Don’t get me wrong, I love to customize my AA game as much as the next enthusiast but is there a point at which the customization gets away from the original game in a way that makes it an entirely different game? Some rules can and are interpreted in different ways and I would even include some of the R&D rules in that as well. Some of this is tweaked for the right reason, however I see alot of add-ons and I guess you could say optional rules that are implemented in different AA members games that I feel take away from the spirit of the game. I am all for customization and I am not here to criticize anyone because I use customizations as well, I just wanted to get the community’s opinion on this subject. I also love the custom maps that I see around the forums, and have even considered building a new table using alot of things that I have come across on the forums. I already have a table that I built about 4 years ago and i’ll keep some of the customizations that I used in making that one, such as adding plexiglass over the map to keep it protected from food and drink. Thank you to everyone who has posted their customizations and please let me know what you think about some of them going too far!
I’d say that customizations which just make the gaming experience nicer without affecting the actual rules – what could be called chrome – are non-controversial. Things like varnished wooden tables, plexiglass covers and so forth. In the same category would be things like upgraded sculpts, nicer versions of battle boards, alternate forms of money (like IWNGU’s poker chips).
Once you start getting into modified rules, modified (or additional) units, and map board alterations, however, you’re getting into the realm of “deviation from the OOB game.” This can be good or bad or neutral, depending on the circumstances, but the basic thing to keep in mind is that the more you deviate from the OOB game the lesser the chances that the modifications will find broad acceptance within the A&A community. On the flip side, keep in mind that “broad acceptance within the A&A community” isn’t necessarily the criterion for assessing if a modification is successful; in practical terms, the real criterion is whether it’s acceptable to your gaming group.
@CWO:
keep in mind that “broad acceptance within the A&A community” isn’t necessarily the criterion for assessing if a modification is successful; in practical terms, the real criterion is whether it’s acceptable to your gaming group.
Im glad you brought this up, as my friends and I are constantly debating things like this. We will be implementing some of the rules I run across on the forum for test runs, and see if we like them, however we are not ones to deviate too much from the OOB rules. We are currently trying to work on the R&D to see if we can modify it in a way that is even and not at chance. I see alot of these on different AA members YouTube channels as well as here on the forum, I just can’t seem to agree with most of them.
Best to just add 1 rule change or piece to game and play it. A lot will do with as you stated on what your group wants in a game.
Also keep looking on site for most info that pertains to a new rule or piece.
If this is for the G40 OOB game then the 39 games may not be for you or your group.
Those games are whole new ball game. They are loaded with more rules and pieces.
Otherwise just keep customizing as CWO stayed with tables and so forth.
I have some magnetic 2 x 3 foot charts that are in my 40 game that have tech, income, victory city’s and NAs for all 6 countries. Those are awesome. Stuff like that. Just keep plugging away. As you do more customs you’ll get better at it and you can change snything you want.
Im glad you brought this up, as my friends and I are constantly debating things like this. We will be implementing some of the rules I run across on the forum for test runs, and see if we like them, however we are not ones to deviate too much from the OOB rules. We are currently trying to work on the R&D to see if we can modify it in a way that is even and not at chance. I see alot of these on different AA members YouTube channels as well as here on the forum, I just can’t seem to agree with most of them.
In discussing with your group what kinds of house rules (your own or those found on this forum) your group would like to implement, one thing you might want to do first – before you get to the “here’s an interesting HR I found; do you guys think we should implement it?” – is to take a step back and to have your group discuss what it would like to accomplish with its modifications. If you can all agree on some basic objective, this will give you a solid basis from which to evaluate specific HR idea.
One way to do this in practical terms is to look at the OOB game’s most basic elements (things like victory conditions, for example) and to put them into one of three categories: things that you definitely want to keep as they are (because changing them would make the game too different for your taste), things that you definitely want to change (because you feel they’re fundamentally flawed), and a middle category of things that you’re open to perhaps changing. Start by trying to agree on the first two categories, since by definition they have the most potential for people to get hung up on them; once they’re nailed down, the middle category will be easy by comparison.
CWO thanks. As I said before you write it better.
@CWO:
keep in mind that “broad acceptance within the A&A community” isn’t necessarily the criterion for assessing if a modification is successful; in practical terms, the real criterion is whether it’s acceptable to your gaming group.
Im glad you brought this up, as my friends and I are constantly debating things like this. We will be implementing some of the rules I run across on the forum for test runs, and see if we like them, however we are not ones to deviate too much from the OOB rules. We are currently trying to work on the R&D to see if we can modify it in a way that is even and not at chance. I see alot of these on different AA members YouTube channels as well as here on the forum, I just can’t seem to agree with most of them.
That is the beauty part of the community. What works with one group, might not work on another group.
The cool thing is, you can pick and choose what works for your group.
You can choose some house rules, or none at all.
Cheers!
John
@CWO:
keep in mind that “broad acceptance within the A&A community” isn’t necessarily the criterion for assessing if a modification is successful; in practical terms, the real criterion is whether it’s acceptable to your gaming group.
Im glad you brought this up, as my friends and I are constantly debating things like this. We will be implementing some of the rules I run across on the forum for test runs, and see if we like them, however we are not ones to deviate too much from the OOB rules. We are currently trying to work on the R&D to see if we can modify it in a way that is even and not at chance. I see alot of these on different AA members YouTube channels as well as here on the forum, I just can’t seem to agree with most of them.
That is the beauty part of the community. What works with one group, might not work on another group.
The cool thing is, you can pick and choose what works for your group.
You can choose some house rules, or none at all.
Cheers!
John
Agree.
In my group of G39 game that we play all the time has half the guys are open to a added thing or 2 and other half of guys don’t want nothing added to game ever. It’s like trying to pull teeth. That’s fine with me and we don’t make any changes to game because it would be best to leave alone.
But I also have a G40 game that I play and the other half of guys that play 39 don’t mind changes in 40 game and they like to play it. Spices things up for everybody.
Plus it pleases the whole group.
You can look at my game reports in Global war thread. I use Deathshead map 40 map
My two cents would be, do whatever you think will make it the most fun for you. Mr. Harris himself has encouraged house rules.
