Enough of the negative waves. Look at the pictures of the game again and take great joy that you will have another great game in your collection soon!
@Brain:
Enough of the negative waves. Look at the pictures of the game again and take great joy that you will have another great game in your collection soon!
OddBall reference?
You got it. Kelly’s Heroes is one of my all time faves.
Krieg, It isn’t that I don’t what the release meant and it isn’t that I don’t understand the way AH writes stuff and even supports the products that Larry and you make, sadly, I understand all too well. What I was trying to point out was what was implied in the release. There is a big difference between what is implied and what is meant there and for many people they just won’t grasp the differences because they haven’t been around.
It is a customer issue. When customers expect something from a product and what they believe they were supposed to get, and then don’t, then you have angry customers on your hands. Simply telling them that they are wrong will not help, it only makes them more discontent, with the product and the salesperson/company/etc.
Take for instance that the release cites AA50, well, since that was a limited run that is over, and they can’t even get the rules from the AH website, citing that as the basic framework for the new game really means little to many people who are thinking about spending $80ish (American) for a game. They can compare it to AAP, and they see the Australian forces now simply being renamed as ANZAC, which doesn’t truly make them a new power, and they know what China had before and now will see only artillery as new pieces, but they thought it was much more.
Truly I point out these things not to just throw the ‘negative waves’ out there because that is the opposite of what I want to be doing. (the avatar doesn’t just look nice, eh). I’ve enjoyed these games for many, many years and it’s sad to see customers turned against companies, (maybe not so much AH, but you and Larry) because of poor advertising and support when they shoot themselves in the foot. I have dealt with customers for years and have picked up a thing or two about business and people. They may not always apply, but sometimes yes. Lose the customers’ trust, you lose the customers and I don’t think that there is a certainty that this demographic is busting at the seams in growth.
i think you should head over to the WOTC website and file your complaints. i dont think krieghund has anything to do with the marketing of the games or how they are advertised. I for one am thankful for everything krieghund does do for us, i.e. give us info on new games, explaining rules, and so on. all these issues are not on him, they are on Wizards
We need a whipping boy on this forum. just kidding krieg
Someone in the Wizards marketing department did, no doubt.
yea another chimp…
LuckyDay,
As I’ve tried to make clear in the past, I don’t work for Avalon Hill. I work for Larry Harris. As such, I have nothing to do with the planning or marketing of A&A games, only their development. However, my offiicial position does lead to the perception in others that I have some stake in defending the behavior of WotC. Believe me, I don’t. I agree that their marketing and support of A&A products in general is lacking, and I have said so on many occassions. This is my personal opinion, and should not be construed as the official opinion of Harris Game Design.
On the other hand, in this particular instance, I don’t think they’ve done anything wrong. I disagree with your assessment of the statements in the Pacific 1940 material. It is my personal opinion that there is nothing misleading about those statements, and that you have simply read too much into them. I have explained my reasoning previously. Please don’t feel that anyone at WotC is telling a customer that they’re wrong. It’s just me, expressing my opinion as a private citizen. If I have led you to believe otherwise, I regret it.
I do agree with you, however, that using the Anniversary game as a basis of comparison was a poor choice. Using the 1942 edition would have been a much better one, as it is the new “flagship” product and will be far more widely distributed.
By the way, the Australian forces aren’t simply being renamed. ANZAC is a separate, playable power.
Just in case any of you were wondering ANZAC stands for Auatralian and New Zealand Army Corps.
By the way, the Australian forces aren’t simply being renamed. ANZAC is a separate, playable power.
Do you know to what extent (if any) the ANZAC forces will have different sculpts than the British pieces, and/or if they’ll be differentiated by color from the (I assume) beige-colored British units?
CWO Marc
They will be the same sculpts as the UK in a different shade of tan.
They will be the same sculpts as the UK in a different shade of tan
so in the global game, they will remain seperate?
Krieghund,
I don’t believe I ever stated that I believed you worked for AH or WOTC. I know quite well who you are and what you do. I simply pointed out some items that could be misleading to customers, because I have that point of view, where-as AH, WOTC, and honestly you and Larry look at things from a different view, because you are the other side of the table with the games. (i dunno, maybe there are more sides as you and Larry don’t want to sit on the same side as AH) Normally for businesses that want to grow market share and cliental, they want feedback about good and bad and how they are viewed.
We here at this forum have some mighty powerful impressions about AH/WOTC and I have been part of the group that has sent correspondence on numbers of occasions to them. Hopefully, that helps, who knows!? Mostly, I’ve gotten the cold shoulder from them on those subjects and a bunch of BS about the website will have all the info and yada yada yada.
But hey, if people’s impressions of how the games are marketed, priced, described, etc are not wanted, then hazzah and that. My businesses and others are different.
You chose to respond and try and correct my impression of the release, great. You didn’t understand I knew what was meant, and came from there. Thanks. This whole thing is really blown way up here far beyond what was intended and is becoming a drag, man…
By the way, the Australian forces aren’t simply being renamed. ANZAC is a separate, playable power.
@CWO:
Do you know to what extent (if any) the ANZAC forces will have different sculpts than the British pieces, and/or if they’ll be differentiated by color from the (I assume) beige-colored British units?
They will be the same sculpts as the UK in a different shade of tan.
In AAP, the “Australia” player/power, whatever you want to call it represented Australia and New Zealand, as well as some of the small British colonial islands and such around them, correct? While India was “india” and the rest of the BCW controlled/influenced territories on the board. So can ANZAC be separate ‘power’ different from what we experienced in AAP, while having the same basic oversight and control and using the same UK pieces, only in a different color? Is there something more to all this, or is this just a terminology game?
ANZAC has its own economy and pieces, and its own turn. It can be played by a separate player. It’s just as much a separate power from India as the United States is. In the original Pacific, while its economy was separate, it shared its turn and pieces with India and was controlled by the same player.
Krieghund wrote:
Refreshed sculpts means that each unit’s mold was redone. The result is a sharper mini with better detail. Compare them with the Anniversary pieces and you’ll see the difference.
And they are very nice. Absolutely better quality than the $100 AA50. I’ve already swapped out the pieces. Very much appreciated, by the way, along with the bigger BBs and fixed German cruiser. Thank-you.
And I like having the Soviet fleet represented, even though I don’t buy any. Its just cool to have them, though.
PS, how about Italy getting some new sculpts and a different colour?
Are you kidding me! Five feet by 32 inches! I’m going to need a bigger table to play on now, Jesus….oh and my two cents from the wording of the preview, China will have many more units, but I understood that as infantry. ANZAC will of course fight Japan but I do admit the wording was a little off, they should have said and ANZAC supported by England.
Krieghund wrote:
Refreshed sculpts means that each unit’s mold was redone. The result is a sharper mini with better detail. Compare them with the Anniversary pieces and you’ll see the difference.
And they are very nice. Absolutely better quality than the $100 AA50. I’ve already swapped out the pieces. Very much appreciated, by the way, along with the bigger BBs and fixed German cruiser. Thank-you.
I wish I could take credit, but this one is all Avalon Hill.
And I like having the Soviet fleet represented, even though I don’t buy any. Its just cool to have them, though.
Don’t quote me on this, but you may get some use out of these in Europe 1940.
PS, how about Italy getting some new sculpts and a different colour?
Working on it. Can’t promise anything, though.
Are you saying I have to go purchase the $25 AA42 to get better pices than my $100 AA50! Go figure.
No, you don’t have to, if you can wait for the '40s.
