Posts made by Admiral_Thrawn

No problem with the input! It might be best if you talk of Canadian house rule here though. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=23641.0

I like a lot of these ideas, yet I think it might be best if the game was not changed so much in a “canadian variant” Like so:

Canada would be played like UK Pacific in the Global game as in it is played on the same turn as the UK but is it’s separate economy of 7 IPC that must be spent at the Canadian IC.

Canadian NO

3 IPC if all Canadian territories are unconquered and London has not fallen.

2 IPC if there are no German subs on Europe board except sea zone 113-115

A one time 5 IPC bonus if Canada captures or liberates a European territory and holds it for at least one round.

I’m wondering if this will leave UK too open to Sea Lion with less IPC at hand. It will have to be playtested to see. I will soon and of course this would be best if you used historicalboardgaming.com’s canadian units and control markers. :) I’m ordering them now and will be using them to play at the end of the month.

Finland could not be a separate nation, but Finland could get it’s own 4 infantry when it joins the Axis though for the fun of it and use painted historicalboardgaming.com units. Canada could be done. With 7 IPC and a NO or two Canada could be on par with ANZAC. I mean to argue that Canada couldn’t be it’s only player and ANZAC could be is kinda weird. Yes, ANZAC makes more sense because of the distance, but it could of easily been just part of the UK in the global game if you wanted things to be simple. I don’t think it’s neccessary(neither is ANZAC), yet it could be fun for house rules.

@Brain:

@Admiral_Thrawn:

Love the game but, I think the rules are poorly written. Can’t wait for the FAQ.

Oh great, cardboard pieces, misspelled words on box and rules, and now poorly written rules. And this was supposed to be a deluxe game.

Don’t get me wrong. I thing the new rules for this game are great. They are just poorly explained in the manual. It leaves too many questions and scenerios unanswered and is vague about certain situations. The FAQ should resolve this soon. Really the only new rules I don’t like is the whole political situation of a 1940 game. All this could be bypassed if it would just be a Dec. 41’ scenerio.

As the attacker you choose which facility you want to bomb.

Does Japan have way too much air power? I haven’t played yet, but I have never seen so much airpower for a setup in A&A before. They have way more airpower then everyone else combined.

Love the game but, I think the rules are poorly written. Can’t wait for the FAQ.

@Stoney229:

@WILD:

Couple things I noticed with the set up.

How many empty air strips the US has that are at Japans disposal. You have Guam, Midway, and Wake all start undefended. Also that the Philippines has no AB or NB.

Then Japan basically gets a free port at Kwangtung. Malaya comes with a port, and the UK will most likely be forced to back down if Japan heads that way early.

Ceylon (island off Indian coast) could be a good place for an AB to help protect the UK fleet in sz 39.

I also used all the Japanese tac bmrs that came with it, and some are chipped.

one thing i notice is that it’s one move from japan to canada again (with NB in Japan).

That stinks that there aren’t enough Tac bombers.  maybe they’ll put some more jap tac bombers in AAE40 for promo :roll: :wink:

The lack of Tac Bombers is the biggest weakness of the game. You only get 6? Japan starts off with so many more. Say you wanted to move your tac bombers to all separate places. There is no way to do it. When you are splitting up your attacks there is know way to probably represent this in certain situations.

Larry said something to the point that the US would be strongly encouraged to have a fleet at Pearl? I don’t see it. Why wouldn’t you just pull back and build. I think you lose too much of the histroical flavor with the 1940 start of the game. For me I want to destroy the US fleet at Pearl and try to conquer the rest in time before the US regroups and destroys Japan. You know like WWII.

Thats a good idea. Why couldn’t fighters in India scramble to defend Burma and then move one space back to India in noncombat? If you can move one space to the sea to defend you should be able to do so on land. I will try that in one of my games as well as you have to have an airfield to land fighters on islands.

Has anyone considered changing the airfields with house rules? I love the idea of airfields in the game. The scrambling is a great idea based off CAP from AAP41. The new rules are improved though. The extra movement point with the new rules doesn’t seem to be much of an advantage. Adding one movement point doesn’t help much because you really need two movement points to make it usually worthwhile. Whats the point of moving 5 spaces most of the time? You need to land some where and you need 6 to go further. I also don’t really like the old airfields from AAP41 because they made the fighters move too far across the Pacific. I think a good house rule would be that you need a airfield to land on an island at all. That way strat bombing would really mean something. You damaged their airfield and they can’t take off until they fix it. Now, you would be able to land on the continents(Asia including Japan, North America, Australia) without one but, then it would give you a bonus move (5, or 7) for the advanced airfields in more industrial areas then some jungle island. I think the cost would have to change too. 15 is too high if you needed them to land planes. Maybe 6IPC? Still can damage them up to six and inoperable at 3 damage. I think this would add to the historical flavor of the game by capturing islands to build airbases on them.

What would be good house rules for U.S. Marines like from the original AAP? The same?

U.S. MARINES
Movement: 1
Attack Factor: 1 or 2
Defense Factor: 2
Cost: 4 IPCs (USA only)
Description
Only the United States has Marine units, these
are the dark green infantry pieces. Marines normally
attack just like infantry units (with a roll of
1). However, they are more effective in
Amphibious Assaults, as explained below:
• A Marine unit attacking in an Amphibious
Assault scores a hit on a roll of 2 or less. A
Marine unit that enters combat by moving
from one land territory to another land territory
may still attack with a roll of 2 or less as
long as at least one friendly unit attacks from
a sea zone making the battle an Amphibious
Assault.
• For each artillery unit attacking the same territory
one Marine unit may attack with a roll
of 2 or less.
• For each artillery unit attacking the same territory
in an Amphibious Assault that is not
paired with an infantry unit, one Marine unit
may attack with a roll of 3 or less.

Should this be modified to make them a viable unit you may want to buy sometimes?

Got mine this afternoon at my local comic/gaming store. I could have got it offline for cheaper but, I like to support my local people. $90 there.

I think for sure Mech Infantry will be more useful in AAE40. How much more, time will tell.

Is the United States considered nuetral until attacked or declares war? Can the U.S. move it’s land units and airpower to territories controlled by the U.K.? They can’t go to Dutch territories so I assume they can’t go to U.K. territories?

Just got the game today. Very cool. I’m not really complaining but, does anyone else wish the game started Dec. 7th ‘41? Or had a 40’ and 41’ scenerio? It seems it would keep it simple for one thing. Not a lot of new rules about when how you go to war. The game is about war. Just cut out the first 3 rounds of the game and get to it. The games are long enough. I feel you lose historical flavor as well without the sneak attack of the Japanese. The surprise attacks was the main reason the Japanese had a silver of a chance in WWII. There whole philosophy was based around it. In the original AAP this was captured nicely with the defend on 1 rule for the surprise attack. Now we have this artifical the U.S. and U.K. just automatically go to war if not attacked. Just like the real war in AAP 41’ you wanted revenge for those easy attacks.

This game will be amazing! The only thing I see that could be better is that I like the artwork for the Original AAP better. The AAE art style is the best in my opinion. I’m not that keen on this new style. It’s definitely better than AAR though.

Altertag wrote that the american fighter and british battleship are new sculpts. They look exactly the same to me. I have all the A&A games and I would of got this one for great new sculpts alone but, I don’t know if I need this one.

I voted for AAE &AAP combo. Theses games need to be revised and be able to combine. Thats the ultimate A&A game. Also an A&A Med or A&A North Africa would be amazing.

I am going to try to use the Chinese setup of 42’ in 41’ next time I play. The Jap forces in mainland China are almost identical in both scenerios so if it’s “balanced” in 42’ it should be in 41’.