AA50-41 Tech Tourney sign-up (sign-ups CLOSED)

@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! :-)

Thanks for sharing the info on the Bob Semple tank, that was a fun little piece of trivia to learn about!  I guess it was an attempt to beat plowshares into swords… :-D

Sounds like they’d have been better off trying to convert some kind of car or light truck into an armored car, though, as tractors just aren’t geared right to make into tanks…

As to the Brits & ANZACs and their Matilda’s: I guess it’s kind of nice to get them a different model for variety/ visual appeal, but the fact remains that the Matilda is really a decisive step down in quality vs. the Sherman… and the Brits actually used more Shermans than any other tank.  I’d have been much happier if they’d chosen the Cromwell; it was at least not outclassed by the Sherman (not to mention nearly every German tank…)

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-)

@hakan:

I have changed my mind. I also think the NO’s are brilliant! Not only because they make the strategies look more like in the real war, but also (don’t bark at me Krieghund) because you can balance the game yourself, or to simulate for example the “Sino-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact”, just by adding a few lines in the NO. Much better then to add complicated Optional Rules.

I have nothing against house rules, per se.  I use them myself.  I just think that some people are too quick to implement house rules to address perceived imbalances in games, before enough games have been played to determine whether there actually is a balance issue.

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

We found the ultimate gamebreaking tech when we played yesterday. My team-mate and I were in the lead with the Axis, and everything was going smooth. Germany had two bombers in Germany and UK only had two bombers and a few inf. in UK. The German player rolled the paratrooper tech  :-D

5 seconds later both bombers was shot down by AA-gun fire and we lost the combat, turning the tide of the battle and after 3-4 more rounds we lost…

Flying Tiger is correct.  Sorry if my original post was unclear.  :oops: I’ll try again.

You place an existing fighter on a new carrier by moving the fighter in either combat or noncombat movement, whichever applies, into the sea zone where the new carrier will be mobilized.  Air units don’t actually “land” until the end of the Mobilize New Units phase, though they must be in the space in which they will land by the end of noncombat movement.  The active player may only move pieces from one space to another during the combat movement and noncombat movement phases.

In Classic A&A, you can’t place fighters (new or existing) on new carriers at all.  In Revised, you can place existing fighters on a new carrier in the way you described in your original post.  In LHTR, it works the same way as it does in AA50.

@timerover51:

@Krieghund:

Chinese units can’t leave China.  However, they may enter Hong Kong.

Since in many respects, China is played closer to the historic reality, I am not sure that I would agree with that.  In 1944, Chinese units were moved into Northern Burma as part of the Allied offensive to clear Northern Burma and get the Ledo Road into operation.  You also had Merrill’s Marauders in operation there as well.  Once the Northern Burma area had been cleared, the British-Indian forces proceeded to clear the rest of Burma, using a fair number of tanks units in the process once they got clear of the mountainous terrain.  This is one area where it would be nice to have some terrain effects, as the Assam-Northern Burma area and the Assam-Burma border is some of the worst terrain in the world to fight in or try to conduct military operations through.  It is not totally impassable, like the Sahara Desert or Himalayan Mountains, just very close to it.

Please recall that the game rules are probably to facilitate game play moreso than to ignore the historical reality of what happened.  Maybe you can incorporate a house rule that says something like ‘after round 10, the chinese units are no longer restricted to China’

Substitute whatever round you want, I just chose 10 for an example.