Well...

[Major Adler]

I looked at the BIG PREVIEW thread...and they look pretty good...I am still a bit put off by the fact that infantry teams will be represented by a single figure(looks like I will have to take the advice of several here and remount multiple infantry figures on a base to satisfy myself)...but I do like the way the models look...and I do like what I read about the attack mechanics...

other things I like -

1) it appears that the game will not be historically smothered by the PC crowd...seeing that SS units will be represented...

2) attention to detail...in that the designers have taken the trouble to give tanks front and rear defense...which takes into account area armour...

I am already wondering if a 24 pc. Russian infantry force(if the game is designed for 100 pt. units) would be able to defeat a German mixed arms force...might be fun to try...

right now I feel the positives out-weight the negatives...I have changed my take on it and I am now looking forward to the game...

Adler...out.....................

[GoblinSlayer]

I am already wondering if a 25 pc. Russian infantry force would be able to defeat a German mixed arms force...might be fun to try...

right now I feel the positives out weight the negatives...and I looking forward to the game...

Adler...out.....................
I'm also wondering, what mix of figures competitive armies will use, I'm wondering how effective tanks such as the Panther which I believe is 48 points, will be in 100 point games. If this game is a lot like other Wizards game the Panther could be the piece seen in all axis armies or this game may be like games such as LoTR TMG where the Panther would only be a collector piece, I'm really hoping it will go along with Star wars...
Right now, after seeing the Friday spoilers I am very excited about this game and the good seems to at least double the bad.
The gameplay looks simple but full of strategy.
I love the penalties that damaged counters give.

[Major Adler]

cannot wait to field a force of Fallschrimjagers backed up by a JagPanther and an AT gun...or perhaps a Soviet Guards assault force (DEATH TO THE IMPERIALIST FACIST INVADERS! - URRRRAH!)...and North Africa , really looking forward to a North African specific expansion...and and and...

Adler...out...................

[GoblinSlayer]

Yup their are so many Ands right now...
The Russians look like they are going to be really fun to play, in a chat one of the designers mentioned that their would be a Russian Commander who killed his own guys to give the rest of the guys bonuses.

[King_George]

1) it appears that the game will not be historically smothered by the PC crowd...seeing that SS units will be represented...

and I hope that it never will!

[Anarch]

I'm also wondering, what mix of figures competitive armies will use, I'm wondering how effective tanks such as the Panther which I believe is 48 points, will be in 100 point games. If this game is a lot like other Wizards game the Panther could be the piece seen in all axis armies or this game may be like games such as LoTR TMG where the Panther would only be a collector piece, I'm really hoping it will go along with Star wars...
Right now, after seeing the Friday spoilers I am very excited about this game and the good seems to at least double the bad.
The gameplay looks simple but full of strategy.
I love the penalties that damaged counters give.
Well I can see the power gaming already beginning. Ever thought about why an "effective tank" might be high in points? Maybe because its effective and in the historical aspect of the hobby (which I can predict will be thrown to the winds by most of the little ex pokemon playing power gamers) there wasnt very many of them compaired to tanks like the sherman or t-34.


cannot wait to field a force of Fallschrimjagers backed up by a JagPanther and an AT gun...or perhaps a Soviet Guards assault force (DEATH TO THE IMPERIALIST FACIST INVADERS! - URRRRAH!)...and North Africa , really looking forward to a North African specific expansion...and and and...
Adler

Why would you have to wait? If your so ready to wargame its not like there isnt crap loads of good WWII wargames and miniature makers.

[GoblinSlayer]

Well I can see the power gaming already beginning. Ever thought about why an "effective tank" might be high in points? Maybe because its effective and in the historical aspect of the hobby (which I can predict will be thrown to the winds by most of the little ex pokemon playing power gamers) there wasnt very many of them compaired to tanks like the sherman or t-34.


well as far as I know your the only ex pokemon player here.

[XAos]

I'm also wondering, what mix of figures competitive armies will use, I'm wondering how effective tanks such as the Panther which I believe is 48 points, will be in 100 point games.
If the games anything like ddm/swm a major effect on battlegroup design will be the commander abilities. And we havn't seen a single one of those yet. :rolleyes:
The heavy german tanks have thicker armour than the US tanks and better guns than the KV1/Churchill. So players who want the "heaviest" tank they can get will play a Panther or Tiger. Which means the allies will be used by players who prefer swarms of cheaper/more manuverable units. The M3-Lee's "Strike & Fade" ability is an obvious example of more manuverable.

[Anarch]

well as far as I know your the only ex pokemon player here.
Excuse me? Your the one wanting to put Panthers in every army. What I dont understand is why people who could care less about history play historical games. Miniature wargames are not about "damn I can only use 4 King tigers in my army... hey lets get the max amount of Ferdinands too". I welcome A&AM wargame, maybe all the immature little twits will flock to it instead of bringing their "gotta collect them all and then win at all cost mentality" to the noble hobby of miniature wargaming.

[rekced]

no where did he say that he wanted to field a panther in every army. He stated that he wondered how effective it would be to use in a 100 point game. Sometimes the "powerful" units in games that have a high point cost aren't actually that viable to use in a game because you are better off having more cheaper units. That is all he was asking.

Also this is a collectible miniatures game, so it is going to have some of that feel to it versus a historical miniatures game. People enjoy playing these games competitively. Many of those same competitive players also enjoy many friendly games too where they just try out new strategys or units they haven't used much before.

I enjoy history very much, but that doesn't mean I can tell you every type of troop or tank used in WWII. I still think it will be a fun game though to use various tanks and infantry units. Does it mean I will mix units that never actually fought together? Probably, but so what. I will also probably learn a bit about WWII by playing the game too, and seeing just what types of units they really had, and the different strengths of the different tanks and units.

[Marat]

Excuse me? Your the one wanting to put Panthers in every army. What I dont understand is why people who could care less about history play historical games. Miniature wargames are not about "damn I can only use 4 King tigers in my army... hey lets get the max amount of Ferdinands too". I welcome A&AM wargame, maybe all the immature little twits will flock to it instead of bringing their "gotta collect them all and then win at all cost mentality" to the noble hobby of miniature wargaming.

Broadly speaking, I think AAM purchasers will fall into four categories.

1.) Collectors who don't care about unit stats or cost.

2.) People who use the AA minis for wargaming with a different ruleset. For these players, the point cost of each mini is of no signifigence.

3.) People who play historical or what-if scenerios (like Germany invading England in '41) with the AAM rules. For these players, the point cost of each mini is not of major signifigence.

4.) People who play skirmish or tournament style, without a significant historical context. For these players, the efficencey of each unit (in terms of point cost per stats/abilities) is one of the most significant factor in choosing an army.

Of course, people don't necessarily fall completely or solely into one category; I'll probably be a 134, and may move to 124 if I find a ruleset for 15mm I like more the AAM.

I think GoblinSlayer is speaking from the perspctive of a 4, whereas you (Anarch) sound like a 2 or 3.

Dungeons and Dragons minis are like this too. Some people want the minis for the role-playing game, some want them strictly for skirmish, some for both. There is actually is a very beneficial relationship between the two "sides" in DDM. Figures that are desired for RPG often are lousy in skirmish, and good skirmish pieces are often not highly sought after by the RPGers. So each "side" sells or trades the minis that aren't good for their style of play to the other side. Since everyone is not chasing the same rares, prices on the secondary market are reduced.

The point I'm trying to make in reference to the quote above is that a) people have different reasons for purchasing AAM and b) that's actually good for all involved as it reduces prices on the secondary market. Rather then criticize, you should be happy that people with different AAM motivations are around.

Just my $0.02,

Marat

[fenyan]

I'm a 3 to 4, since point cost will be important to help design balanced scenarios or for fun quick Design-Your-Own games with friends.

I'm somewhat a 2 because I'm thinking of using 1/285 minis with these rules (15mm might be too big & expensive).

[rebel_yancy]

I'm definately a 3-4 mix. Almost 50-50. It's a WWII wargame, which will be awesome, but the game mechanics and squad construction will be big for me. Certain combinations may be powerfull in the game, but have been impossible on the real battlefield. I'm also not going to be fully aware of historical opponennts, unit-wise (obviously, I'll never have the US battling the UK or allied with Japan or anything too crazy), but I won't be too upset if I have a Panzer II fighting off Soviets it never would've seen in real life. (I realize they may have overlapped a bit, and the above may really have happened. Just a quick example.)

[DocD]

I'm really disappointed in the one or two soldiers per hex idea.

I don't see how that makes for a nice looking miniature game. I hope I'm wrong but I don't see AAM reaching Mech or D&D status.

[Anarch]

It's a WWII wargame...
Well the way that many people here are comparing it to D&D and SW minis its not going to be anything like a wargame. Its a fantasy game with semi historical units. I just think that the whole idea of tourney play with points for vehicles is a shame. People "could" learn alot about WWII history with this game but its going to basically break down to the "what is the have to have figure" mentality.

BTW... in my last "real" wargame three Panthers fell to my M3 Lees because of good strategy on my part and him not playing them the way they should have been played. Lets see how collectable game players fare against real strategists at tourneys.

[Anarch]

And for the official record... I havent decided whether I will buy any or not. If the rumor that there is only 1 tank per box holds true then no I will not be purchasing any, whether i end up playing the game or using the figures for something else.

[Engineer]

I'm all set to buy into this game. One case or two?

My 2 year old daughter does not know this yet, but this will probably be her first Wargame (SWM and Bang don't count as war games).

I'm not expecting too much of a local tourney scene. I expect most of my play to be on Vassal (just as soon as someone makes a mod, I sure hope I don't have to).

[Major Adler]

you sound just as upset about this game as I did when I found out about the infantry...the more I see of it however...the more I am willing to give it a chance...

I guess the difference between you and I is that I did not resort to slamming other board members in my posts as part of my argument...

un-cilvilized behavior in defense of a noble cause...compromises the crusade...

Adler...out..................

[Engineer]

And for the official record... I havent decided whether I will buy any or not. If the rumor that there is only 1 tank per box holds true then no I will not be purchasing any, whether i end up playing the game or using the figures for something else.

I would hate for you to jump to too many conclusions before buying your first booster. :rolleyes:

[Weapon]

I would hate for you to jump to too many conclusions before buying your first booster. :rolleyes:

Yes, this is all assumption and speculation. I don't think this is SW Minis with historical units. If AH can stick to their guns for hex based war games, then it will be good. And no, I don't think this is going to be a historical teaching experiment; if they wanted to give a history lesson along with their games, they would not be selling it in boosters targetting the 15-30 demographic. Especially not by makig it collectable. I also think that using approved tournaments will not only give people some good competition, but will get some newer players into the game.

[GoblinSlayer]

Well the way that many people here are comparing it to D&D and SW minis its not going to be anything like a wargame. Its a fantasy game with semi historical units. I just think that the whole idea of tourney play with points for vehicles is a shame. People "could" learn alot about WWII history with this game but its going to basically break down to the "what is the have to have figure" mentality.

BTW... in my last "real" wargame three Panthers fell to my M3 Lees because of good strategy on my part and him not playing them the way they should have been played. Lets see how collectable game players fare against real strategists at tourneys.
We don't compare it with Sw because they have the same theme (theme) we compare them because their being made by the same companie, and companies games have gameplay that is a lot alike with each other.

[TheFoeHammer]

BTW... in my last "real" wargame three Panthers fell to my M3 Lees because of good strategy on my part and him not playing them the way they should have been played. Lets see how collectable game players fare against real strategists at tourneys.

One of my favorite conversations with a WWII Veteran was back when I was in high school playing GHQ with my friends. I told him that my Battalion of Easy Eight Shermans was getting its clock cleaned by my buddy's Battalion of Panthers every time.

He said "We never took Shermans head to head against German tanks! Are you crazy! We either outnumbered them 3 to 1 or hit them with other combined arms."

Good strategy is fun and you can occassionally beat a less clever opponent with a weaker force. But a point system is the only way to reflect the "real" weight these units should be given. If you didn't assign a point cost to the units and just went by unit size, the Germans would always win when two equally skilled players face off.

Point systems don't make things non-realistic or fantasy, they make them balanced, fun and more accurate "what-ifs".

[Anarch]

1. Do not assume to be able to compare you and I. We are far different people with far different motivations. Your comment on you "not resort to slamming other board members in my posts" was proved invalid, when you replied in the way you chose, to me.

2. I'm not upset about this game as much as I am the people who are going to play it and then call themselves wargamers. Its sort of like playing a computer game and calling yourself a rpger. Its not the same creature.

At least the people here know that when I say something its the truth, not some weak way to try to suck up to the rest of the people on the forum to make up for past poor behaviour.

you sound just as upset about this game as I did when I found out about the infantry...the more I see of it however...the more I am willing to give it a chance...

I guess the difference between you and I is that I did not resort to slamming other board members in my posts as part of my argument...

un-cilvilized behavior in defense of a noble cause...compromises the crusade...

Adler...out..................

[Anarch]

I would hate for you to jump to too many conclusions before buying your first booster. :rolleyes:
I did say and I quote "rumor". I would learn to read more carefully before I roll eyes at others. BTW... what does it matter to you if I do form conclusions based on conversations here? Hate is such a strong term for something that has no consequence to you.

[Anarch]

We don't compare it with Sw because they have the same theme (theme) we compare them because their being made by the same companie, and companies games have gameplay that is a lot alike with each other.
Oh really? I dont remember the major games which make up WotC being alike? Just how many have you played? Magic? D&D? A&A? They belong in one shape or the other to the same company if im remember correctly.

[Anarch]

Good strategy is fun and you can occassionally beat a less clever opponent with a weaker force. But a point system is the only way to reflect the "real" weight these units should be given. If you didn't assign a point cost to the units and just went by unit size, the Germans would always win when two equally skilled players face off.

Point systems don't make things non-realistic or fantasy, they make them balanced, fun and more accurate "what-ifs".

Well finally someone with a well thought out reply to a comment. My congratulations to you. Its nice to see someone who can think on his own while others are like little baby wolves following an alpha male (too bad there isnt even an alpha male in the bunch to teach them).

Points are a semi-recent development (last 15-20ish years) in games to try to balance forces where tourney play can take place. I must disagree that they very rairly reflect true battles since seldom in history would a commander willingly take his force to attack without some kind of advantage. If one person gets a defensive position due to terrain with balanced forces then the chance of the battle being balanced is reduced and thus the attacker will probably not have fun.

Now on to the point of accurate "what-ifs"... an oxymoron if there was ever one. How can a "what-if" scenerio be accurate? If by accurate you mean "well this tank existed and this other one did also but they didnt function in the same environment" then prehaps you might be correct. But one way or the other its not going to give an accurate assessment. What if there were a-10s in WWII? Well what if there were no tanks in WWII to be the primary target for the a-10s? That is sorta like taking Russian front German Vehicles to North Africa (which this game is going to do). Well the Allies in North Africa did not feel the need to escilate the arms race. Thus the German tanks did not improve there very much (yes I am very aware that the Tiger was used there). Is an army from 1941 going to be balanced with an army from 1944? No... because armor and weapons improved drastically between early and late war.

So If you want to play a game (we will decide if its historical when we see how the battles and units turn out) that has historical "flavor" then thats fine and I'm all in favor of the game. But dont try to turn it into something it might not be until we see whats its all about.

[Anarch]

Yes, this is all assumption and speculation. I don't think this is SW Minis with historical units. If AH can stick to their guns for hex based war games, then it will be good. And no, I don't think this is going to be a historical teaching experiment; if they wanted to give a history lesson along with their games, they would not be selling it in boosters targetting the 15-30 demographic. Especially not by makig it collectable. I also think that using approved tournaments will not only give people some good competition, but will get some newer players into the game.

The simple fact of the matter is that they created this game to cash in on the popularity of Flames of War. Plain and simple. Some of the "powers" that I have already read on cards for this game lends itself to unrealistic usage of vehicles.
AH does have an excellent rep for wargames. Now lets see how much control they can extend over this game. Just remember how much of a change that D&D had when WotC touched it.

[rekced]

I don't think most of us will call ourselves wargamers. I am a minis player. I play Star Wars Minis, and will play A&A minis. I also played Mage Knight, and Mechwarrior.

Goblin Slayer was referring to D&D minis and Star Wars minis being very similar to each other. Which they are. Though I think A&A will be fairly different it will still follow the basics of collectibility with common, uncommon, and rares.

WotC typically puts the more complex pieces either to paint or assemble as rares, and the easier to paint ones as commons. Also they tend to make the commons be figures you would want a bunch of and the rares to be the more unique type figures. I know for D&D they will also move some figures up to uncommon or even rare if they feel they are a fairly powerful figure.

[Anarch]

WotC typically puts the more complex pieces either to paint or assemble as rares, and the easier to paint ones as commons. Also they tend to make the commons be figures you would want a bunch of and the rares to be the more unique type figures. I know for D&D they will also move some figures up to uncommon or even rare if they feel they are a fairly powerful figure.
Now im confused? What WotC collectable figures have to be painted or assembled?

[Vulturedoodle]

Now im confused? What WotC collectable figures have to be painted or assembled?
That would be all of them. By WotC laborers, apparently in Asia.

And I will certainly call myself a wargamer. I'll just have to find a way to endure your displeasure.

--Steve F.

[Weapon]

The simple fact of the matter is that they created this game to cash in on the popularity of Flames of War. Plain and simple. Some of the "powers" that I have already read on cards for this game lends itself to unrealistic usage of vehicles.
AH does have an excellent rep for wargames. Now lets see how much control they can extend over this game. Just remember how much of a change that D&D had when WotC touched it.

Of course they are cashing in. But hopefully they are cashing in on a good game. Remember, like it was said, THIS IS NOT A WAR SIMULATION. If this was a war simulation, the layman would not find it interesting. Sure, wargamers would most like enjoy it greatly, but its doubtful there would be a market for the product, and they would cancel the production. Also, if the flagships of the game, the tanks and vehicles, the prized rares of the set, were weaker, then its also doubtful the non-wargamer would have as enjoyable a time. Like I said, either here or in another post, this isn't a wargame, its a miniature game. Wargames are simulations. Simulations lend themselves better for wargame hobbyists. Miniatures lend themselves better to the CCG and miniature audience. I think AH has reached a good midpoint; adopting the hex based combat, and some great units and simo combat, but keeping it light enough for regular people to pick up and play.

[Anarch]

That would be all of them. By WotC laborers, apparently in Asia.
And I will certainly call myself a wargamer. I'll just have to find a way to endure your displeasure.
--Steve F.
And where does this Painting rairity information come from? I dont buy that arguement in the least bit. There are very few of the D&D or SW figs that have to be assembled and as far as painting goes well that doesnt hold water either.

If your going to call yourself a wargamer then your going to at least have to think a little before coming up with something to say.

[Anarch]

Of course they are cashing in. But hopefully they are cashing in on a good game. Remember, like it was said, THIS IS NOT A WAR SIMULATION. If this was a war simulation, the layman would not find it interesting. Sure, wargamers would most like enjoy it greatly, but its doubtful there would be a market for the product, and they would cancel the production. Also, if the flagships of the game, the tanks and vehicles, the prized rares of the set, were weaker, then its also doubtful the non-wargamer would have as enjoyable a time. Like I said, either here or in another post, this isn't a wargame, its a miniature game. Wargames are simulations. Simulations lend themselves better for wargame hobbyists. Miniatures lend themselves better to the CCG and miniature audience. I think AH has reached a good midpoint; adopting the hex based combat, and some great units and simo combat, but keeping it light enough for regular people to pick up and play.

Well thats just crazy talk.
You can use whatever semantics you would like... its miniatures...about war...and its a game... so lets add that up. Miniatures + War + Games = Miniature Wargames. Now you can add in the collectable part, and try to take out the simulation part but it still dont change the fact. I'm almost sure that the maps that are included in the starters are of terrain during WWII.

Sheesh... the logic that you people employ to keep from being wrong is better than messing with the monkeys at the zoo. Thanks for making a rainy afternoon entertaining. :D

[Weapon]

Well thats just crazy talk.
You can use whatever semantics you would like... its miniatures...about war...and its a game... so lets add that up. Miniatures + War + Games = Miniature Wargames. Now you can add in the collectable part, and try to take out the simulation part but it still dont change the fact. I'm almost sure that the maps that war included in the starters are of terrain during WWII.

Sheesh... the logic that you people employ to keep from being wrong is better than messing with the monkeys at the zoo. Thanks for making a rainy afternoon entertaining. :D

I don't think you get it. Wargaming falls into the category of PanzerBlitz and ASL. True wargames, tactical strategical boardgames. The fact of the matter is, this discussion isn't about "Is it a wargame or not". You are trying to say, well, its a bit difficult to see WHAT your point here is. The game is not a heavy tactical, strategical game. Its minature combat, ala a mix of PanzerBlitz lite and normal WotC minature combat. I'm not trying to keep from being wrong, because I am not. In what seems to be your former definition of a wargame, as you posted earlier this game is not. According to the pretty generalized view of wargames you just posted, sure it is.

[Anarch]

Wargaming
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargame

Wargaming can be one of number of ways of exploring the effects of warfare without actual combat. It can take the form of a hobby in which one or more players simulate battles or entire wars, or a model or computer simulation of possible scenarios in military planning, or the full-scale rehearsal of military maneuvers as practice for warfare.

[rekced]

And where does this Painting rairity information come from? I dont buy that arguement in the least bit. There are very few of the D&D or SW figs that have to be assembled and as far as painting goes well that doesnt hold water either.

If your going to call yourself a wargamer then your going to at least have to think a little before coming up with something to say.

Here is one example I quickly found from the Star Wars Miniatures forum from WotC_Rob. The lead designer of the game.

http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=6439121&postcount=119

I am probably the source of the confirmation on the AT-ST, and it is wrong. Once upon a time, it was an uncommon. Due to the number of parts and paint steps involved with the AT-ST, it was made rare instead of uncommon.

Rob

[rekced]

Wargaming
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargame

Wargaming can be one of number of ways of exploring the effects of warfare without actual combat. It can take the form of a hobby in which one or more players simulate battles or entire wars, or a model or computer simulation of possible scenarios in military planning, or the full-scale rehearsal of military maneuvers as practice for warfare.

By that definition Magic players are wargamers. They are simulating a battle between two powerful mages waging war on each other with creatures and such.

[Anarch]

I am probably the source of the confirmation on the AT-ST, and it is wrong. Once upon a time, it was an uncommon. Due to the number of parts and paint steps involved with the AT-ST, it was made rare instead of uncommon.

Rob
So obviously that completely backs up your warped logic... 1 example is an exception. Nice try.

[rekced]

So obviously that completely backs up your warped logic... 1 example is an exception. Nice try.

Obviosuly you are the one with warped logic. You fail to accept anyones comments but your own. I found that example rather easily. Most of the larger and more complex figures in Star Wars are rare or very rare.

In D&D any piece with translucent plastic was always rare because it was harder to make. Star Wars continued that with its first set which had all lightsaber wielding figures as very rare. The next set they had some as rare and very rare, and added an uncommon one as a generic jedi, which was huge at the time because there had never been a figure like that in either line with a translucent piece that was uncommon.

In my original post I also said the more powerful units were generaly rare and very rare. It isn't just one set of rules that everything follows, but there are definite trends for how a figures rarity is determined.

The tanks are going to have some moving parts, so they will be more complex and therefore will be rare because they cost more to produce. Plus there is just less tanks than infantry on a typical battlefield too, so infantry should be more common.

[Anarch]

Obviosuly you are the one with warped logic. You fail to accept anyones comments but your own. I found that example rather easily. Most of the larger and more complex figures in Star Wars are rare or very rare.

In D&D any piece with translucent plastic was always rare because it was harder to make. Star Wars continued that with its first set which had all lightsaber wielding figures as very rare. The next set they had some as rare and very rare, and added an uncommon one as a generic jedi, which was huge at the time because there had never been a figure like that in either line with a translucent piece that was uncommon.

In my original post I also said the more powerful units were generaly rare and very rare. It isn't just one set of rules that everything follows, but there are definite trends for how a figures rarity is determined.

The tanks are going to have some moving parts, so they will be more complex and therefore will be rare because they cost more to produce. Plus there is just less tanks than infantry on a typical battlefield too, so infantry should be more common.
All i hear is "blah blah blah" save it for the fanboys

[Weapon]

Wargaming
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wargame

Wargaming can be one of number of ways of exploring the effects of warfare without actual combat. It can take the form of a hobby in which one or more players simulate battles or entire wars, or a model or computer simulation of possible scenarios in military planning, or the full-scale rehearsal of military maneuvers as practice for warfare.

No one is here to argue over the game. Fine, its a wargame, whatever, does it matter what people classify it as? It doesn't change the game. Its not a simulation, its a game meant to bridge a gap between collectability and wargaming, a tap that, if done right, can be quite profitable for WotC. Its not a history lesson. And trust me, I'm not a fanboy in any term of the word; I severely dislike Axis and Allies in general. And yes, larger, more complex figures in miniature games are normally rarer than others. Certain exceptions; The Yuzzems in SWM, for instance, don't set the norm. The only real sets where larger or more complex figures are less rare, is when its a set of a high percentage of large figures.

[Anarch]

No one is here to argue over the game. Fine, its a wargame, whatever, does it matter what people classify it as? It doesn't change the game. Its not a simulation, its a game meant to bridge a gap between collectability and wargaming, a tap that, if done right, can be quite profitable for WotC. Its not a history lesson. And trust me, I'm not a fanboy in any term of the word; I severely dislike Axis and Allies in general. And yes, larger, more complex figures in miniature games are normally rarer than others. Certain exceptions; The Yuzzems in SWM, for instance, don't set the norm. The only real sets where larger or more complex figures are less rare, is when its a set of a high percentage of large figures.

Oh now your not here to argue over a game... funny it seemed earlier that several of you were willing to argue over a game.
You seem to know exactly what their intent is of this game. This IS a AH game... not WotC (dont even start on the "they own AH" bit) Who did put out ASL and Diplomacy amongst dozens of other which are very historical games.

[Weapon]

Oh now your not here to argue over a game... funny it seemed earlier that several of you were willing to argue over a game.
You seem to know exactly what their intent is of this game. This IS a AH game... not WotC (dont even start on the "they own AH" bit) Who did put out ASL and Diplomacy amongst dozens of other which are very historical games.

Have you noticed how many ASL and PanzerBlitz styled games they have put out lately? Oh, thats right, Nexus Ops :rolleyes:

Diplomacy is the closest only one you mentioned that they have recently reprinted. Don't try to feed me crap about WotC NOT having an influence on this game; just the collectable nature and the miniature influence should be enough to disprove that theory. And this is less WotC, and more Hasbro. Miniature games are raking in dough, and making a collectable miniature game will definitely bolster AH sales, something that needs to happen. The only game that sells well for AH lately has been A&A, and that is usually a gateway game for "heavier" wargames. MMA and Nexus Ops would probably be up there,but thats about it.

[Vulturedoodle]

Alcon,

It's patently obvious that the person using the "Anarch" account is a mere troll. In the interest of useful discussion, I recommend we all simply ignore his/her comments from this point.

Regards,
Steve F.

[SeattleGamer]

This IS a AH game... not WotC (dont even start on the "they own AH" bit) Who did put out ASL and Diplomacy amongst dozens of other which are very historical games.

I'm not sure if I understand this point.

Since I've been around as long as AH has, a brief history lesson is in order.

A long time ago, in a galaxy . . . sorry, couldn't resist. AH was an offshoot of Monarch Publishing, and they came up with a way to generate business to sell printed paper and boxes and counters and such - they started inventing games. They had a staff, and did this for 40+ years. While they did sometimes take an existing game from an "outsider" and develop it further (giving it the AH treatment so to speak - mounted mapboards, improved graphics, die-cut mounted counters, cleaner rules), the majority of their games were home grown.

Then they went out of business.

Then they were bought up by Hasbro.

Since coming to Hasbro, I cannot think of a single game AH has re-released. AH was not the original company for Diplomacy or Risk or Cosmic Encounters, and certainly not for Axis & Allies. I don't see titles such as D-Day, Stalingrad or Battle of the Bulge on any shelves, nor Blitzkrieg, Guadalcanal, Midway, Panzerblitz, Luftwaffe, U-Boat, or even Le Mans or Verdict.

Hasbro took a small selection of wargames they alredy had in their stable and shuffled them off to their wargame division, AH. I'm not saying that's a bad marketing move or anything, this isn't a complaint. But when my eyes run down my list of 75+ AH games of old, I don't see any of those available today.

I will grant that AH did take over Diplomacy from a company a long time ago, gave it their treatment, and re-released it back then. And it is available once again from AH/Hasbro, so I will amend my prior statement and say there is one game from their old line that has been re-released. But I think that's it.

Going from memory here, I believe Hasbro sold the rights to ASL to a newly formed group of fans that included an all-star Baseball player (he was the source for the money used to buy the rights IIRC), so if that is true, then AH is not the company that is supporting ASL.

I think A&A Minis will be Avalon Hills first in-house design of a game since Hasbro took them over, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it comes together.

[NewtonCain]

I'm not sure if I understand this point.

I think A&A Minis will be Avalon Hills first in-house design of a game since Hasbro took them over, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it comes together.

I believe that some of the WotC design team that developed SWM and DDM's had to help in the design of AAM. Granted Hasbro owns WotC and AH.

[Anarch]

Alcon,

It's patently obvious that the person using the "Anarch" account is a mere troll. In the interest of useful discussion, I recommend we all simply ignore his/her comments from this point.

Regards,
Steve F.
You have posted twice, neither have been constructive posts, so who is contributing more? At least I bring up valid points, whereas you say nothing.

[Major Adler]

excellent suggestion...IGNORE...On...for Anarch...

Adler...

[Moderator Sinister]

topic gentlemen stick to the topic.

[TheFoeHammer]

Now on to the point of accurate "what-ifs"... an oxymoron if there was ever one. How can a "what-if" scenerio be accurate? If by accurate you mean "well this tank existed and this other one did also but they didnt function in the same environment" then prehaps you might be correct. But one way or the other its not going to give an accurate assessment. What if there were a-10s in WWII? Well what if there were no tanks in WWII to be the primary target for the a-10s? That is sorta like taking Russian front German Vehicles to North Africa (which this game is going to do). Well the Allies in North Africa did not feel the need to escilate the arms race. Thus the German tanks did not improve there very much (yes I am very aware that the Tiger was used there). Is an army from 1941 going to be balanced with an army from 1944? No... because armor and weapons improved drastically between early and late war.

Stretching the A-10 into WWII turns it more into an "anachronistic what-if" which is a little different than what I was referring to. Those are a lot harder to make accurate, because the A-10 would not arrive in a vacuum. There would be a reaction to it. Units would develop different tactics and commanders would take different courses of action. I do not enjoy these what-ifs, except maybe in science fiction.

The better what-if would be to identify what if Patton had got approval to invade Eastern Europe and Russia and we saw JS-IIs fight Pershing tanks. Or what if Russia had decided to appease Western sentiment and invaded a well defended Japanese Island or two with an armored force. Some of these what-ifs can still be accurate because military doctrine in the respective countries would not have changed all that much for the change in theatre. My friends and I did some of these with GHQ stuff.

The game will be what it is and will appeal to some and not to others. I just don't like the inference that point-values, tournament play and mixed forces somehow makes things less accurate or realistic, while I agree it makes it less historical. Those factors will more likely depend on the quality of the game design, and the point costs, stats and special abilities given to each unit. Which we, as you state, will need to wait and see.

[Major Adler]

FoeHammer - looks like I will be playing this game even with my feelings about the way the infantry is represented...and since most at my shop will be investing in it...I better paly or I will not be playing at all some days...

the tought up here is to have a border war A&A battle...we (four to seven of us) would travel down to Mt. Prospect for a day of gaming...a head to head round robin tournament...our guys against yours or just mix everyone up...looks like the game will be out in mid August...and our shop is closed up here for a week (Mike is going on vacation) in September...September 3rd to the 11th...so maybe the 3rd , 4th , 10th or 11th?...

we can do another LOTR border war battle in the fall...some time after the next expansion is out...

let me know what you think...

Adler...out............

[Major Adler]

ack!...A&A is not out until mid September...so FoeHammer...how about a SW tournament one of those days...

Adler...

[TheFoeHammer]

I'll e-mail you Major Adler once I know who's up for it down here.

[Engineer]

I'll e-mail you Major Adler once I know who's up for it down here.

There are SWM players in SW MI who might make a drive for a tourney.

Okay, I might drive to play in a SWM tourney.

[GoblinSlayer]

it would be great to get an A & A border war going!

[Engineer]

it would be great to get an A & A border war going!

As Grand Moff Tarkin would say "Name the system".

[Major Adler]

either sounds great to me...but looks like if we hold one in September it will be a SW battle...with the hope of holding a AA battle in the Fall...we will have to wait and see what TheFoeHammer comes up with as far as availability of space on those weekends...we will keep you informed Engineer...

Adler...out.................

[Dapuma]

Anarch, why do you post on these forums? It seems you only want a history based war game, which from your other posts seems to be plenty of. This is just a regular game with minis that they use, doesnt seem to be anything wrong with that. Who cares what ratio they were really used in as long as the game is fun and balanced.

We do play games for fun right?

[SeattleGamer]

"We do play games for fun right?"

We should, but sadly, not everyone does. I play for fun, and the challenge is to win while doing that. But if I'm playing for fun (and the fellowship) then win or lose I had fun, and that was my goal.

But I've met people who are all about winning, and their challenge is to have fun winning. If they don't win, they don't have fun. They get caught up in tournament competitions and it's all about squeezing out the best possible killer combos.

But like all hobbies, it takes all kinds. :)

[TomJag3]

I happen to like historical based games. Learning what influenced people to make decisions can be very interesting.

If we're going to be using miniatures of historical vehicles, it only makes sense to give these vehicles appropriate abilities.

I'd be game for going to Mt Prospect, Games Plus, for a big game over a weekend. I'm planning on running an A&A minis event at Flatcon (Sept 23-25). Osprey Publishing will be providing prizes. Maybe the guys around Chicago could make a road trip to central Illinois for a weekend.