Who's winning in the 2004 A&A board game

[jumperpin]

Axis or Allies ?

In the original MB version, the Allies enjoyed a huge advantage. Long games, over 8 hours, were always a race between a *** sweep across Asia (towards Moscow) vs. a Limey/Yank transport-driven assault on the Hun. The Allies cosistently won. We'd make transports cost 10 and prohibit new IPC centers to balance the game.

The xtra sea zones in the N Atlantic and xtra territories in E Europe look xiting...as do the new sub rules and the addition of destroyers and artillery.

Would someone please comment on how the new board edition plays ?

[TomJag3]

It's awesome. It's like the old A&A on steroids. Allies have a slight edge, unless you're playing tournament rules. I spent a weekend in Cincinatti last spring with some veteran players and watched bids going from +4 for the Allies to +7 for the Germans.

[axis_roll]

but I have to .... what Revised Rules?

Out of the box rules are broken, basically. Read the many posts hear discussing that issue.

Larry Harris Tourney Rules (http://dicey.net/revised/index.php) are a nice fix, but those games (IMHO) tend to fall into the same playout as what you've just described. Allied Crush Germany versus *** Tank dash to Moscow. With the LHTR changes to tech, I think the allies are favored again.

[Moderator Sinister]

Revised is also fun because even after many games I'm still learning new things. I think the game still favors the allies but not nearly as much as the old game. There are a couple of NAs out of the box that make the game very unbalanced. There's a couple of rulesets out there that make the game much more interesting.

[jumperpin]

Thanx for the quickies.

Guess what, everyone in this thread, so far, is within a couple hundred miles. I'm in eastern Elgin.

SOOOooo...gettin' a game goin fer tonite. Ain't got a fivesome yet. It'll be A&A and thincrust (ez sauce) at 20:00. Will prob'ly "roll one", too. Smoking permitted. Wifey cool. If there's still time, call my cell at 847-921-3633.

Based on comments here, am tempted to cram (pretty much) MB 2nd Edition rules plus Destroyers onto new boardmap. Any thoughts?


JP

[smo63]

Elgin, I assume that is in Illinois.

Why not go to GEN CON next week and play AA. There will be more than one can imagine as far as AA goes and you will get to see some of the best players in the Country compete. Unless that might be you?

GS:)

[squirecam]

IMO that isn't as good as getting the new game. The cool thing about the new board is that there are a lot more borders to protect on the Eastern Front. It's harder just to stack infantry.

The new game is a lot better than the old one. LHTR are pretty bad, except for the NA changes. They are rules written by players who don't understand tech strategies. The only house rules I think improve A & A revised are no tech rolls turn 1 and limit sbr damage to the value of the territory per turn not per bomber. No tech turn 1 prevents Germany from taking UK before UK player has taken his turn. This is not a real issue in a friendly game as no one would try it. HBs are still too powerful when you can wipe out all the enemy income.

Larry dislikes tech. Hence LHTR.

I also note we were beaten in 2nd ed because of a lucky tech roll, no?

No tech = fine by me.

Squirecam

[ButchOHare1]

They played a tech strat. That was their best chance to win. They bought 3 bombers and rolled 8 tech. Five 6s is a good roll but that was still good strategy. Delaying tech until placement would not have allowed that.

I know this game is highly abstract, but if it has any pretense to being about World War II it has to be principally a tech game. World War II brought us into the Atomic Age. Einstein had theories but Roosevelt had money. Compare the Italian tanks in Ethiopia in 36 with the Germans in France in 1940 with the Russian T34s in 43 with the German Tiger IIs in 45. Compare a Me 109 with an Me 262. If you want no tech play Conquest of Empires or Shogun or something. I'll take WW2 thank you.

[squirecam]

They played a tech strat. That was their best chance to win. They bought 3 bombers and rolled 8 tech. Five 6s is a good roll but that was still good strategy. Delaying tech until placement would not have allowed that.

I know this game is highly abstract, but if it has any pretense to being about World War II it has to be principally a tech game. World War II brought us into the Atomic Age. Einstein had theories but Roosevelt had money. Compare the Italian tanks in Ethiopia in 36 with the Germans in France in 1940 with the Russian T34s in 43 with the German Tiger IIs in 45. Compare a Me 109 with an Me 262. If you want no tech play Conquest of Empires or Shogun or something. I'll take WW2 thank you.

Then why are allied and axis tanks 3/3 ? German tanks should be "better". Yet they are not.

HB Tech is based upon luck (double 6's) and revised rightfully limited that stuff from the game.

Squirecam

[Moderator Sinister]

When A&A is redone again I'd like them to seriously look at a research track. You invest in a tech, the players see what you are investing in, and after X turns of paying X ipcs you get the tech. I'd love to see tech become a luckless event all the way around.

[Bushido Blitz]

I know this game is highly abstract, but if it has any pretense to being about World War II it has to be principally a tech game. World War II brought us into the Atomic Age.I emphatically disagree. The specific territories under control of each power and the units they contain at the start of the game are sufficient to make A&A "about World War II." No pretenses there. And in point of fact, as an abstraction it does not have to be "principally a tech game."If you want no tech play Conquest of Empires or Shogun or something. I'll take WW2 thank you.If you want tech, play Civilization or something. I'll take A&A Revised with LHTR, thank you.

[TomJag3]

Jumperpin, my partner for the GenCon Masters is in South Elgin.

Butch, I'll see you in a couple of days. Much as I hate to, I agree with Squirecam on this. WWII was about stopping Hitler from establishing his 1000 year Reich and stopping the Japanese from expanding their empire. Germany wasn't stopped with Atomic weapons. The Atomic Age grew out of WWII, but that was a side effect. If you want tech, play a game of the Russians and the US racing to the moon.

Besides, WWII wasn't the first war where technology advanced. It's just that as time goes on, the pace of development increases. The Civil War saw a number of advances in technology, using balloons for artillery spotting and scouting. That time saw a number of advances in medicine. Weapons changed from a rifled musket to repeating rifles, the Gatling came about, the Napoleon cannon was replaced.

Look at WWI. WWI was brought to an end by disease. However, look at some of the weapons that came into being. Aircraft developed from unarmed craft, where the pilots fired pistols and shotguns at each other, to sophisticated flying machines. The machine gun came into its own. The BAR, Browning machine gun, Colt automatic, and Luger weapons stayed around for quite some time. Chemical warfare was utilized at a large scale.

Anytime there is conflict, advances occur in a number of different fields as the opposing sides try to obtain an advantage.

[Darksideknight]

Quote from Moderater Sinister: "When A&A is redone again I'd like them to seriously look at a research track. You invest in a tech, the players see what you are investing in, and after X turns of paying X ipcs you get the tech. I'd love to see tech become a luckless event all the way around."

It may be a good rule but that would take some of the fun out of it. If every tech that you can get has no luck factor to it how dull would that be? I think the game could be changed so that if you want a certin tech you have to invest in it and then the odds could be changed so it's easier to get it. Instead of just a 6 you would need a 5-6 to get it. That makes more sense then just saying ok in x amount of turns I'm gonna have heavy bombers. Blah I'm sorry I just cannot share your same interest in doing that to the tech rule. I think the game play would be be very bland. Try it some time, set it up and try it I think you will find it dull. Tech should have some element of luck involved or it makes the whole reason of adding tech to the game obsolete.

[pagan]

I like the method of Tech employed in AARe (enhanced)

In order to get Tech you must invest your income
no cheap tech purchases
Luck is diminished due to spending structure
.

New 4:2 Tech Rule
-The first time you roll for a particular Tech, you MUST purchase a minimum of 4 rolls that turn
-The second time you roll for that Tech, you MUST purchase a minimum of 2 rolls that turn, but you recieve the Tech automatically
-You MAY purchase ALL 6 rolls in ONE turn, and recieve the Tech automatically (thus a choice between expensive but quick vs. potentially cheaper but also potentially later)
-In all cases, Tech doesn't come into effect until the end of the turn you recieve it (as per LHTR rules)