Mr Anderson…sorry, Imperious Leader: if YOU actually review the thread (and those elsewhere on this subject) I think you’ll find that, while I sometimes try to do so humorously, I do always make valid points and ask relevant questions. Yes, I am a stickler for historical accuracy but only because for me this enhances the gameplaying experience.
You sometimes give the impression that you’d rather play A&A on a life-sized picture of Tera Patrick than an accurate and well researched map of the world. While this idea may have some merit, it’s hardly something we can discuss intelligently on these forums.
I know you feel some duty to defend your friend Jeff from my criticisms, but I’ve recently read on another forum your own comment that games are rarely played with OOTB rules by experienced players and groups. Yet becasue you had some input into The War Game you go balistic when anyone suggests that it could be improved upon. We all have our own priorities as to how we like to customise games; for me this is always going to focus on the map. I’ve been studying and drawing maps and boards for many, many years and like to think that I know pretty much where maps can go wrong. What really, really bugs me about Axis and Allies is that so many people keep repeating the same errors over and over again because they can’t seem able to get over the official maps being some sort of sacred text which cannot be altered, e.g. the unhistorical and nonesensical insistence on tearing the Sinai penninsular away from Egypt and placing it in Trans-Jordan. Sinai was never in Trans-Jordan, so making access to Suez dependant on control of T-J is just plain wrong. So why do so many people drive me nuts by doing it?