First After Action Report of AA50!!

@sensenschwarm thank you.Reprint.jpg

this rule was expanded in the reprint of anniversary edition - but not in the PDF Rulebook on axisandallies.com, and not in the FAQ/Errata, and in my physical copy of the original AA50, it is the version which I had quoted above.

The issue is resolved! Thanks alot! :-)

We have 2 spots open for this coming Sunday in CT.  PM me if interested.

Thanks,
Brian

This has been sold. Thanks jrchase.

After further consideration I no longer feel the fighter escort/interceptor rule needs any fine tuning. In my previous posts I expressed the view that the rule nerfed strategic bombing too much but I’ve since changed my mind. After all, bombing raids over inland German targets without escorts was near suicidal, especially during the daylight. It wasn’t until the Allies had deployed long range escort fighters and had outnumbered the defending Luftwaffe aircraft, that the Allies were able to conduct bombing missions without terrible loses. The same is true with the fighter escort/interceptor rule as it stands now and it should stay that way.

I have found it’s still very difficult for Germany to survive if Russia, Britain and USA team up.

The primary reason for this is the difficulty in sustaining a German navy.  Even at 6 IPC each, subs are expensive when you need to buy tanks and fighters every round.

That being said, I won my first game playing the Axis.  I was aided by my opponent’s poor play as he ignored Japan.  My Japanese units conquered Western USA, Central USA, Mexico, Western and Eastern Canada and it was over.

@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.

The most logic and reasonable endgame terms is common sense… you know if (almost certainly) you can’t win, at least experienced players usually does, and probably most AA50 players will already be familiar with AAR or other AA versions.

I am beginning to wonder if the Heavy Bomber rule that has some people bent so out of shape is in there to compensate for the large boost that attaining National Objectives gives the Axis.  As a guess, it is going to be easier for the Axis to attain their objectives, and more productive to them than for the Allies to attain their objectives, which do not appear to give them anywhere the same boost.