@Brain:
Nice work!
+1 to you.
Would you please change ‘bomber’ to ‘tach bomber’ or ‘tactical bomber’ in the #3 zone?
That might clutter it up and I think the icon speaks for itself. IMHO of course.
Maybe if the Tac Bomber looked like the allies Tach bomber with 2 engines, the icon would be fine…but the Tac Bomber icon and the Fighter icon look similar to me.
Nice work!
+1 to you.
Would you please change ‘bomber’ to ‘tach bomber’ or ‘tactical bomber’ in the #3 zone?
Malaya is a peninsula!, and thus not an island.
Go ahead and put your major or minor IC on it.
….then another 4 turns for the first one to reach the philippines…
Ships might be able to move more than 2 spaces, (maybe from friendly port to friendly port :?).
AA has come a long way from the infantry push mechanics by Don Rae (although his papers on deadzone management did wonders for my game) to now. One of the joys of this forum is learning and interacting with others. I would have to say that most people on this site like to learn and contribute to the growth of the game.
Very good points brought out.
+1 to you.
I have been doing it by hand for years.
Your sheet is a much better layout! :-)
It is nice to see the money curve as the game goes on in a F2F game. (and who spent what on what and when)
+1 for you
This game is a new puzzle to figure out!
Since it’s release, many claims have been made that the game is flawed.
With more play, people are trying new strategies and leaving behind the old thinking (i.e. Industrial Complex in India on UK 1) and learning new ways to use the new layout of pieces/techs/National Objectives.
Now, many have found the depth this game has to offer, without the same old play out every time.
Play more and enjoy solving the puzzle. :-)
A few people have already mentioned this fact and they are absolutely right: AA42 is not for us. It was not designed with anyone in the AA community in mind.
Well written article!
+1 for you. :-)
They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules. The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.
You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway. As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan. This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.
+1 for Krieghund
I’m glad the paper ‘money’ is gone.
My AA50 ‘money’ is still in the plastic.
It would be nice if the rulebook gave a player some suggestions how to keep tract of IPC’s.
I am bothered about the small board and waste of resources on a Russian battleship.
Do people even use the production chart in other AA games?
Too easy for mistakes, I always count up a nation’s income each time anyway.
@Joe:
…that in ftf we could maybe even finish in less then, what, say 6 hours? That will really help my friends and I to keep our wives off our backs…
So true.
Frood, thank you for the AACalc(s) that you have made. :-)
They have been a big help over the years. :-D
@WILD:
If you are going to use paratroopers effectively more then one is preferred.
**I agree that imp fact tech is great for Russia and that kinda proves my point. She would roll trying to get that tech because its in the ground chart. If radar was in the ground chart it would have 2x the chance of defending against SBR.
Well said. (+1 for you)
@WILD:
**I read on another post (sorry don’t remember where) something similar. That person was talking about a house rule to switch paratroopers w/radar. Both tech’s would deal w/air units on a ground chart but at least Russia would have a better use for radar. As it stands Russia would most likely never get radar because normally she wouldn’t roll the 2nd chart.
find it here
http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1800
I have not used it as a house rule yet, but that might be worth a try.
I feel that the Paratroopers Tech should be on the Air/Naval chart, because it takes owning (many) aircraft to use them.
What taste better, an apple or an orange?
Depends on the person.
Like Cmdr Jennifer said:
@Cmdr:
The destroyer in my mind is the submarine of old with the ability to defend itself against air attack in place of the sneak shot ability.
In my mind, the submarine is the new piece on the board. Here’s a cheap unit you can toss out for naval attacks and it helps keep your opponent honest.
The sub is a new type of unit, which acts differently than in any other A&A games.
Sure, there are some things we miss about it - but now subs can move about without getting hit by aircraft!
This is awesome! :-D
A side note: sub stalling is not a problem any more. (A&A Pacific)
Think of subs as a different unit, with new strategies to come up with.
Think of subs as an attackers unit. :-)
One example, after the US fleet has moved away from sz56 (West coast), subs can be mobilized in sz56 and catch up with the main fleet with out needing AC/ftr protection from Japan’s aircraft.
The purpose of the Russian sub is to sink Italy’s attacking 1DD on round 5 (and laugh at the ftr) and sink Japan’s 1AC and 4trn on round 6 (and laugh at 2ftrs)! :-o
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=14545.225
reply #225 , #226
@Cmdr:
I actually like war bonds. It’s like Anti-Rockets technology.
Improved Shipyards seems to be the most worthless for a few reasons:
You generally get it after you have built the main portion of your fleet (and sometimes after you are done building fleet entirely.)
We’re reducing the price of expensive pieces by 1 IPC. Not a huge boon if you ask me. “Yay! You sunk my 19 IPC battleship and I sunk your 20 IPC battleship! I’m going to win now!” Sorry, just cannot ever see that conversation taking place, like, ever!
I agree with point #1, somewhat.
But for point #2, the savings are 3ipc for BB and AC! :-) 2ipc for CA.
(1IPC for the 3 cheap vessels.)
@Emperor:
I’d like to go on record as favoring a revison to this rule. Include the 2IPC territories, the way it stands most of the strategic locations are left out (Egypt, SAF, Australia, Karellia, FIC\Burma). I hope you guys will revist this.
Nicely said, Emperor Mollari.
I too, would like to see 1 additional build for these small territories.
On my screen, it is even.
On your quote it is not.
I don’t know why.??? :?
AA50 is still being hotly debated as to axis vs. allied balance.
More play testing is needed from the Out Of Box (OOB) rules and the Optional Rules to see the direction this game is going in terms of balance.
Cousin Joe (original AARe brain) has started some threads, but it is too early yet for Enhanced AA50.
Outside of that, Put them in the microwave with the 1 or the 6 at the bottom for 3 min, that should round the edges out :P and you should stop rolling 5’s :D And probably 2, 3, and 4 as well ;)
Excellent tip, +1 karma for the laugh. :-D :-D :-D
Another thing I have used, take a few digital photos of it.