Getting the ball rolling on 4th Edition...

[cousin_joe]

Here's some news from the AAMC Message Boards. If you're looking to join up for 4th Edition PBEM Competitive Play, this is the club I'd recommend.

Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 11:36 am Post subject: 4th edition is major concern here

The title says it all: 4th edition is a major concern for many of us. In fact, it will use 90% or more of my time of a few other members until Wednesday. This club will soon (few days) have a top-notch 4th edition dicey up and running. Only unrated games will be possible at first (need to make sure there are no problems), but that will change relatively soon, too, and of course everyone will be encouraged to play around with the new dicey as soon as it is up.
_________________
Ad Astra
Nathan
-------------------------------------------------
Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 1:49 pm Post subject: hehe

I will say this in advance: I hope everyone is 'somewhat' pleased with the release when it comes. You cannot expect to please everyone with everything they want, but hopefully they'll receive the majority of fixes/clarifications they felt we would work out. There are a lot of different personalities and perspectives involved in the process, but all involved have been receptive and warm to point-counter-point on all items, so we end up with what seems consentually best. When it's all said and done we will have a ruleset approved by Larry Harris, and having been assisted on by Mike Selinker for a portion. Interclub play will not be a problem, meaning tourneys and such run by any club could easily have members of another club jump in and know the rules.. or interclub tourney contests, or use of AAR for the Axis and Allies Online World Championships. Perhaps a 2nd edition and 4th edition contest in the next running of this event?
_________________
Carico67
Chairman AAMC

-------------------------------------------------
Posted: Mon May 10, 2004 5:47 pm Post subject:

Carico67 and rest of AAMC Senior Staff,

I believe the major issue that needs to be settled is US HB bombing German economy to nothing. Other issues I'd like to see addressed though are Sub Vulnerability, Tech Imbalance, Sealion, Allied VC's in the Pacific, Possibility of Combined Bombardment Standard at 2 with Replacement Tech, and Possibility of using Balanced National Advantages. I really think you'll have a better overall product for Competitive Play if all of these are adressed, although I understand they may not for the reasons you have mentioned.

Overall though, I look forward to the final release and want to say thanks for the outstanding job you guys have done and all the hard work you have put in for the game. Thanks.

cousin_joe

-------------------------------------------------
Posted: Tue May 11, 2004 12:41 am Post subject: Broad agreement to this

cousin_joe,

cousin_joe wrote:
" I believe the major issue that needs to be settled is US HB bombing German economy to nothing. Other issues I'd like to see addressed though are Sub Vulnerability, Tech Imbalance, Sealion, {...}, and Possibility of using Balanced National Advantages. "

I agree US bombing GER is the major issue that has to be dealt with - and it will be dealt with. In fact, all of those quoted will (99%) be addressed.

cousin_joe wrote:
" Allied VC's in the Pacific, Possibility of Combined Bombardment Standard at 2 with Replacement Tech, "

These will not be addressed for reasons mentioned by Carico above. They have been considered, though.

Sorry I'm not giving any reasons or details here, I don't want to harm the still ongoing work.
_________________
Ad Astra
Nathan

[DY]

Thanks for the info CJ.

[Carico67]

Thanks CJ.

Guys, the release is coming from us soon. A lot of your concerns have been addressed. All were disussed in some form (really was my role there as I'm no word wizard, I tried to gather as much from you guys as I could and direct all to vital info and ideas... grunt work smile.gif ). I will say this, so you have something in your minds to go "why did they decide this way" in regards to what you will find; We tried to keep things clear and simple (remember the box says players 12 and older I believe) as much as we could, and we tried to look at things both historically and from a gameplay mechanic in regards to what items were addressed. Being players ourselves, we are as concerned as all of you are that what is presented will be manageable and accepted to the point that 20 years from now when Larry's making the AARR (hehe :eek: ) we have a good model to work from. Also, the scene has changed in regards to interclub communication, and contact with Larry and AH, for the better. We won't simply walk away fom this and expect perfection, though that is the goal. As the game evolves, so will we, and re-convene as necessary. I am confident that 99% of any 'vagueness' players felt was in the original text has been re-worded and clarified, as our biggest goal was making sure EVERYONE understood the rules and wason the same page. In 2nd edition we don't even have that, 20 years later, as the clubs vary on interpretation of 'intent' on many items.

We may have had a postponement (very minor one) so stay tuned, within a week I expect you guys will crush me with Q's (hopefully in a happy positive sense...). C2

[ May 12, 2004, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Carico67 ]

[squirecam]

I must say I dont like PBEM games. I dont like playing one game over several days. Its just too slow for me.

I really would hope that the clubs support online and FTF (when possible) play. Certainly if the two people agree to play out the game using Triple A or FTF there shouldnt be a club objection.

Squirecam

[cousin_joe]

Squirecam,

Time constraints and unavailability of FTF are the main reasons a lot of people are restricted to PBEM play. I know the AAMC supported FTF play in the past, although I am not sure if they still do.

[squirecam]

Originally posted by cousin_joe:
Squirecam,

Time constraints and unavailability of FTF are the main reasons a lot of people are restricted to PBEM play. I know the AAMC supported FTF play in the past, although I am not sure if they still do.and alot of people still play the 2nd ed in the "zone". Both types should be supported. Not just PBEM.

[Carico67]

AAMC does both. We have seperate DB's (not automated yet, MB driven while we get the new site ready) for both forms of play. We have an open rules DB for CD play currently (due to dice cheat release, CD play is no longer supported in main 2nd edition DB). Will Triple A or other sources be allowed in our AAR (4th edition) DB when its read?---that will depend on JCS discussions. If voted down, games would still be postable and playable in the open rules DB as well, so in some form all games are postable in AAMC if 2 players agree to a ruleset and it is an A&A game.