@calvinhobbesliker:

@Seven_Patch:

Well the IPC value is even between both the Axis and the Allies (except the original global set up of 19 Allies Infantry), I’m hoping it doesn’t throw things off too much.

Glad you like it.

If they have equal ipc’s of units, allies win due to their greater economy

My changes to the additional Global setup pieces are equal so it would just add equal amount of IPC value to the base set up.  I haven’t checked on what the balance is like for the base set up, I would imagine that the Axis have more units to allow the Axis a chance to try and win early while the Allies have to survive until their economic power tilts things back in their favor.

The Allies did win though, historically speaking  :wink:

I give credit to the testers and designers of this game, a game of this size and scale can’t be easy to balance.

Japanese destroyers can carry one infantry.

typo.

I think it would be interesting if you had any ideas on different country combos, even different time periods, perhaps a House Rule ‘Cold War’ game or something in that nature, but I do agree with Keredrex, the game was definently designed to have 5 players and has been well set up for balance.

No not at all. Never felt that even once.

Just had to clarify the rules so when you play it’s done correctly.

Seems to me that some of the Japanese NAs are very powerful, like Yamato Class Battleships, Paper Planes and Banzai attacks. With this, Japan would be unstoppable, on the mainland and at sea. Even the extra 40 IPCs for the US wouldn’t be enough, and I would know since that’s how I play, and that’s how I’ve played from the beginning. Tone them down or replace them and/or give the Allies a bid (20-30 IPCs) and it’ll be more fair.

Nonetheless, I still love the ideas, even if I have seen them around the forums. I also love the ability to pick which ones you want to use.

I find them very brittle. The smokestacks break off too easily.

Also they cost like $4 each! and you only get one!

But i see the idea to keep an all plastic set and it is more standardized. I have many of them as well, but mostly WW1

@Himilayas:

Nicely done Coach, what type of paint did you use on the figures?

I am using Vallejo paints.
I do use a spray primer before I paint them.

Great work!  They look awesome

No, the map of Europe is that the increase of Europe on the main game board.
During the next game, I am going to fix both cards together.
Both map will be on same height.
One table instead of two.

Panzer keepers, IL had a template I used and changed roundels to fit my needs.

Yeah it’s a bit crude, and not really original but it was the first map I’ve made for AA, I’m hoping I’ll get better as I get more practice. :-)

These are just proposed for now, the goal is to reduce the incentive of a J1 DOW and to reduce incentive of an India crush, promoting a more global game.

Placement changes:

Removal of UK BB and 2 transports in SZ 37, replaced with a cruiser. Addition of a UK BB and 1 transport in SZ 39
Reason: Slow down UK DEI expansion and decrease J1 DOW incentive. Replacement of US bomber at Philippines with tac fighter.
Reason: increase SZ defense, also makes it harder to retreat the plane. Replacement of US transport with a destroyer in SZ 26
Reason: reduce dicey J1 pearl grab and sneaky sub J1 attack Addition of Minor IC to Manchuria
Reason: allow japan more build slots

NO changes
Removal of UK Kwangtung & Malaya NO, want to replace it with something but unsure of what.

ANZAC occupation of original jap territory to be for every round.

Replacement of US NO of Phi, to 3 of the following: Phi, Wake, Midway, Pearl.

Replacement of US NO of Iwo and Oki to 2 of the following: Iwo, Oki, Carolinas.

Replacement of Japan Haw NO to any 1 of the following: Haw, Mid, Wake.

Any thoughts.

@calvinhobbesliker:

You’re the one who started the discussion by saying  that japan doesn’t need to take 8 chinese territories.

How is my math fuzzy? China starts with 12 infantry. Killing 3 kills 25% of their power. Japan starts with 14 fighters. Taking one out is taking out 7% of their fighter force and 3.5% of their entire air force.

What I was talking about was in reguards to the Chinese NOT the Japanese. I dont believe Japan needs to focus on taking all those Chinese tt early on, its got better things to do. But this isnt really the place to discuss it at lenght. I made a passing comment, you are the one who turned this thread into another J1 attack fan boy rant. Also, anyone with a bit of sense would never make an attack with 6 planes and 1inf, if they can avoid it. Most people would better support their attacks so they wouldnt have to take fighters as casualities, which you can easily do in China as Japan. A  fighter is more useful, just because you have alot of them, dosnt mean you should be looking to lose them, its a waste of resources

take away the dice, you take away the fun. i LOVE rolling dice.

@Bardoly:

My main point though, is that giving techs for free is definitely a house rule, while allowing one’s opponent to pay 5 IPCs and you assume that the tech die that he rolls is automatically a “6” and then his Chart 1/2 die is automatically forseen, is more of a gentleman’s agreement rather than a house rule, and as such, could possibly be allowed in League play.

Whether it’s a light beer or a wheat beer or a pilsner beer, it’s still a BEER.

In other words, I am pretty sure any gentlemens agreement is still a house rule, and would technically be against any league play rules.  Sorry  :cry:

@Napoleon:

Someone tried to put extra chinese infantry on all empty territory?

Does it make a difference?

It made China an annoy bitch.

@calvinhobbesliker:

@Fishmoto37:

@IronDuke:

Here is a tiled version of the map.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/zdnggn4zmmj/AAMedTiled.pdf

This will make a 20"x 30" map. Sorry it took so long.

I have printed this out but it is way too small to be practical. Can you tile the original map that you posted? If you cannot then I still thank you for your efforts.

How is it too small? Most of the territories are large, and the small ones have blow up circles

I finally got a larger version of this map printed out. Now I can sub divide the land and sea zones and create my own version of the North Africa campaign. That is why I wanted a larger map. Who knows when we will get such a game from WOTC.

If you want accuracy, you would need to introduce the concept of units ‘breaking’ and running before they are destroyed.  Squad Leader (Avalong Hill 1977) had this, some squads keep fighting when they are down 50% strength, others ‘break’ and run when damage hits 10%.  Of course each of the existing units when they need variable strengths compared to other nations units.  This would require a switch to dice with a greater range of values, I’d say minimum 10 sides, but lets use 2 10 sided like AD&D.  No way a soviet or german tank unit fights the same way as an allied unit.  The way the allies fought german tanks was using a squad of 4 allied versus a german tank.  It starts like this, the first allied tanks lights up like a torch and the remaining three start to manouver around the german as its turret rotated a bit slow.  So, allied tank #2 then #3 light up in flames and the 4th allied tank gets in behind the german and lets loose at point blank range in the poorly armoured rear of the German and manages to disable it.

New units would not fight as well as vetern units of course so you would have to keep track of the age of each unit then modify its combat values based on just aging and also exposure to combat.  Yeah cool, way more accurate, of course each countries turn would take a few hours and we would have to go back to cardboard units with the 3-4 % values representing the units abilities.  We would need zillions of these units for each combination of values.

In ‘set-piece’ battles the Japanese were getting slaughtered against the US.  Perhaps it because by 1943 the US was producing as many machineguns per month as the Japanese produced during the entire war.  I think the Japs having never faced trench warfare and the futility of charging into massed machineguns had no concpet with this type of warefare.  Moreover, the Japs never seemed to retreat so they had little ablity to learn lessons as nobody came back to HQ with information on what they faced.  I would think for accuracy this would have to be represent also with different strencth units.

Personally, I think AA has found a pretty good balance of accuracy and playability.

These rules use the OOB maps for AA50 and 42. They are current files.

For aesthetic reasons, to maintain the integrity of the AA50 map. Swiss have a distinct neutral color and i don’t want it mixed into the other nations.