@mike64 I had edited that tank out of Denmark on Japan’s turn, but it’s back in Denmark. When I do Germany I’m going to edit back to W Germany.
kwaspek(x) v gamerman01 Classic 3rd ed
-
I moved an extra guy to Western Europe instead of Eastern Europe in edit mode btw.
-
Thanks for pointing out the edit
This is fascinating. I don’t think I’ve ever played Classic against a good, experienced player, and pretty sure never online. I thought it strange when people talked about the “infantry push”, but after a ton of experience with AA50 and Global, especially, and going back to Classic I get it. When I played against myself on the living room floor 33 years ago, I could mess around with buying various units and techs to make it fun.
I don’t know where elche’s been, but I’m glad you grabbed me for these (at least) 2 games.
I do think the Allies are much easier to win with, from what I heard when I came around online maybe 2003 or so. So I’m glad I got the Allies for the warm-up game. I think I’m understanding the sub capabilities now, but will probably still be caught off guard. -
I saw infantry on West Canada as I started placing units, edited to East Canada
It is refreshing how short and crisp the moves for Classic are even though I’m so many years out of practice and getting re-oriented.
Engine helped me by taking the fastest route from London to French Equatorial. I didn’t see the Algeria route. Turned out I wanted to land on Egypt anyway, but now I know…
-
GAA I’m all grown up. 5 “extra” IPC’s and I bought an infantry instead of tech. BOORING 🎵🎵
-
Post-move review, saw that I do prefer bombers on TrJ and hope you don’t get LRA
Just tell me if you are a picky one who doesn’t like NCM edits after placement, and I’ll be more careful to have my NCM exactly as I want it before placing. Most of us don’t care, but I don’t want to assume since I don’t know you very well yet.
You’ll give me a break since my first game back to this map after a hundred games with big maps? Since you ripped a fighter in the middle of Africa, you’re in a good mood?
-
Fighters there too, if I may
-
yeah I don’t mind NCM edits, just let me know when you do them! and thanks for the commentary and compliment!
Infantry is pretty good in this game, to say the least haha. Especially when you have less money and other items are more expensive. And because Axis generally have a lot less money, more risky to roll for tech with them. But next game I can play loopier ;D
-
-
And yes I agree, I like how short the moves (can) be in this version. It’s among other reasons why I like this version so much!
-
You want the 3 fighters on Yakut?
They aren’t there on your map,
If you confirm, I’ll move them for you -
Yeah, can you please? Thanks
-
No problem, just wanted to make sure that’s where you wanted them, thanks for quickly confirming
-
@kwaspek104 said in Does anybody play with 3rd Edition rules?:
I was wondering if anybody actually plays this game with third edition rules, especially on an actual board. The differences between 2nd and 3rd edition are relatively minor, but they do change the game:
"1. Defending subs can submerge or retreat from combat. A submerged sub remains in the sea zone and resurfaces after combat.
2. Planes can retreat from an amphibious assault.
3. There can be multiple AA guns in one territory, but only one can fire.
4. New sea units can be placed in an enemy-occupied sea zone (this was an optional rule in 2nd Edition).I’m starting to get confused. I’m starting a game with elche and he wants certain rules, too, like he doesn’t want planes to retreat from amphibious assault.
In our game here, I have been playing that I can’t place ships if there is an enemy ship in the zone. Are we playing 2nd edition or 3rd? Could I have placed ships in an occupied zone?? Pretty wild that a German sub in the North Sea can stop fleet placement. I couldn’t risk the 10% chance that my planes fail to hit your sub and then I lose all my money.
-
yeah we’re playing with the 3rd edition rules for this one. you can place sea units even in enemy sea zones for this game.
next game we can pick and choose what rules we like, if you wish
-
- subs submerging in the same sea zone
- not being able to place sea units in enemy occupied sea zones
These two rules are mutually exclusive. Otherwise, submarines would be overpowered, because they would always just submerge in a sea zone with an industrial complex, preventing you from putting anything there.
In the second edition rules, subs could only withdraw to another zone, not in the same sea zone.
Let me know if that makes sense lol
-
@kwaspek104 said in kwaspek(x) v gamerman01 Classic 3rd ed:
Let me know if that makes sense lol
Confusing with different versions and rules!
We are playing 3rd edition, so subs are not allowed to submerge in their own zone. So to retreat on defense, you’d have to have an open zone. If you can’t withdraw to another zone, and you can’t submerge, then you’re auto-sunk against air?
-
other way around lol. We’re playing 3rd edition, so subs CAN submerge in the same zone
-
@kwaspek104 said in kwaspek(x) v gamerman01 Classic 3rd ed:
In the second edition rules, subs could only withdraw to another zone, not in the same sea zone.
Well I should have understood, from this…
-
So in 3rd edition, we can submerge in same sea zone, and you CAN build fleet into a hostile zone, no matter how much enemy fleet is there.
R4 posted below
-
Correct. In the second edition, building sea units in enemy sea zones was presented as an optional rule. They made it a “mandatory” rule in 3rd edition.
(Btw, the 3rd edition was first seen in the 1998 computer game by Hasbro. You could pick and choose what rules you wanted as well as other optional rules)
And yes, you are correct, if aircraft attack a sub in 2nd edition and there’s no place for it to withdraw to, it basically auto-dies. I’m assuming this is why they added this rule in 3rd edition.
Suggested Topics
