Pre-Ordering

+1 for Cairo and an odd number of victory cities. Cairo is a shorthand for that game-swinging Africa money anyways-- by which I mean that the controller of Cairo likely has (or will soon have) control of the rest of Africa as well and would therefore be in good standing for the “IPC Income” tiebreaker if Cairo was not a victory city.

@Mondueo
https://www.mediafire.com/file/rj83ja8gidbrscu/AA_Anniversary_clean_ITA.png/file
This is a “cleaned up” file from Tojak on this thread

@DoManMacgee said in Gen Con 2025 - AAR:

I wouldn’t say my “playing without a partner” was necessarily a mistake. I tried convincing any relevant A&A player in my life to partner with me. It just didn’t work out (and I didn’t want to miss the event outright). That being said I will continue to advocate that 1v1 should the official format for tournament play, even if I am in the minority. Most of the teams I played against were basically “the main player” and “the advisor who catches mistakes” anyway, in my opinion.

Yes, you did say in your initial post that you tried to get a partner for the tournament. I chose my words poorly. I should not have said “mistake”, I just meant it was one of many factors that put a hard road in front of you. My main intent was to call this out to anyone who is considering playing in future tournaments that playing alone is harder than you might guess. I don’t think I would get out of the first game if I’d tried it.

I can relate to that for other games, but I spent about 7 months prepping for this specific tournament format and have been playing semi-actively since 2008 (although I have never bothered with this one in Online Leagues, so my level of play isn’t as high as something like Revised for 42SE. Online Format Vs. F2F format are basically completely different games anyway, so that sort of experience wouldn’t necessarily help beyond a firmer grasp on the openings).

I can relate too! We didn’t quite spend 7 months prepping, but we did spend several months testing ideas when we could. Anyone considering a tournament run should, particularly if you have not played tournament rules. Where we erred was in using the first day and half of GenCon to do some intensive training/prep when we should have been resting up instead.

Yup. At least the Gen Con food is pretty good as far as convention hall stuff goes (I’ve played TCGs for most of my life, so I’ve had way worse).

Agreed. The food is good, my only complaint is the place is so huge, and with so many participants, getting to your favorite food stand during a short break can make you even more tired.

The 9-hour car ride on top of everything else was something I forgot to mention on my end. I’d like to imagine the lack of sleep affects everyone (mostly) equally though.

Yeah, that one I forgot too. I’m from philly, so again I feel you on that one!

Yeah. In my case I think physical conditioning is also a big factor. I should not have been skipping gym days in the month before the tournament for sure. That sort of thing was never a problem for me in the past but I just do not have as much natural stamina as I did in my teens/20s. Part of getting older I guess.

Yes, physical conditioning is another really important aspect for anyone thinking of going. Its easy to see a strategy game as a purely mental exercise, but if your physical stamina is lacking, it will absolutely affect your clarity of thought.

Anyway, thanks for the comment! Sorry that you were also not able to win it all. I can’t make it to the Dayton tournament later this year (just not in the cards money/time-investment wise, as November is crunch time for both my job and wallet due to Christmas), but will hope to come to more events next year.

Thank you for the post! Sorry for the long delay in response, I’ve been out of town.

I will be going to Battlefront, and I’m sorry to hear I won’t see you there, but I certainly hope to run into you at a future tournament. Until then, good luck to you!

In fact for the moment we still love the AA42 2d Edition for many reasons like the interception rules that is officially this way :

Both the attacking bombers and fighter escorts, if any, fire with an attack value of 1.
For each “1” rolled, a defending interceptor is immediately removed as a casualty. The surviving defending interceptors then fire with a defense value of 2.
For each result of “2” or less, the attacker chooses a casualty and removes it.
After the air battle is complete, or if there were no defending fighter interceptors, surviving fighter escorts are considered to be
retreated. They don’t participate in the actual bombing raid, are not subject to antiaircraft fire, and will remain in the territory
until the Noncombat Move phase. Any surviving attacking bombers carry out the bombing raid as described above.

Plus we ask the defending factory to pay directly in IPCs the bombing (max twice the value of the territory) like in the old versions!

Fast & Fun!

@Panther Thanks for the speedy answer… feels like a strategy that might make me unpopular but if it’s legitimate then I suppose it’s fair game.

@andrewaagamer
Ah. I hadn’t understood that subtlety. It’s a bit like assuming that, as an attacker, I’m going to win - so, retreat isn’t an option. Thanks a lot for your help.