50th Anniversary Map Wraparound

@squirecam said in Anniversary Errata Optional Rule: Escorts and Interceptors:

@the_good_captain said in Anniversary Errata Optional Rule: Escorts and Interceptors:

@cernel I played three games against forum members that made a point to do this as Germany while I was the allies. After the final repetition and significant impact from the aforementioned, I had to insist on Escorts and Interceptors.

I consider it less significant than the USA bomber strategy but I’m confident enough to make it an axiom of my own axis strategy …and share it in a video, obviously.

The escort and interceptor rule is required for a fair game IMHO. Moreover, no bombing strategy succeeded in eliminating a country’s ability to build tanks and weapons during ww2, and certainly not without getting through fighter screens first.

This answered my question krieghund.

I’m axis allies’s foreign fan. And I bought axis allies anniversary 50. But, when I unbox, the inside boxes are a little breakage. So I want to repair them!

Is there axis allies anniversary 50 box(inside) art pdf file?

I had planned on making it to Gen Con this year but I wasn’t able to get the time off work on the relatively short notice. Definitely going to try making it to Origins/Gencon next year though. I live on the US East Coast so the CA Tournaments, Young Grasshopper’s Tournaments, etc. are probably out of the question though, just as a logistics thing.

@Imperious-Leader Maybe you went this way since the original design does archetypally the same, but how about, in the land-to-land borders, colourizing the borders of the borders, while leaving the inside of the borders light grey?
This way, you could properly define the colours for the borders between territories with different ownerships (for example, having the border between Poland and East Poland grey on the west and red on the east).

The Soviet symbol in the turn order is different from the ones inside the territories.

The Azores are sometimes neutral and sometimes American (also probably it would make more sense as British than Americans, but debatable and pointless).

In the “AA50 Suplreme Edition” there are no territories for Azores and Malta, but only the roundels?

@SS:

Ok then. Axis player what is the best way to play it , with or without tech and NO’s?

I would preface this with my opinions about these options.

National Objectives

Usually these are more often lost and hard to (re-)obtain for the allies.  The axis are usually advancing and can more easily achieve their national objectives, with the exception of Italy, whom the allies can deny the Italian NOs more easily.

Advantage with National Objectives:  to the Axis

Weapons Development

sidebar
I am not a big fan of the randomness that is built into the achieving of technologies.  Plus the techs are not even in their strengths:  Super Subs for Russia?  practically worthless

But if you play with tech, I think that favors the Axis.  Why?  Most techs are offensive in nature, which is the Axis main strategy/strength, especially early.  It would be nice if Jet Fighters were still a ‘5’ on defense instead of a 4 on offense (no longer a defensive tech).  Similiarly, advanced art could be a defensive aid as well (inf defense to a ‘3’).

Advantage with Weapons Development:  to the Axis

Again, merely my opinion, but with the reason(s) I why I believe so.

Well yes. If you get an account with mediafire, you wont get that. Everyone should have at least a dropbox account and probably Mediafire

@Hobbes:

There are a few interesting differences from the map pictures:

Japan is now surrounded by a single SZ, instead of the 2 in Revised. This allows for US bombers to attack any ships there and land on that new Russian territory adjacent to SFE and Bur. Japan has a lot of hard choices to make: to take out the 7 inf Russian stack on Buryatia (after moves on R1) or to prevent Manchuria from falling to the Russians; to take Borneo/E. Indies/Phillipines; to hit Pearl; plus Burma/HK/China Egypt is tougher to crack for G1: running a calc gives G 73% odds of conquering it, where before 2 inf 2 arm 1 bmr gave it 95% odds. The Italians seem to have 2 choices: either reinforce Egypt or try to retake it in the case of a UK counterattack, or do the same for the Ukraine. Which would open the way for a German tank rush on Caucasus…i guess that’s why there’s no German INF on Austria, otherwise they could be moved to Rom/Bulg and the G transport on the Med could be used to lift INF for that attack on the Caucasus. G has the option of making an attack on Kar on G1 using the Finnish INF and the transport, plus all of the Luftwaffe, but the AA makes it risky. It can really pay off though because it secures the Baltic countries from any Russian counterattack.

The single seazone around Japan deters even more invading Russia and trying to achieve its historical objectives.