AA50 reprint?

There is a thread in the Find Players and Game Discussion section for people looking for AA50 games.

I more than agree with templeton on the freedom to players idea. I appreciate the game offers a nice historical point of view, but it is the idea of being able to do the “what if” playing that makes it really exciting.

I am pleased to say, that today our beloved game is ranked # 2, with a 8,41 rating.

If BGG has it out there already, well hell.

This is 3MB smaller and better quality:

http://www.savefile.com/projects/808699222

~ZP

Interested ones please visit the Team Games forum, please  :-D

That file … yummy …  8-)

I was just looking over the new AA50 board image and it occured to me how arbitrary the geography is in this game.

Why is the Belgian Congo in this game at all?

Spain is off limits, even though certainly in the realm of possible history/gameplay Spain could have been a major player or battlefield of WWII; a lot more of a possibility than French Eq Africa or the Belgian Congo which are indeed in play.

Certainly Turkey could have been a significant factor in this alternative universe of a game we call Axis & Allies than ever could have would been French West Africa or Rhodesia.

Yet there they are: Belgian Congo, French West Africa, Rhodesia all open for invasion. Spain and Turkey and others are closed off.

This is so ahistorical, we disagree about countless other nuances and rules about being historically deficient. Yet without Spain and Turkey, we are are not even accorded the ability to play out WWII in ways which could have indeed happened a lot more probable than the invasion of the Belgian Congo and Rhodesia by the Nazi war machine.

Why of all the possibilities of the Axis and Allies timeline/universe are these 2 of the more likely ones that could have happend are indeed shut down?

@Imperious:

Larry has stated many times that the units don’t generally fit standard military models for classic formations (divisions, corps, army) and in some cases these are corps and others they are armies. They are not the same in every case, allowing for the corps in Africa to be symbolized as perhaps 2-3 units, while in the Soviet union one infantry may represent an army ( 3-5 corps).

Yes, IL thanks,
I have been reading those old posts.  I note he (Larry Harris) stated the Naval units abstraction was a greater dilution of unit strength, or a direct correlation to vessel numbers from standard representation of Classic fleet/squadron/Battle groups.  I am thinking more in chess terms, where tempo or position is sometimes of more value then individual pieces.

@Bardoly:

@Rakeman:

@Bardoly:

Thank you Krieghund for your answer.  The Fact Sheet was very unclear about this.
With this, I have to agree with Funcioneta that this can be quite detrimental to the smaller ICs, but at least Germany can never be SBR’d in 1 round for all of its $ now.

Couldn’t in LHTR either.

In LHTR, in order to do 20 damage to Germany, USA and UK would each have to dedicated 10 IPC worth of bomber damage.  In this game, USA or UK needs to dedicate that much.  Big difference.  USA sitting back shipping bombers off while UK invades Northwestern Europe should be a viable strategy.  We’ll see.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.  This rule change seems to be more fair, and especially if Germany gets Radar and/or the IC repair tech, then that really limits the effectiveness of the SBRs.

I disagree, nerfing a broken mechanic is a good thing IMO.  I don’t know about other players, but if I was Germany and only producing 5-7 units a turn, I’d be wondering how long it would take for Russia to run me down.  It is nice that damage doesn’t HAVE to be repaired completely, but most likely, it often will be, or at least enough to hurt badly.