As it has not been posted before: Renegade indeed relased a reprint of Anniversary Edition celebrating the 40th Anniversary of A&A itself:
https://renegadegamestudios.com/axis-allies-anniversary-edition/
News flash: AXIS & ALLIES ANNIVERSARY EDITION due out oct 23 08
-
/Imperious leader
I found an answer of a post by Axis_Roll by Larry where the former suggests some changes and the latter seems to be quite positive.
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/bb2/viewtopic.php?t=1519
They were:
1. Destroyer cost - from 12 to 10
2. A/C cost - from 16 to 14
3. BB cost - from 24 to 20
4. Subs - You can not attack subs with planes only. You must have a naval ship.Number 4 could be even better I would say if you would need a destroyer, as in AAE. If we add in a cruiser at cost 15, A3, D3 and some special ability you would have a very interesting situation! Can’t wait till October!
-
Larry is a very positive person. Always encouraging…
Those AH people were bugging out about 4 years ago when i was saying BB should be 20 IPC and Destroyers 10 IPC… and eventually after telling me its “not balanced” have adopted it in their 2.1 version. They will deny this ever happened ( of course) but probably reflected on the idea of cheaper naval units after reading my posts back in 2004 about cheaper naval costs.
Second of all those prices (except CV) are the same prices as AARHE. A Carrier ( CV) for 14 IPC is too cheap for its value with 2 fighters. Studies have been done comparing BB, 2 destroyers, Carrier with fighters showing this out. A Carrier was built on the strong cruiser hull. they should be 2 hits along with cruisers.
So as per realistic ideas:
BB 20 IPC 4-4-2 (2 hits)
CA 15 IPC 3-3-3 ( 2 hits)
DD 10 IPC 2-2-2 ( 1 hit)
CV 15 IPC 1-2-3-( 2 hits)
SS (same as OOB)
AP 8 IPC 0-0-2 ( 1 hit)Note: transports don’t have a defense value and cant be allocated as combat loses. You don’t bring liberty ships into large scale naval battles and they are no longer “human shields” for battles. The flip side is they cant block your navy from moving thru the sea zone because they are not combat ships.
also: carriers and cruisers are long range and have the fastest speed so they move three spaces. They are dedicated long range warships.
Also, So what seems to be a convenient plug for that variant you refer too is just what they call “being in the right place at the right time” making it seem by magic that larry converted to their thinking when he has not. The Harris forums contains all of the ideas mostly making up the new game, but are hidden in many little posts making it like a dig site for archaeologists looking for dinosaur bones. I can guarantee you the changes in this game will not be welcome to their thinking because they are indeed more historically realistic but functional. Loopholes have been closed and its more realistic to what the vast majority of others have commented on. Just watch what they do with defender retreats…
did i just say defender retreats?
I can tell you the new game will have alot more new ideas that are much closer to my interpretation than the folks at AH- AARe people. When the game comes out i will post all of these ideas.
Take care. Post often.
-
Well, all your questions could be answered next week, in person, by LH himself. That is, if you go to Gencon…
-
Larry is posting a picture of the Chinese territories and that would be posted tonight?… as per request from another member asking about the split of territories.
AS i said before i don’t think Japan will need to attack Moscow in this game to win.
-
guess i cant wait for tonight then. :-P
-
Squirecam your on my +1 karma list. IN one year you will be at 730+ Karma. Think of it.
-
@Krupp:
guess i cant wait for tonight then. :-P
@Imperious:
Larry is posting a picture of the Chinese territories and that would be posted tonight?… as per request from another member asking about the split of territories.
AS i said before i don’t think Japan will need to attack Moscow in this game to win.
OK so where’s the picture?
LT
-
one more + karma from me, sqirecam, now if you add the 730 from IL to the 465 you will get from me, you just might have like 1200 applauds next year, now that is something to consider
-
squirecam,
Here you go +1. Don’t spend it all in one place.
LT
-
/Imperious leader
I’m fully aware of the inherent conservatism of Larry Harris, and have followed some of the forums of the last few years. My questions are not related to house rules, which me and my friends have some of their own as I’m sure most gamer teams do.
I just wanted to figure out what the already finished product will be like. Since Revised was such a great improvement with a few simply fixes (territories, IPC boost for Germany), I actually have a good hope for real improvement this time around.
Of your ideas, I think the transport defend on ‘0’ is the best of the lot, but doubt if it’ll be implemented. But it would be a great leap for A&A-kind! I don’t think CV and CA should be 2 hits, that would be some kind of inflation in special abilities. Should Cruisers be able to move to a different sea zone if having a movement point left, even if that means participating in two combats? That would be a blitz-like ability that at the same time would not be too powerful since these occasions are not that common as players usually pool their fleets to one sea zone. In Guadalcanal, cruisers don’t even have a special ability, do they?
-
I think that having multiple hit ships should be added. I mean lets not get carried away here and add 3+ hit units. I’m just saying look how much your shelling out for a navy that’s a vulnerable as an INF unit? That would be a big plus.
I agree transports shouldn’t have a defence value. That would make for an interesting new navy fodder unit.
LT
-
IMHO transport should be even not allowed to be in the battle, they should be simply destroyed after the battle if the enemy had defeat the escort.
In the Revised naval battle I imagine a dialogue like this between the Captain of a BB and the Gunner Officer:
Captain: enemy fleet in range, 1 BB and four TRNs, engage the enemy!
Gunner Officer: Yes sir, distance determined, fire data transmitted to the turrets, waiting the order to open fire.
Captain: Open fire!!!
Gunner Officer: All turrets Fire!
Captain: what happened?
Gunner Officer: we scored a hit!
Captain: so we have sunk that pensky battleship?
Gunner Officer: No, sir, we have hit a TRN!
Captain: Damn it! Fire Again!
Gunner Officer: All turrets Fire!
Captain: and now?
Gunner Officer: We hit another TRN!
Captain: Fire Again!
Gunner Officer: another TRN has been hit!
Captain: But! Why are you not aiming at the enemy BB?Hiss… Incoming shell from the enemy BB…BOOM! (Ammo depot Explosion)
Captain(swimming): Gunner Officer, what happened?
Gunner Officer (swimming): The Enemy battleship hit us!
Captain(swimming): I know, we have not TRNs to be hit instead of us! -
Good post. Trannys are not ALSO destroyers, cruisers and the mysterious and elusive “support combat ships” They are just the means to carry war materials to foreign lands and transport oil and resources. They don’t have deck guns, no torpedoes, nothing…
Battleships don’t bring squadrons of gunless ,slow moving barges to provide “human shield defense” for battles like Midway or Leyte Gulf. They cant even get into anything over 20 or so knots. When you send your only bomber ( representing thousands of planes) they dont just shoot these suckers down with mysterious deck guns, that double as high altitude AA gun battery’s.
AA guns cant hit 1 out of 6 either but thats another gaff. Of all SBR only a sum TOTAL of 10% of planes were damaged or destroyed in this manner.
-
On the other issue:
Larry posted that he misspoke and cannot post a picture yet, but he will as soon as he is allowed.
Of course i just relay the info here seconds after its posted.
the window of doing this cant be greater than about 2 weeks because the game will be photographed at Gen Con.
-
Why do you think that getting this game on the shelves takes so long? Do you think they just need to produce a bunch of copies to ship out the first wave with?
LT
-
/Imperious leader
Yes, no TRN involvement in combat at all! Because you on some posts imply that you know more than you can say on the end-product A&A Anniversary Edition, I assume that none of these changes have actually been put into the product, except for the cruiser addition and consequent destroyer modification.
I can only hope for good NAs to resolve the sub issue, maybe some of the NAs can be used as a standard rule for all nations. I sometimes have a hard time getting friends to try out house rules, so having them in the rule book is perfect.
Anyway, even with only China, Italy and cruisers added this could make for a much more active Pacific and Mediterranean operation zone and that alone is worth buying the game, even if Larry Harris dislikes convoy attack and interceptor rules…
-
I am not saying any of my posted ideas are in the new game. I just making the same point as the OP who like anybody else can post something and have larry say “thats been in my thoughts and its a great idea” He is a great guy who wants everybody to feel comfortable sharing their ideas. He has zero intention of using 99% of these ideas….but the actual answer key as i pointed out before is the total effort of all those posts over years mixed in with his own ideas mutated into most of the games ideas that are finished product. The game was printed long ago and Larry has a copy. Nothing can be changed at this point for at least 5 months, so its not like anything is going to change.
I am most sure the destroyer goes down to 2-2 unit and cruiser is at 3-3, with this i can only speculate the destroyer is now 10 IPC and that change you elude too in your post is not ANYTHING new but a rehashed idea, among other sensible approach to the DNA of the units values per IPC basis. I’m am also quite sure that they will have some unique ability in the game, but it will come out soon.
Just keep thinking about what a wonderful time it will be when we all finally get the objectified look at the game and a pouring of ideas about this and that will be staggering. This site will get real busy real quick. Its really like waiting for the “man landing on the moon” type of feeling for me.
-
Well said, IL.
@LT04:
Why do you think that getting this game on the shelves takes so long?
The usual answer is that the production in China is behind schedule.
-
Well said, IL.
@LT04:
Why do you think that getting this game on the shelves takes so long?
The usual answer is that the production in China is behind schedule.
That makes sence. I would think they want a full first batch. Or maybe they wanted to have it hit the shelves at that time to be purchased as a Christmas present.
LT
-
@Imperious:
On the other issue:
Larry posted that he misspoke and cannot post a picture yet, but he will as soon as he is allowed.
Of course i just relay the info here seconds after its posted.
the window of doing this cant be greater than about 2 weeks because the game will be photographed at Gen Con.
I guess it is possible that AH wants to save photos and have a big “reveal” on their website around the time it is unveiled at Gencon, but given their track record I kind of doubt it.
Suggested Topics
