Looking for a game

Yes i really miss all of the unique  rules these older games had to offer. Like the j1 kill everything rules, or the allies paying for oil rule in europe. Convoying was wayyy beter in these games, but the problem i have with it is that its not an attack. Maybe we should have the ships roll dice and whenever they hit, the other player loses money, ON THE TURN OF THE AGGRESOR! The problem i have is that by the time its the enemies turn, they have destroyed  you fleet that was blockading you convoy. Having it be an attack would fix so many issues when it comes to convoying.

eBay.ca sucks.

I have played quite a few games of the original A&A, but not as many as I’d like to have played. Not sure if my game is some type of 2nd edition as it’s not nearby. I’ve only recently played Pacific, on my third game all against the same guy who had never played before. He did Japan first and it was over early. I did Japan and won, but there were touchy moments. I’m about to lose as the Allies after making a bad choice. So far I see some decent possibilities for variation in games. Just as in the original version I think that if a few critical battles and/or just different losses go one way or another then the actions by both sides often are forced to change. The reason I like A&A so much is the variation in what happens, so different from Risk which I’ve played tonnes of growing up, but not overly complex that a novice can’t have a good go at it and fun the first game. In all the games of original A&A I’ve played while there has been the natural similarities one gets with playing on the same board with the same victory conditions, I can honestly say I’ve never played a game that was the same as another. Always something different happened to make that game a little special. I hope Pacific works out that way, and I can see that happening, especially with more than one enemy player. So far I’m enjoying it.

I’m a newbie of AAP but I’ve played a few games (just a few) of AA original.

I know that players of AA original usually plays RR (Russia Restricted) in order to make the game more balanced.

How about AAP? Is there any similar measure?

I’ve visited the FAQ for AAP in AvalonHill’s offical site:
http://www.avalonhill.com/default.asp?x=faq/axispacific

Do the majority of players here play the modified setup mentioned in that FAQ?

Thanks :)

Hey,if you like the trays that are all sorted out,that’s fine. :) I personaly use and like the black tray that comes with the game because it helps save space on your table.

ENDGAME

Once victory is achieved on a board, there is no more combat movement or resolve combat on that board. The victor keeps control and remains getting IPC’s for all territories gained. He also regains control for territories he owned at the beginning OF THE GAME. Also you may now non combat move into enemy owned territories and sea zones leaving mixed forces, for example if Japan won the Pacific game a American battleship and Japanese battleship may share a sea zone and do not ever resolve combat. You cannot non-combat move onto an enemy capital after a game is completed for that board. Example, Japan cannot drop of troops on United States or New South Wales. However if you took the enemy capital to win the game you keep control of it and the original owner and his allies may not non-combat move into it.

yeah, i wish somebody could ban him or something

Ha, as it is, I don’t own A&A: P either!