimized" you for hundreds of dollars.

Entertainment this good shouldn't be free.

- Marty Lund

[UnionMan]

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think that anything WoTC has done would qualify as being illegal or could tread legal water. Everything that we are complaining about can be stored under the category of "paralyzing details." Look, I too complain a ton about WoTC and the direction the game has been headed, but to start spewing bogus legal threats is in no way constructive.

Inhale. Exhale. Repeat slowly.

At this point it is quite clear what kind of product Hasbro is pushing with AAM. It was quite clear from the get go. To wake up one day and realize that you have just spent hundreds of dollars on little army men is not WoTC's fault, is it? Did they hold you down and perform Chinese water torture on you, forcing you to by these things? No. They did not.

Inhale. Exhale. Repeat slowly.

WoTC, like any business, is concerned primarily with one thing: profit. If they flush the game down the drain and kill it then they have gotten what they deserve. It's in their best interests to listen to us so that we buy many more little army men. The power of profit is our best hope.

Sueing WoTC for AAM would be akin to sueing McDonalds for serving you hot coffee.

[Patton4014]

And who won the hot coffee suit?????

And I do have a question. Would Wotc consider going to a third party vendor for items that they can sell to make the game better?

Like the map guys on the board for more/better maps? Or Gale Force Nine for better counters etc.

[UnionMan]

And who won the hot coffee suit?????

Some stupid a**h***, that's who.

[CommisarNikolai]

1. In your second article you say:

Its simply not fun if you can’t shoot them down. We don’t want a situation where if you field an army without any units with an Antiair ability (say, you only had units from the Base Set or Set II, or you fielded a Soviet army), you’re hosed.

Regarding planes. Since we have had two sets with aircraft and not a single soviet unit with the antiair SA, why would anyone wnat to play them? In DCI, CZ or Home play? Well there is one non-competive useless faction. GEE!! thanks for letting me pay 200 dollars to figure that one out.

2. Does the design team give any thought to faction balance for those of us who wish to play single nationality armies? - Since the soviets still do not have a machinegun, fighter, antiair units or a decent uncommon tank, I am guessing the answer is a resounding NO. I want to know why.

3. If the deisgn team is making the game on the same principles that MTG is made, then why is the game advertised as historically accurate? Designing a WWII game to have any semblance to reality would force game design to be done VERY VERY differently from MTG. For a simple example, Unit ablities would have to have some semblance to historical reality. Not made up values for 12 year old children to "Discover" as they play the game.

4. Since I am 32 years old with 200 to 300 dollars a month of disposable income and I do not know of any teenage game players in my area interested in any game but MTG, did WotC, AH or Hasbro do any real market/demographic research before embarking on game design? And if so; why was the 12+ demographic chosen when all the AAM players I know are 30-40 year olds putting down 400 to 500 dollars a release for product. It would seem to me that you would want to go where the money is.

Anyway, thank you for decent miniatures at least. Well at least in Set I - III. Any particular reason for the low quality miniatures in Set IV?

[Volorkey]

I saw this thread and I knew my purpose in life had been found. These burning questions in my soul could be answered so here it goes.

Several other people have commented on this I just want to join in with the hopes it will increase the chance you will answer this question sooner. Could you please explain the decreasing quality of minis in recent sets? To mention a few The Marder II Barrel, I thought "oh that's a lousy one maybe if I'm lucky I'll get another that does not have a bent barrel." The limp barrel was not a flaw of just the Marder as others have stated Also replacing screws with pegs and guns that do not elevate were unfortunate steps down. As for the Spitfire I cannot comment as the player community is small in my neck of the woods (5 players counting my self) I've never even had a good look at a Spitfire fig as no one where I am has ever gotten one.

And another thing about the Marder, for a vehicle with the no turret ability it's turret can swing 360. Just wondering about this too.

One question that I need answered is stats for figures most specifically dice on infantry. Vehicles are fairly straight forward as it usually depends on their armament. Anyway I wanted to ask why does, for example, the SMLE Rifleman have a close assault of 6 while the Mosin Nagent has a close assault of 8? I have this same question with most basic infantry. Obviously bazookas and panzerfausts have higher numbers but why are Russian soldiers just better at close assaulting vehicles than British? And what did your design team have in mind with "Close Assault"? Soldiers running up and shoving grenades in the hatch? Just curious.

Also with the basic infantry why are the Screaming Eagles Just a tad less effective than SS PanzerGrenadiers(SP Error)? How do the designers determine one die more or one die less. And what is up with the panzer Grenadier the regular one I mean. Why are mechanized infantry just slightly worse shots that the standard German Troops (Kar 98), but a little more effective at close assault than their SS counterparts. (PG close assault 8 to the SSPG close assault 7) This is just one example of many that plagues my mind. Again just curious how you determine this.

Wow that's all I can think of for now, Thanks for running this thread, love the game keep it coming, and my message to the guys who take our flack every time they read our posts: The easy way is always mined.

[Volorkey]

Having gone over my collection with a closer eye to details, I came up with some I haven't seen asked (or just missed seeing) -

1. Why is the MG 42 Machine-gun Team a '40s unit, while the Sandbagged Machine-gun Team is a 1939 unit? The Germans were NOT on the defensive and using Sandbagged MG Teams in 1939! What happened there?

2. There are as yet no British armor available for a 1939 game! Why not?

3. Why does the T-34/76 suffer from such a crappy Deco Ops sceme if it is Rare? It is tan with a black wash. Thing doesn't even have a flipping red star on it to denote nationality!

4. Why do I have to combine my British and French units together to even be able to field a 1939 force? Not that it could stand against a 1939 German force anyway, but...just curious.

Really there should be no British units 1939 units since the Brits did not really get into the war until 1940. On that note there are no real British infantry for 1939 either unless you count the enginers but we all know they are second hand infantry, with 6/4/0 AI dice. (feel free to disagree)

[NEVjr]

the french didnt really get into the war untill 1940 either, yet they have 1939 units

the brits need things like early cruiser tanks, an a10, or a13 a matilda 2, and a 2lbr to flesh out an early war force

edit: and an earlier enfield

[Cruizin2000]

Justin,

Based on what I've read here concerning the price of the pieces and how rares get determined, how can AAM be $14.99 per booster when I can get Heroscape boosters for $12.99 that has more plastic and better paint jobs? And these are made by the same company, Hasbro. Please explain.

C2000

[Cruizin2000]

Please call a lawyer, just so he can charge you $300 - $500 dollars to tell you that your case won't hold up and then you can come back to these boards and rant at everyone how A&A Minis has once again "victimized" you for hundreds of dollars.

Entertainment this good shouldn't be free.

- Marty Lund

Are you a lawyer or do you study law? Just curious. My uncle was a judge here in Columbus and my cousin is a criminal lawyer. His sister also currently holds a political office here. I can't swing a cat in my family without hitting someone who's in law enforcement or in the legal field. I'm in the medical field - go figure.

C2000

[ToodlyPip]

A 1939 German force?! It has a hard time standing up to the Polish, let alone a French tank company..

And I'm not even considering French and Brits together!

If only they had started the war in 1940..

Toodly

[RBloom0566]

Really there should be no British units 1939 units since the Brits did not really get into the war until 1940. On that note there are no real British infantry for 1939 either unless you count the enginers but we all know they are second hand infantry, with 6/4/0 AI dice. (feel free to disagree)

Actually yes, it should be based on the date that the units were available for active duty. Never said I wanted to play an official scenario or something that started in 1939, just that I was trying to put together builds for each year when I noticed this.

So the British had NO army until Germany got done dealing with Poland? I think not.

[Photoner Hawkwind]

I have a request for Justin if he could share with us the design process of a set of minis from beginning to release and the timeline of the set.

Maybe we can better communicate on these boards if we all had a better knowledge of the process.

[U-Boat]

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think that anything WoTC has done would qualify as being illegal or could tread legal water. Everything that we are complaining about can be stored under the category of "paralyzing details." Look, I too complain a ton about WoTC and the direction the game has been headed, but to start spewing bogus legal threats is in no way constructive.

Inhale. Exhale. Repeat slowly.

At this point it is quite clear what kind of product Hasbro is pushing with AAM. It was quite clear from the get go. To wake up one day and realize that you have just spent hundreds of dollars on little army men is not WoTC's fault, is it? Did they hold you down and perform Chinese water torture on you, forcing you to by these things? No. They did not.

Inhale. Exhale. Repeat slowly.

WoTC, like any business, is concerned primarily with one thing: profit. If they flush the game down the drain and kill it then they have gotten what they deserve. It's in their best interests to listen to us so that we buy many more little army men. The power of profit is our best hope.

Sueing WoTC for AAM would be akin to sueing McDonalds for serving you hot coffee.

I'm pretty sure advertising two seperate items 1. A Spitfire 2. A Messerschmitt
and using the same mold with two different paint schemes is misrepresentation of the product for sale.

We all lost on that one.

[Volorkey]

Actually yes, it should be based on the date that the units were available for active duty. Never said I wanted to play an official scenario or something that started in 1939, just that I was trying to put together builds for each year when I noticed this.

So the British had NO army until Germany got done dealing with Poland? I think not.

You have a very good point and I agree. I was just putting my two cents in.
I had been thinking about that alot since U.S. units are not included until 1942 for obvious reasons even though some of the units were in production before 1942 they were still not in the war until 1942. That's the parallel I am trying to draw between British 1939 and U.S. 1942 units.

[simonr1978]

In production does not mean in service. Take the Spitfire for example, in production by 1936 IIRC, not in squadron service till 1939.

[RBloom0566]

In production does not mean in service. Take the Spitfire for example, in production by 1936 IIRC, not in squadron service till 1939.

No offense, but I believe my specific words were "available for active duty."
I understand the difference between on the assembly line and in the squadron. I also understand the difference between when they were available and when they were used in combat.

So...there is no use for 1939 builds. The Germans have plenty, but no one else does. Try fielding an army of 100 pts of Polish. Good luck!

[NumberCruncher]

Why were we led to believe that what we asked for here in the forums would have an affect on this game's future, only to be told it wouldn't?

THAT and other recent revelations about the somewhat cavalier approach to production are what led to the recent negativity on these boards, so you only have yourselves to blame.

I am a recovering "agitator".

I was one of the worst, because I listened to the Modsquad when they that told us that by posting, we would be heard by the makers and designers.
I though it was "neat".
I thought that if we advocated for improvement by pointing out what we really liked and what didn't hold up to standard, they would take that on board.
I was passionate about the game, and inspired that we could have some positive affect on the product we were/are paying for.

I sit corrected, and have logged my opinions with customer service where we are now told they will do the most good. My ire at being misled, intentionally or otherwise, led me to a very dark place for a time.

Now I am trying to move past my disappointments and get on with trying to accept the game as it is and try to enjoy it for what it is, not what it could be.

Patience, forgiveness and understanding.
I am seeking these, but also extending them.
I want a return to the sense of anticipation and excitement I felt when I first discovered this game and forum.
I'm just finding that a little difficult knowing now what I didn't know then.

[johnnyonthespot]

Justin:

I hope you haven't been scared off by some of the rants on this thread.

I look forward to the articles. Keep them coming.

[Yakumo_Fujji]

I got a question for JW , When's Disp 3 planned for can't wait for what u have chosen I hope the design proces.

Grtz

[WotC JW]

Justin:

I hope you haven't been scared off by some of the rants on this thread.

I look forward to the articles. Keep them coming.

Not at all.

Dispatch 3 should be up by Friday.

[RBloom0566]

Question: Where is Justin's next HQ Dispatch? I thought they were supposed to be weekly?!

[NumberCruncher]

The dude probably can't sit down for the spanking he undoubtably got for telling the unvarnished truth the LAST time he posted.
The fact that the 'powers that be' are allowing him TO DO IT AGAIN after the little firestorm the first article produced boogles my mind.
Either they aren't the ogres we've made them out to be, or they REALLY don't care about their next paycheck.

I for one can't wait. This is more entertaining than T.V. Wrestling.

[RBloom0566]

The dude probably can't sit down for the spanking he undoubtably got for telling the unvarnished truth the LAST time he posted.
The fact that the 'powers that be' are allowing him TO DO IT AGAIN after the little firestorm the first article produced boogles my mind.
Either they aren't the ogres we've made them out to be, or they REALLY don't care about their next paycheck.

I for one can't wait. This is more entertaining than T.V. Wrestling.

Boogles? *Grin*
Otherwise, I agree.
Only thing missing is the fake blood!

[WotC JW]

The dude probably can't sit down for the spanking he undoubtably got for telling the unvarnished truth the LAST time he posted.
The fact that the 'powers that be' are allowing him TO DO IT AGAIN after the little firestorm the first article produced boogles my mind.
Either they aren't the ogres we've made them out to be, or they REALLY don't care about their next paycheck.

I for one can't wait. This is more entertaining than T.V. Wrestling.


They don't normally spank us for telling the truth, especially when it's the design philosophy the company's based on. Mark Rosewater has been writing about this stuff (magicthegathering.com) for donkey's years now—there appear to be no visible red marks from where I'm sitting.

I will definitely be more careful in developing context and background when writing about collectability in the future (hopefully still this Friday) though.

[Hum_35711]

I will definitely be more careful in developing context and background when writing about collectability in the future.

Yes. You've got to watch it with this crowd. They're rabbid, and they're just waiting for a reason to jump all over you. Whenever #-cruncher finds a spelling mistake he gets that glint in his eye, he starts snarling and his hair stands on end. BEWARE!

[RBloom0566]

They don't normally spank us for telling the truth, especially when it's the design philosophy the company's based on. Mark Rosewater has been writing about this stuff (magicthegathering.com) for donkey's years now—there appear to be no visible red marks from where I'm sitting.

I will definitely be more careful in developing context and background when writing about collectability in the future (hopefully still this Friday) though.

Which in itself raises several questions -
1) Exactly how long is a donkey's year?
2) Are you aware that skilled torture can be concealed?
3) Where exactly do you sit that you have opportunity to routinely observe his...well...never mind.
4) Can you give us a hint about what HQ3 is about?

[Cyberhawk]

Hi Justin,

why do planes play such a minor role in the official scenarios? Set III and IV introduced them....and they should be used I think. So please: At least one aircraft per scenario...
It just doesn't make sense to come up with RARE (IN REALITY) planes like the Me-262 or the Me-163, when the "Common" planes like the Bf-109 do not show up in the official scenarios...

Kind regards

[johnnyonthespot]

Good job on the T-35 article, Justin. I enjoyed it.

[Photoner Hawkwind]

Justin, I liked and thought dispatch 3 was very informative. I was just wondering if you could give us approximate timeframes for each phase such as phase 1 takes about x number of weeks etc. or varies fro x to y weeks etc. thanks again for the info.

[Redgar]

Hi Justin:

Thanks for the article! It was both interesting and informative.. plus a preview unit never hurts ;).

Look'n forward to number four!

Just my 2 ep worth,

Redgar

[Dr_Strangelove]

Justin, I just wanted to thank you for the T-35 article; it goes a long way towards starting to restore some of my faith in this game.

[UnionMan]

Hi, Justin.

Great article. I am curious as to the following aspects of your process:

- Have you ever considered bringing the sculpting for the master figures on-shore to ensure better quality control? We all knew that the minis were manufactured overseas but it was suprising to me that the actual mini sculpting was also off-shore.

- Is the Art Director the only person involved in the quality assurance and approval of the master molds?

- Have you considered inserting a third QA party between the Art Director prior to approval of the final minis? This is a common practice in software QA as sometimes that guy who has been spending weeks on the details will miss fine points as they reach saturation.

In short, it doesn't surprise me that you are having quality/scale consistency issues now that I know the sculpting is also being off-shored. Bringing it back home will probably increase your quality.

Thanks!

-Tad

[RBloom0566]

Justin:

Over a week ago, you said you'd re-issue the maps (on-line, I assumed) with grid coordinates (ie. lettered-numbered). Obviously your answer was not seen only by me. There is already a post on the Praise/Complaint Thread regarding those maps.

So my question...when do you anticipate being able to complete that project and provide us with updated maps with grid coordinates?

Thanks,
Robert

[NEVjr]

i like the last post, but i was hoping for more pictures, from the early sculpt, the way it is molded, etc

why arent previous minis used more often and new sculpt added, like the panzer 4, they could havemade one base to sculpt all the panzer 4 based units on

[Autarch]

Hey Justin,

You mentioned in the last dispatch that there are 50 minis commissioned per set. Any chance we can see the ones that didn't make the cut?

Thanks.

[Yakumo_Fujji]

Yeah its called reserves..... :P
Grtz

[Yakumo_Fujji]

Any on the right order of things......
I posted this one before but not in the right thread so here goes again.

A few copies are sent for safety testing to check for choking hazards, sharp points, etc.

Chocking hazzard I thought this game was 12+ ???
Savety : Every kid in the company gets one and they'll look if some one does choke... :p

Seriously TNX for the article JW looks very nice and some feed back on some older issues. Looking good keep em comming.I think this is a very possitive dispatch.
Just 1 question that arose, you said:

For two-piece miniatures like the T-35, a determination of whether the smaller piece will “take” a metal screw is made—if not, a peg is used to attach the smaller piece. In this case, the T-35’s turret will get a peg.

My Flamingo (panzer II F) has a very small turret but does have a screw, so where/when was the desision made to move to pegs as some older small turret models have screws and why was the disicion made not to use smaller screws ????

Grtz

[viking]

Hey Justin,

You mentioned in the last dispatch that there are 50 minis commissioned per set. Any chance we can see the ones that didn't make the cut?

Thanks.

Why do think next set is called reserves? Because we will see all of them, now as official minis! :p
All the molds and crappy stat unit that were made will be there. Just like a sell out at crazy Joe's.

Back to buisness.

Justin, I would like to see an article about the playtesting phase and rules development. As most complaints were made about cheesy rules (and miscosted units), I would like an article or maybe an interview about how the rules are developt and playtested.

[johnnyonthespot]

I'd like to see an article about the WotC staff's favorite units and why. It may be more of a "soft" article, but it'd be fun to read, too.

["Easy Eight"]

Justin will the Soviets get any AA? Will the US or Soviets get a Machine gun team?

Thanks

[Le Poilu]

First, thanks for offering a customer interface - most appreciated on this end.

Second, one question that has come up repeatedly but hasn't been addressed is the market for A&AM. I don't expect Wizzos to lay out its proprietary marketing research or strategy for us (but if you did, that would be cool - c'mon, we won't tell anyone, honest!), but perhaps you can answer a couple of roundabout questions on the subject. Has the actual customer base for the game been different from what was originally projected in development? Is that customer base older or younger than anticipated?

Third and last, many of us have posted our game piece "wish lists" on the board, such as the What Theme Would You Like To See Next? (http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=13815) thread. Do the Wizzos cull ideas from these threads and other direct feedback from A&AM players?

[Colonel_Panic]

Justin,

I'm still waiting for an article that describes how Stats and Year for a certain piece of warfare machinery is decided. What criterias are use to define Speed and Armor?

Some units don't match the real world. I know it is difficult, almost impossible, to abstract war to the simplified level that A&AM has without loosing some of the reality.

An example again:
The Humber and the Sdkfz 222 both has Speed 5. In the perfect world, the Humber should have had speed 4.5, and the sdkfz a speed of 5.2, but they now both got a speed of 5.

[polish_horsy]

can we see the correct costs for units before they were intentionaly "pushed" or "overcosted"?

[skeevo666]

can we see the correct costs for units before they were intentionaly "pushed" or "overcosted"?



Seconded.






.

[Cruizin2000]

Seconded.






.

Count me in for that!!

C2000

[4242david4242]

I'd love to see some elaboration as to why the game's developers would make an intentionally defective point system for the units.

[PatrickWR]

David: It's so the tourney scene can be kept "fresh" and "competitive". Nothing more, nothing less. If half the units from each set are essentially unplayable in competitive play, AND the purchasing format remains random, then players will have the continually buy vast amounts of product to maintain their edge in the tourney scene.

I personally despise tourneys and will never attend another one. But that's the truth of the marketing strategy. I say this as a former Magic player since 1996.

[NorthernRommel]

And the same old power armies are so easy to beat ........so its usually not worth the bother. Play all day and win a panzersheck........woo hoo. :mad:

So heres my question to Justin - when the hell are the promotional packs going to have something better in (and in more numbers). The Pzkw IV D was ok - but now there are so many that everyone uses swarms of them. :-|

Prizes in the promotional packs should always be rares........tell WOTC to stop being cheapskapes.........

[NorthernRommel]

Chocking hazzard I thought this game was 12+ ???
Savety : Every kid in the company gets one and they'll look if some one does choke... :p
Grtz

My friend nearly choked on the size of my Partisan army.........does that count? :-?

;)

[4242david4242]

David: It's so the tourney scene can be kept "fresh" and "competitive". Nothing more, nothing less. If half the units from each set are essentially unplayable in competitive play, AND the purchasing format remains random, then players will have the continually buy vast amounts of product to maintain their edge in the tourney scene.

I personally despise tourneys and will never attend another one. But that's the truth of the marketing strategy. I say this as a former Magic player since 1996.

In that case, they should promote AAM as a "marketable World War II game."

[AudieMurphy]

I like the new T-35 that is previewed in Justin Webb's last article.
Will we get more of this?
I like that format of a single unit previewed in details like that.
Thank you.

[Autarch]

I take it the Dispatches are on hiatus until after GenCon?

[Yakumo_Fujji]

My friend nearly choked on the size of my Partisan army.........does that count? :-?

;)

What he tried to swallow your 200 point partisans in one time :p
Whel since your the only one who proofed it's stil not chocke proof....
Yes it counts.

Grtz

[WotC JW]

I take it the Dispatches are on hiatus until after GenCon?

That sounds about right. I don't have one planned for this week :(

[NumberCruncher]

Justin, as a concerned parent I have the following burning question:
If a boy and a girl are over eighteen, secure in their own gender imprinting, orientation, polarity, and traits, are emotionally available and mature, financially stable, of similar and otherwise compatible economic, educational, language, political, and religious backgrounds, free of any negative health or lingering self-esteem issues, previous relationship baggage, psychological prejudice or bias, is it okay for them to share unit costing observations on a first date?

Or should they wait until they have established a deeper more meaningful physical/emotional/intellectual/spiritual bond before engaging in such activities?

How should the girl respond if the boy pressures her to perform more "hardcore" acts such as army building, swapping sides, trying other or mixing factions or even deviant behavior like multiplayer games, increased point totals, substituting proxies or using maps he found on the internet?
What should she do if he only likes alternative {house} rules?

What forms of protection would you recommend?
{Please don't say abstinence as we both know that they are naturally going to be curious and want to experiment, with or without parental consent, and you can't keep an eye on them ALL the time.}

Please give me some examples of how I can talk to my daughter about the "neatness" of this act without embarrassing her or myself. I don't usually like to resort to euphemisms, but some of the current language is somewhat over explicit, and makes me a little squeamish.

[118th_MPCo_abn]

@ Numbercruncher

That was sick!
I love it! Well thought out @ freakin' hilarious!
Appreciate the comic relief.

[WotC JW]

Justin, as a concerned parent I have the following burning question:
If a boy and a girl are over eighteen, secure in their own gender imprinting, orientation, polarity, and traits, are emotionally available and mature, financially stable, of similar and otherwise compatible economic, educational, language, political, and religious backgrounds, free of any negative health or lingering self-esteem issues, previous relationship baggage, psychological prejudice or bias, is it okay for them to share unit costing observations on a first date?

Or should they wait until they have established a deeper more meaningful physical/emotional/intellectual/spiritual bond before engaging in such activities?

How should the girl respond if the boy pressures her to perform more "hardcore" acts such as army building, swapping sides, trying other or mixing factions or even deviant behavior like multiplayer games, increased point totals, substituting proxies or using maps he found on the internet?
What should she do if he only likes alternative {house} rules?

What forms of protection would you recommend?
{Please don't say abstinence as we both know that they are naturally going to be curious and want to experiment, with or without parental consent, and you can't keep an eye on them ALL the time.}

Please give me some examples of how I can talk to my daughter about the "neatness" of this act without embarrassing her or myself. I don't usually like to resort to euphemisms, but some of the current language is somewhat over explicit, and makes me a little squeamish.

<levity on>
Dear Numbercruncher,

It is this columnist's opinion that young courting couples should probably wait until the third or fourth date before even contemplating considering the devilishly complicated mental gymnastics that is unit-cost comparisons.

In some societies, engaging in such perilous pursuits early can be misconstrued by one party that the other is "up for it" and may give the illusion that he or she may be willing to enage in 200, 300, or (heavens above) even 500pt skirmishes on a first date.

Before you know it, the couple finds themselves re-enacting the Battle of Kursk on the kitchen table without adequate preparation or forethought over the possible calamites that might ensue.

My advice would be to start gently. Try the simple exercise shown in the Quick Start guide. When the two of you are sufficiently warmed up and limber, progress to a full 100pt game using the more advanced rules in the Rulebook (omitting pesky Aircraft naturally).

By taking it slow, you foster feelings of curiosity and inquisitiveness in your partner. And then ... and only then ... should you both consider "alternate play styles" and begin navigating the minefield that is unit-cost comparisons.

In answering the second part of your question, first you must ensure that your daughter is classified as AGE 12+, in accordance with Hasbro's SRS requirements. Gradually introduce miniatures to your child one-by-one, explaining general game concepts as you do so. Make absolutely certain not to allow your daughter to handle a Tiger I and a Veteran Tiger at the same time. Being forced to try and fathom the discrepencies of those two units' costs at such a young age could cause irrevocable damage and trauma. Good luck.

Thanks
Justin Webb
<levity off>

P.S. Thanks for the laugh Numbercruncher. That was great :)

[RBloom0566]

*LOL* I want what you guys are taking! Prescription or OTC?

[NumberCruncher]

Great Googally-Moogally! I've finally been one upped!

Justin, you have FOREVER secured yourself, this board, and this game in my heart forever.

No-one else on earth could put up with my constant needling about the game's minor flaws and have the daring, wit and intelligence to respond to my last post in such a creative and fun fashion.

You sir, should be the one calling the shots on this game.

I hereby demand your promotion to Brand Manager, Vice President, Minor Deity or whatever it takes to get you exalted enough to make the changes that this community {and I'm equally sure yourself} feel this game needs to make it the elegant, lasting benchmark to compare all other tabletop games to.

[RBloom0566]

Great Googally-Moogally! I've finally been one upped!

Justin, you have FOREVER secured yourself, this board, and this game in my heart forever.

No-one else on earth could put up with my constant needling about the game's minor flaws and have the daring, wit and intelligence to respond to my last post in such a creative and fun fashion.

You sir, should be the one calling the shots on this game.

I hereby demand your promotion to Brand Manager, Vice President, Minor Deity or whatever it takes to get you exalted enough to make the changes that this community {and I'm equally sure yourself} feel this game needs to make it the elegant, lasting benchmark to compare all other tabletop games to.

Here! Here! Justin for King! *L*

[spite48]

Great work JW, and thanks to Numbercruncher and yourself for the worthy laugh.

Couple of questions:

The GENCON tourney rules are experimenting with 1 hero limits. Is this indicative of a general responsiveness to concerns of customers, or was that scenario planned prior to the discussion voiced here?

I understand that you cannot take isolated "heroes are teh broken" comments as a klaxon call for immediate changes, but I like the idea that our comments are being received and considered.

Also my eight year old boy has recently asked "Where do Axis and Allies Miniatures come from?" I told him that the stork brings them, but now I am concerned that his friends at school may tell him a distorted version of the truth. Should I raise the subject again?

[Hum_35711]

you guys are hillarious. LOL.

[WotC JW]

Great work JW, and thanks to Numbercruncher and yourself for the worthy laugh.

Couple of questions:

The GENCON tourney rules are experimenting with 1 hero limits. Is this indicative of a general responsiveness to concerns of customers, or was that scenario planned prior to the discussion voiced here?

I understand that you cannot take isolated "heroes are teh broken" comments as a klaxon call for immediate changes, but I like the idea that our comments are being received and considered.

Also my eight year old boy has recently asked "Where do Axis and Allies Miniatures come from?" I told him that the stork brings them, but now I am concerned that his friends at school may tell him a distorted version of the truth. Should I raise the subject again?

I'm pretty sure the heros were developed knowing that OP (Organized Play, a very different entity than R&D) might very well institute a "unique" ruling on them.

Personally, i was pretty sure that most competitive play groups would house rule them quickly. And again, if I was playing at home, I'd probably make them unique too, but thats just my opinion.

However, R&D will often err on the side of casual gaming with basic game rulings. And not prohibit too many things right out of the gate. I'll also concede that that openness sometimes leads to strange play situations (horses being transported by jeeps anyone?). I'm not totally convinced that the hero's are degenerate in any way (albeit they are very good) — I just personally don't like seeing more than one each fight.

I'm sure fan feedback and message-board analysis certainly influenced OP's decision here.

Oh, and yeah, Kids can be cruel.

[WotC JW]

Justin,

I'm still waiting for an article that describes how Stats and Year for a certain piece of warfare machinery is decided. What criterias are use to define Speed and Armor?

Some units don't match the real world. I know it is difficult, almost impossible, to abstract war to the simplified level that A&AM has without loosing some of the reality.

An example again:
The Humber and the Sdkfz 222 both has Speed 5. In the perfect world, the Humber should have had speed 4.5, and the sdkfz a speed of 5.2, but they now both got a speed of 5.

Typically, someone on the development team will pour over a bunch of text books and reference books (my favorite for quick fact checking is The Encyclopedia of Tanks and Armored Fighting Vehicles (ed. Christopher Foss)) to find that information.

I will concede that some of the final card stats are a bit subjective when fit into a small-scale integer system, but I think we've done a pretty good job lately.

Speed is a tricky one, since we use hexes and not a measureable distance. So the speed values have to be integers to make any game sense. In the example you gave, if you round both numbers you gave (4.5, 5.2) to the nearest integer, they both come to 5. I'll agree that in real life, their speeds were markedly different, but I'm not sure what other system we could use at this point to portray that difference.

For the Year, we try to use the year that that unit first saw combat. For units that may have first seen combat in December 19XX, say, I would probably make its year 19XX+1. On some of the units, it can be very difficult to find out exactly when the first one saw combat. For "veteran" units, we determine their year on a case-by-case basis, but we'll usually end up adding a year or so on.

[WotC JW]

First, thanks for offering a customer interface - most appreciated on this end.

Second, one question that has come up repeatedly but hasn't been addressed is the market for A&AM. I don't expect Wizzos to lay out its proprietary marketing research or strategy for us (but if you did, that would be cool - c'mon, we won't tell anyone, honest!), but perhaps you can answer a couple of roundabout questions on the subject. Has the actual customer base for the game been different from what was originally projected in development? Is that customer base older or younger than anticipated?

Third and last, many of us have posted our game piece "wish lists" on the board, such as the What Theme Would You Like To See Next? (http://boards.avalonhill.com/showthread.php?t=13815) thread. Do the Wizzos cull ideas from these threads and other direct feedback from A&AM players?

I can't really discuss brand-management and marketing things — partly because I'm not privy to a lot of that information, and partly because I'm not allowed to (for good reason). Some other people have posted asking me to "spoil" set themes, units, release dates, etc. Unfortunately, I can't do that either. I had to ask very very nicely to be able to do that piece on the T-35. I don't actually "know" the answer to your first question. I'm really Sorry, especially since you asked so nicely. :)

As for your second question, I think that sets get designed so far ahead of release (how long I can't say) thats its very difficult to react to message-board wish lists in any immediate-feeling way. And I'm guessing that design-wise, R&D does use these boards to get a feeling of the current state of the game when figuring out set lists. Also, before we issue errata, we definitely use the boards as "one" of the factors before acting.

[RBloom0566]

Justin:

I understand the business reasons behind the veil of secrecy. I think we all would just like to know if we're going to see A&AM supported through 2007. Knowing another year is in the channels at least gives us a vague idea that as many as four, or at least one, more set(s) are coming out after Set V.

There's just so damned much potential to the game that it'd be sad to see it's life cut short.

Robert

PS: Apparently I'm not the only one not going to GenCon Indy. You, too?

[WotC JW]

PS: Apparently I'm not the only one not going to GenCon Indy. You, too?

Unfortunately there was no need for any "emergency editing" at GenCon this year, so I will not be going :( which is a shame, cos a couple of people here were going to buy me some beers.

Good luck to everyone taking part in anything there!

[RBloom0566]

Unfortunately there was no need for any "emergency editing" at GenCon this year, so I will not be going :( which is a shame, cos a couple of people here were going to buy me some beers.

Good luck to everyone taking part in anything there!

I don't know?! A stat card for an obscure unit might enter play with a typo on it, and they'd need an "official edit/ruling" before play can continue! The whole Battle of the Bulge could depend on your interpretation of one key-stroke!

[TomServo]

Justin; I have a question about unit AV values. Specifically, how you arrived at them. I ask, because some of them seem off to me. For example, the Firefly, vs. the Panzer IV G. These units have the same AV stats, yet the 17-pounder was a far more powerful gun. Also the Panther vs. The Tiger I. Despite all the hype about the Tiger, the Panther's gun was more powerful. These are just a couple examples. There are others that, in comparison seem off too me as well.

As I said, I'm just wondering if there was some criterion or system you guys used.

[Colonel_Panic]

Typically, someone on the development team will pour over a bunch of text books and reference books (my favorite for quick fact checking is The Encyclopedia of Tanks and Armored Fighting Vehicles (ed. Christopher Foss)) to find that information.

I will concede that some of the final card stats are a bit subjective when fit into a small-scale integer system, but I think we've done a pretty good job lately.

Speed is a tricky one, since we use hexes and not a measureable distance. So the speed values have to be integers to make any game sense. In the example you gave, if you round both numbers you gave (4.5, 5.2) to the nearest integer, they both come to 5. I'll agree that in real life, their speeds were markedly different, but I'm not sure what other system we could use at this point to portray that difference.

I agree, but you could have used the SA High gear to differential them. High gear 2 on the Humber, and High gear 3 on the sdkfz 222 for example.

For the Year, we try to use the year that that unit first saw combat. For units that may have first seen combat in December 19XX, say, I would probably make its year 19XX+1. On some of the units, it can be very difficult to find out exactly when the first one saw combat. For "veteran" units, we determine their year on a case-by-case basis, but we'll usually end up adding a year or so on.
Then, why is the year on the sdkfz-250 set to 1941, when it was heavily used on the France -40 campaign?

Justin, I would love to see something like the T-35 development cycle article, written about the stats and year definition, for example on the Sherman Easy Eight, how come it ended up with such a armour rating for example.

// Totte

[Photoner Hawkwind]

I just wanted to say that Justin that was a hilarious response to Number Cruncher's post and you should at least deserve the title of VP if not CEO. :D

[Count_Ciano]

First off, kudos to Number Cruncher and JW for some much-needed comic relief (that was great, guys!http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/TheCount/smileys/lmao.gif)!

Now, onto my question, somewhat of a follow-up to Col. Panic's:

Are other values (such as defense, and particularily, attack) also "skewed" to "push/punish" certain units? I'm especially curious about attack values since just based on raw penetration values, some units seemed over-powered or under-powered ( 88 mm flak vs. 17 pounder comes to mind) compared to their actual performance numbers. So I suppose, I was wondering if this was more "skewing around ;)" or if there are other abstractions taken into consideration (ie. rate of fire, accuracy, etc.) in determining attack values?

Thank you for your time! :D

[Cruizin2000]

When will all of these questions get answered?

C2000

[Kaufschtick]

When will all of these questions get answered?

C2000

Yes, and who'll stop the rain? :cool:

[RBloom0566]

Well....unless everyone went to GenCon Indy (and we know they didn't), there should not really be an interruption of information flow, but that's in an ideal world.

And we all know better, don't we?