AA50 Rules Errata and Q+A

@bigfatal

Yes and no. The UK has a lot of earning potential, but a lot of it is vulnerable to attack or capture, making UK very “swingy”. If things are go well for the allies, UK will be pretty wealthy, if it goes badly UK can end up being very cash strapped indeed. Playing with national objectives (which is the way I prefer to play) will amplify this even further as the UK is the easiest ally for the Axis to prevent earning any bonuses.

Meanwhile the US has a huge does of IPCs that are rarely touched by the axis, even when things go badly for the allies, and is also the only nation with 20 ipcs of objective bonuses available, so the US is still very much the big spender of the game.

As to what’s in it for the US in the pacific: Its less about increasing US earnings and more about limiting Japan’s. Left unchallenged Japan can reach stratospheric income, bringing the UK economy to its knees as they drive to Moscow.

There are also two pacific based objectives for the US, so that adds 10 potential ipcs of direct incentive, plus the chance to pick up one more for the UK and prevent Japan from earning any, which stacks up to enough money to justify a US fleet investment.

I find allied players that are good with a slow push play style do well fighting it out in the pacific, but those that are better at a quick kill/knockout blow style will have more success trying to kill Germany before Japan gets too big. I also find a pacific allied strat is more likely to work in the 1942 set up than it does in 1941. (Part of the reason I like that set up better)

Without objectives it may be better for the allies to just fight a delaying action in the pacific and focus on Germany, but I have not played that way enough to say for sure.

To put it another way, the restriction applies only to placing (mobilizing) new units. It does not apply to moving existing units.

@MidnightExpress:

I just saw two AA50 auctions on ebay sell for $185.02 and $201 plus shipping so it’s not an unattainable game.

Yeah…but did you notice that it was the same person that won each of those items?

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=231322439104&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2765
http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=251630644174&_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2765

k***y must have really wanted two copies @ a total cost of $410.32 (shipping included), or maybe they were just shill bids?  Who knows…but it was those two auctions that directly led me to simply purchase some HBG and FMG Italian units and augment my 1942.2 game  :-P

I guess by the responses I have read it is unanimous, Italy is better as a seperate entity mainly due to the added possibilities that it creates and the overall strategy changes it allows from both sides.
The other thing I really do like is that with 6 countries it is axis then allies turns rotated so as to not have two allied turns back to back. It is harder to double team that way.
Thank you every one for your thoughts. 8-)

Keep in mind however, subs alone always reserve the right to submerge before even the Attacker rolls his dice. so essentially, without a destroyer, you can NEVER attack subs unless your opponent allows you.

Here’s a list of the rules that have changed: http://harrisgamedesign.com/pdf/Anniversary_Rules_Changes.pdf

Here’s an article on new rules: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/bb2/viewtopic.php?t=1682

There is a thread in the Find Players and Game Discussion section for people looking for AA50 games.

@Bardoly:

@Rakeman:

@Bardoly:

Thank you Krieghund for your answer.  The Fact Sheet was very unclear about this.
With this, I have to agree with Funcioneta that this can be quite detrimental to the smaller ICs, but at least Germany can never be SBR’d in 1 round for all of its $ now.

Couldn’t in LHTR either.

In LHTR, in order to do 20 damage to Germany, USA and UK would each have to dedicated 10 IPC worth of bomber damage.  In this game, USA or UK needs to dedicate that much.  Big difference.  USA sitting back shipping bombers off while UK invades Northwestern Europe should be a viable strategy.  We’ll see.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.  This rule change seems to be more fair, and especially if Germany gets Radar and/or the IC repair tech, then that really limits the effectiveness of the SBRs.

I disagree, nerfing a broken mechanic is a good thing IMO.  I don’t know about other players, but if I was Germany and only producing 5-7 units a turn, I’d be wondering how long it would take for Russia to run me down.  It is nice that damage doesn’t HAVE to be repaired completely, but most likely, it often will be, or at least enough to hurt badly.