Axis & Allies .org Forums
    • Home
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Register
    • Login
    1. Home
    2. Black_Elk
    3. Best
    0% for April
    • Profile
    • Following 0
    • Followers 5
    • Topics 100
    • Posts 2,096
    • Best 184
    • Controversial 0
    • Groups 6

    Best posts made by Black_Elk

    • RE: Advice to Renegade! What is on your top 10 for adjustments to G40 3rd edition?

      It’s definitely a fair point. The unit bloat thing. Here’s an amusing example… shows a standard roster, then tech advances, then expansion type unit concepts I’ve seen floated. This set is generic based on Frostion’s with some additions I added, but gives a quick impression. Cause like many different graphics are required, just to handle the same unit, but in a different state of play. With physical sculpts you’d chip it or flip it, but for the digital version gives an idea of how things start to compound pretty quickly hehe.

      expanded set.png

      I think another alternative to having multiple unit types, is to have cosmetic alts, which could be used in that way, but which could also just service the regular play. This is basically what we get when they vary the sculpts (like what equipment they use for the molds) for units in the smaller boards or satellite games. Or then just a cursory look at HBG shows that there’s probably a demand for something along those lines. So basically instead of paratroopers or marines as a set unit, you just have a handful of sculpts within the infantry box that could be used for these different concepts.

      Or same deal for fighter aircraft or artillery or tanks or ship types. I don’t know, say for every dozen regular units you get a couple specialty alts of the same basic sort but a different riff. Very similar to the way they sell the plastic army men as toys. You know with a bazooka dude, and a paratrooper looking dude, an officer with a sidearm, that sort of deal. Basically a grab bag approach, in terms of what they include, but where each alt fits a certain niche that could be expanded. Or not, depending on how into that the player is lol. Since the equipment types Nation to Nation already feature pretty different looking sculpts, it’s not that big of a stretch to imagine the standard unit boxes having a few variants, but still using the same hue for their tints. Probably the expense goes up with more molds, but still, it would provide a lot of options for a look and feel vibe, without necessarily needing a ton of extra unit interactions or new rules per se.

      posted in House Rules
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      @victoryfirst if you need more boxes I can subdivide them more or change the dimensions. It’s possible to add boxes along the sides, but to do that you’d have to turn the map wrap off in the map.properties. Otherwise you would have a column of rectangles interrupting the wrap, cause they’d appear where the two sides of the board meet in North America. Reason it works at the top/bottom is cause the map wrap is horizontal, so the effect is less pronounced. Basically the boxes just repeat if a row, but if you do columns then have the map edge to deal with. It’s possible to turn the wrap off for any map in the properties if you want to lock it. In that case for the current map West Coast USA would be on the right, and East would be on the left, and to move a unit across that divide you’d have to click to the other side of the board to each, if that makes sense. I think most would probably be used to the map wrap for a global type map, whereas for the Europe or Pacific theater maps they’d be more used to the no wrap. Just depends what you’re after. Let me know and I’ll try to knock something together for you. Thanks again for finding those errors! It definitely helps to have a fresh pair of eyes. I swear I’ve been staring at the thing for weeks and weeks thinking it was dialed, but then bingo missed a connect hahah. Well hopefully closer now! :)

      Catch you next time

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Advice to Renegade! What is on your top 10 for adjustments to G40 3rd edition?

      Took me a while to realize this thread was in HR now. I guess that’s cool, anything goes here I suppose haha. Still my first big suggestion is to be consistent with what constitutes a Re-Issue/Re-Print vs a new "Edition’ (or if there is even a worthwhile distinction there) vs an entirely new game which properly should get a new Title.

      For me this boils down to whether or not the update/revision can be handled by just updating the manual (e.g. the rules, or the set up cards) vs requiring major changes to other contents inside the box.

      If the map does change (beyond cosmetics) like adding new territories and new sea zones, or adjusted connections/boundaries, that’s a new game and it should have a new name. If entirely new unit sculpts are added, that game should get a new title to reflect this, since it’s a very big change. Basically anything that breaks backwards compatibility with an already existing board, or which makes a previous release of that board obsolete.

      You know what I mean, like if all I have to do is download a pdf of the new manual with new tech rules that’s one thing, but if I’m required to have a new map and new sculpts that’s a rather different thing. If the only changes are to the rules for existing stuff, or new unit set up cards for existing stuff, or if the changes to the map are only cosmetic, (like a new look and feel, but otherwise all the same TTs/connections) then that release should be a new “Edition” of the previous game’s same name.

      Sadly these conventions have not been very consistent in the past, and so I think there is a fair bit of confusion regarding the whole ‘which edition?’ thing. This is part of the reason why I think they should drop the concept of editions for anything which should properly be considered sequels and instead give those new titles. I would look to the conventions adopted in Book publishing for guidance here. If the manual is being re-iussed, and only that, then a 2nd or 3rd edition printing under the same Name makes sense to me. If it goes much beyond that, then it should get a new Title/subtitle, or else some qualifier there like “Revised” or “Advanced” or “Anniversary” or some season/year whatever, to make that really obvious. I think anyway, but I’m pretty sure that ship has sailed already hehe.

      posted in House Rules
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      So what I did was to give you 24 boxes on the baseline, 12 at the top 12 at the bottom. I just assigned them greek letters for names so alpha is top left, omega bottom right, like the Iliad hehe. They’re about 160px tall by 925px wide so hopefully enough room to get something going. 160 was about as tall as I could manage without cutting off some of those sea zones, but should be enough to house a several units or icon graphics I’d think. I just cropped into the map rather than extending the canvas so we wouldn’t didn’t have to redo all the centers, the map is the same dimensions. I fixed all the polygons and added the centers, but the labels you’d want to move out of the way for some of the sea zones that gotten eaten at the bottom/top (I’d just raise em all like 200 px and you should be fine.) Here’s an example near the top. When you know how you want them assigned, like who owns the TT how it gets colored up and connected then we can just make a relief for that part. Currently shows the base through. Looks like this just so you can see the space relative to the units. You could put any image or graphic into the relief if there some kind of decorative organization/motif you’re after, but just figured I’d get you started with the big blocks

      :)

      902bb278-1ab2-47bc-b570-707e5189e157-image.png

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      oh also just for comparison this image is 160px tall so you can kinda figure however many per box, or doing a more horizontal orientation. Most of the units are 54 px tall so basically 2 or 3 rows.

      d98a4fde-94bb-4a48-9ee6-71aed7a6c98b-image.png
      9f0fd52d-c0b8-4582-83aa-c669e06ed640-image.png

      93c4d671-ea18-4302-a643-6300358eb3d7-image.png

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      Nice work! Just sent ya a new one with those corrections. Tried to use the lip trick so it wouldn’t jack up the place too hard. Hopefully got it dialed this time. But let me know if you find any others

      82f9a22f-a4da-4d59-a5c7-b95d1f5de7e4-image.png

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      @victoryfirst good eye! I’ll fix em up when I get home

      Pacific underwent quite a few adjustments on the other map before morphing into G40, so wouldn’t surprise me that the blocking had some stuff going the drift. Should be a quick fix for those, since sz stuff is a bit quicker to change on the relief. I’ll shoot you something tonight in a few hours

      :)

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      OK I sent the basic UHD with correction to your email.

      Looks like this now…

      6c6962c8-3622-4307-b576-d7df077ad730-image.png

      This correction requires adjustments to the centers.txt and the polygons.txt. To do the same with for your map with the boxes, you maybe need to run the center picker and polgyon grabber again to make sure it has the stuff you changed for the boxes. Also the sea zone numbers in the decorations for that txt. I sent all the UHD stuff to beelee.
      I would suggest updating that first, and then using those polgyons and centers files to make your updates for the Expansion stuff with the boxes.

      Here is the baseline with boxes…

      https://www.dropbox.com/s/477bfi22fl6bzo7/baseline_uhd_global_1940_boxes_5-9-23.png?dl=0

      Here is the draft relief with boxes to match…

      https://www.dropbox.com/s/vcv41futml9drf1/relief_uhd_global_1940_boxes_basic_5-9-23.png?dl=0

      For the inside of the boxes you just let me need to know what kind of look you want, whether you want specific graphics for those areas or just the basic terrain sort of look like other colored areas of the map.

      Hope that helps, and again nice catches!
      Have fun :)

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      @barnee

      I sent a quick fix for Novosibirsk to your email. Has the updated base/polys/relief for the UHD. I just knocked out a quickie line, turned the border at the river to get the proper division. I remember when that got tweaked when we stretched the Russia TT a bit wider hehe. For Bryansk couldn’t catch what was off there, did you mean Samara? That was the border that was off that I saw. Anyhow, I think should work for now. Let me know if that does the trick

      3af518fa-eb4f-45d8-837f-de83a3cd07c3-image.png

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      @barnee Sent the fixes to your email for both maps.

      Looks like this now
      52808b41-50b9-474e-b506-bc1dd2566c3e-image.png

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Names to Faces

      @barnee

      So those are extra images that were going to be for commanders in the variant 1941 game. You could probably ditch em all from the standard package since they’re extraneous, and cause I also put those in the extra folder with map making stuff. Sorta your call there, what all to include. Like there are some extra tanks and whatnot as well. Mechanically those Commander units were going to work sorta like bombers, except also as a ground/naval unit which boosted the attack/defense of other units.

      I used each of the Generals from the Iron Blitz 1999 game, plus a few more for the pick six. I tried to avoid some of the most horrid Nazis and also tried to go with peeps who got their comeuppance and died during the war rather than being hanged afterwards, so nope, not Goring. I had them as Command 1, Command 2 etc, cause I was less interested in the named figures and more just sorta generic visualizations like for a general staff. The general idea was to avoid sus RP, by avoiding the political leadership and focusing on the military, or just choosing peeps on team Axis who would be less fraught or maybe just completely unrecognizable, which seemed somehow preferable. That was a bit of a challenge, so I’m not sure it’s entirely satisfying. Like initially I just wanted to go with a broadcast TV hogan’s heroes type thing, or just to keep all the basterds inglorious or whatever.

      For G I had Manstein, Rommel, Valentine Hube, Kesselring, Guderian, Doenitz.

      For the Soviets it was Zhukov, Konev, Vatutin, Vasilevsky, Rokossovsky, Katukov

      And I just did something like that for each of the big 6. I picked most of them for reasons of having like the right hat for the job, more than any sort of statement about who was the better random general. In Iron Blitz it was 5 star, 4 star, 3 star, but I didn’t try to follow that idea. There’s probably a rogue email or post in that thread somewhere that I had em still labelled, but yeah you could probably use whatever. I basically just cropped what I could find that had a vibe into a circle and colorized them in a couple cases where I could only find BW stuff. There are like a million of these sorts or portraits floating around, particularly in the Hearts of Iron game series, though I tried to riff off stuff that was in the wiki rather than those.

      Yeah that’s Ike and Bradley. For my thinking it’s kinda better to push it pretty Hollywood if going that direction. Like I almost just did George C. Scott for Patton and Karl Malden for Bradley, cause my aesthetic is basically technicolor flicks of the 60s and 70s.

      Or like for the dime store balsa wood flyer, pretty much this is my jam… I just think it works better generally hehe

      50-cents.png

      posted in General Discussion
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Article nomination for A&A.org home page

      edit* moved the working draft to the relevant game section. Thanks for letting me camp in the article section while I knocked it out. :-D

      http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35703.0

      Earlier…


      Hi all! YG has asked me if I might be able to provide a kind of “General Introduction and Strategy Guide for Axis and Allies 1942 Sec Edition” as an outgrowth of the things I was writing in the “Russian openings” thread linked above.

      If its cool with everyone here, I’d like to reserve this thread in the article submission section as a placeholder, so I can organize some of my ideas and outline a basic approach to the subject. Thought it might be easier to draft and expand things here first, then abridge/edit with feedback, before creating a final document. I imagine it will take me a few weeks to pull it all together, but I’m pretty enthusiastic when it comes to A&A, so hopefully it won’t take me forever.
      :-D

      Right now though, I just wanted to brainstorm a little, and highlight some of the subjects I think it might be worth addressing. This isn’t an article yet, just a way to get there eventually.

      I’ve been teaching people how to play A&A for a while now, and I have some definite ideas about various ways to introduce new players to the game, starting from the very basic and moving into the deeper strategic territory. Although there is now a “starter board” called 1941 (currently in print) that is meant to do this job for us, I think 1942 Sec Edition is sufficiently simple enough that I could teach pretty much anyone how to play A&A using this board, without requiring prior experience with Axis and Allies. I don’t think you need to have played 1941 before you jump to this one, or that you need a familiarity with the earlier A&A games to enjoy and excel at 1942 Sec Edition.

      It may be helpful for the purposes of comparison or analogy, if you’ve played a game like Risk or Chess or Monopoly before, if you are fascinated by the History of World War II, or like Maps, that’s fantastic too, but none of that is strictly necessary. All you really need is a bit of enthusiasm for the spirit of gameplay, and a little patience. If you’ve ever enjoyed playing with miniature figurines or Plastic Army Men as a child (setting them out and imagining battles!) then I can definitely teach you how to play this game.

      First I just want pause and say, I think you should go out and buy yourself a copy! Its a great way to motivate yourself to learn how to play.  :wink:

      1942 Second Edition is still available at most shops and in many toy stores that sell boardgames. Its not too expensive, and if nothing else, you get a bunch little plastic army men out of the deal! Plus a playing field included (the World) for them to move around on!

      Sure, there is a recommended age for this game, but as long they’re old enough not to choke on the pieces or wantonly destroy the cardboard map, you can play A&A with most kids. Its nice to have a bunch of toys on hand, in a tidy box somewhere in your house. You know, just in case kids descend on you haha. But even for adults, this game has solid potential as an education tool, one that promotes greater aptitudes in the social skills, as well as in geography, history, and mathematics. Game play is good for us, and good for the species, I truly believe this. But if you need more help justifying the expenditure, how about support for the arts and the killer illustration on the cover of the game box?! Or poker-like predilections, with those mini stack-able A&A chips, now in Green too?! (like green M&Ms, you just want them! and I probably also just dated myself exactly haha, but those greens are great.) Or how about all the miniature flag roundels, and the thrill of punching them out?! There are all sorts of reasons to pick up this game.

      Some of you who frequent these forums, or hang out on the Larry boards might know that I’m a pretty big proponent of digital gameplay. (For those who are new to these haunts or new to A&A, Larry is the dude who first created and came up with this game. He did us a solid. Thanks Larry!) But back to the subject of “Machine” aided gamplay, there are all sorts of digital tools and applications for Axis and Allies that are pretty cool. Everything from dice rolling, to battle calculators, to map emulators, to simulations of the game itself. I think these are all fantastic. I fully endorse them, and think they can be very helpful for learning and enhancing your comprehension of the game, but still, there is just no real substitute for the physical game on your table. Rattling the box open, laying out the pieces, feeling the dice in your hand, the thrill of facing down your opponent in an actual face to face match! That’s what it really comes down to. It’s not always possible to get someone to sit down with you and achieve the full gameplay experience, and in those instances there are great digital ways to play this game; by email or by forum, or live online using software, but face to face is still the ideal that I strive for. Everything else just builds up to it in my mind, like training, so you can be at the ready when the opportunity does present itself. It’s totally worth it to pick up a copy of 1942.2 for yourself, and this guide that follows will assume that you have, or hope to do so sometime soon.
      :-D

      That’ll do it for a mission statement, or a rocket launch, that mission control will hope to keep in view. What follows is I guess, a rough outline or notes. I’ll be editing as I go.

      First things first, What’s in a Name?
      Axis and Allies 1942 “Second” Edition:

      1942.2, or the game you just bought, is one of the latest in a whole series of Axis and Allies games that came before it. Taking our time machine back to the 1980’s, this thing has been available in one form or another for geeks like you and me to enjoy for a while now. Each iteration aims to improve over the last and carry the concept forward, but the game itself is intended as a stand alone thing. There is no “First Edition” you need to pick up prior to playing this one. Everything you need (or at least, almost everything) can be found in the box, and all you need to know (or at least, almost all you need to know) can be found in the game manual. The “almosts” are why we’re here, to help you out and point you in the right direction. So with that in mind, lets talk about a couple things you might want to have on hand, in addition to the boxed materials…

      Show me the Money!
      This game uses a kind of currency, or game points, which are called IPCs. They are imagined as “certificates” that are meant to represent an Industrial Production Capacity (IPC). In the past, little paper bills were included as part of the Axis and Allies boxed materials, similar to monopoly cash or funny money, which you could hold in your hand and count. These bills were awarded for accomplishing your in-game goals, used to purchase units, or track your progress, and for other purposes as well. In the more recent Axis and Allies games, this paper money was replaced with an “IPC” tracker, but I really believe that it is helpful to have a physical representation of IPCs available when playing this game. You can find gaming “funny money” online or in specialty shops, or you can use colored pocker chips, or even simpler you can just use actual coins. Where I live Pennies and Nickels can be fun for this purpose, representing 1 ipc and 5 ipcs.

      Not that I’d ever endorse gambling. (Although I totally would) ;) But just having something at the ready, for your players to count up and exchange, and horde as their IPCs, can be very helpful for maintaining general order while promoting a more avaricious desire to play the game (you know, until the sun comes up! haha). Honestly, it helps. The tracker can be useful too, but coins, or chips, or bills in hand, is just best, especially with newer players.

      Write it down, check it twice:
      Like all things conceived in one place, built in another, and coming into your home after passing through who-knows-how-many hands, there’s a chance things might glitch out somewhere along the way. Unfortunately these glitches sometimes occur with A&A games too. In 1942.2 a few things in the game manual and some of the set up charts included with the boxed materials weren’t 100% in line with the vision of its creator. I don’t know why these things happen, but they do, so in addition to the Box, you’ll also want to check out the game FAQ and Errata for 1942.2, and maybe print out a page to keep on hand. Often on these boards you’ll hear people use the acronym “OOB” what this means is the straight up game out of the box, by the book, or the “official” game. This is the game described in the manual + updated addendum from the FAQ/Errata.

      The arbiters of officialdom, are basically the creator Larry, and our friend Krieghund who keeps us posted on Larry’s views whenever a serious question comes up. You can always ask a question here on the boards and someone will chime in to help. And if its a real stumper, then Krieghund, our war-hound on point, will bound over the barbed wire and guide us in the right direction so we can avert mini rules disasters.

      That’s it! That’s all you need to get started. The game and the rules! Now that we have them, lets take it back to the basics…

      Plastic Armies, and Plastic Army Training:
      I’ve seen a lot of different ways that people teach this game, and reading the rulebook aloud cover to cover is probably the worst of these. It might be admirable for yourself, and necessary to do at some point, but it’s just not the best way to get people pumped up to play the game with you. If you take this approach to teaching, A&A can rapidly become overwhelming and tedious, and can challenge the attention span of the new person in your gang. Frequently they’ll look to you to just “explain how to play, so we can start playing.” And that’s the trick. If you have a second person in the room who knows how to play, you can do the “watch and learn” method. This is better than straight up reading the rulebook, but it can also be confusing for the new player. They will see a lot of things happening, without understanding why, and you will constantly be pausing and digressing and explaining what’s happening in a somewhat haphazard and circuitous manner. It works, but it takes a while, and it requires that you have at least 2 people in the room who know what they’re doing. Sometimes you won’t, sometimes its just going to be you and the new guy, and when you find yourself in this situation I have very basic method I like to use…

      When I first learned how to play Axis and Allies, from my older buddies Griff and Oddie, they taught me to play it this way, and its the approach I’ve taken with new players ever since. Start with the Units, the Battle Board and the Dice!
      The very first thing you’re going to do when you open the box, and the very first thing your new players will do when they dig in, is to pick up the plastic pieces and start checking them out. Fantastic! First hook achieved :-D

      Once you have the little units in hand, and you’re ogling all the mini sculpts; looking over the infantry and tanks, fighters and battleships etc. I say dive right into the battle with the dice. Before you bother setting up, or explaining the map, or IPCs or production, or how units move, or even unit value as it relates to these things, just grab the units and start staging mock contests on the battle board!

      Rolling dice is the one surefire way to get people quickly engaged with the game, and the combat system is truly what makes A&A. It allows you to “play” plastic army men, but “with rules.” You don’t even need a map or a broader game architecture for this to work, all you need is the battle itself, and a simple way to connect the units with the rolls. That’s the start, explaining Attack vs Defense, how “Hits” are determined, how casualties are allotted when those hits are made, and how this stuff all repeats until one side wins or the attacker withdraws.

      I start with Ground. Infantry first, then add in the other ground units, explaining the principles of “heavy hitters” and “fodder” along the way. Then do the same thing with all the Naval combat units. Then the same thing with Air Units. Then combine these to showcase the different abilities or units in differing combinations. I like to talk about subs, destroyers, and aircraft last, as that one can be a bit tricky.

      Now add in the AAAgun and show how it interacts with aircraft. Finally introduce the transport unit, showing how they can work in amphibious assaults with bombardments, or at sea vs air. Once you’ve gone through the entire unit roster this way, and have described the abilities and relative attack/defense combat values for each, pause the battles and turn to the economic/production aspect of the game

      The easiest way to make this transition is with the Bomber unit. Its a good unit to showcase the concept of Unit Value/Cost. After you’ve showed your friends some ways that bombers can be used in battle, you can gradually segue to a discussion about how this unit can “also be used” to Strategically Bomb factories. SBR is way to show how units enter play. All units must be spawned at factories, so the SBR thing naturally gives rise to a more in depth discussion of what IPCs are, how they are awarded, and what they can be used for e.g. buying more units!

      Here I find it helpful to draw more attention to the map itself, which until this point just serves as a backdrop and place to mess around with units, but which will now take on a more meaningful gameplay significance. It will make more sense now, since your players will start to “get” the concept that the territories on the Map=IPCs=Money=Units.
      And Units that must be spawned from production facilities at specific places on this map.

      At this point you’re still not “playing the game”, what you’re doing is priming your players and getting them invested in the process of “setting up the game.” As someone who’s played before, you might be temped to do your players a favor a set everything up beforehand to save time, but I think this has a definite downside if someone in the group is new to A&A or even just new to the map. Pre-Settting is something you can do next time, once everyone has a practice game under their belt. But for the first time out I think its really important, to actually go through the process of letting each player place their starting units, and read through their set-up charts, and all the rest. Not all together but one at time. In other words, don’t just hand everyone a set up card and say “go to town.” Instead, begin with the Russian set up, and get everyone involved. This will necessarily take a bit longer, but it doesn’t take as long as you might expect, and it has the advantage that everyone is on the same page, get’s to see all the units and all the territories involved, familiarizing themselves with names and locations and the distribution of forces, double checking to make sure that the set up for each nation is correct.

      Take 5 roundels (one for each nation) out of the box, and arrange them from left to right in the sequence of the Turn Order.
      Russia, Germany, UK, Japan, USA and keep these 5 off to the side somewhere where everyone can see them. Then go through the set up in that same order. You can have one player read off the locations and units from the set up card, and the other guy place them in the territories, both checking to make sure you got all the right stuff in the right place. You’ll notice that when you slowly build up like this, not only does the map take shape in a more organic and resonant way for your new player, but it also increases the feeling of mutual participation and anticipation. The situation on the gameboard will start to “read” for them, in a way that it won’t, if you just start slapping pieces down all over the place. This way there is a progression and a point of focus: First Red, then Black, then Tan, then Orange, then Green.

      And by the time you get to Green (USA), all of your players will have surveyed the full map and starting forces. Green light go! Eat another green M&M! Do it this way, and I’m telling you, your new players will be so ready to rock it, you won’t be able to hold them back. Building to the crescendo, which is actually just the start, the First Round!

      You can do this in an hour, 2 hours tops (if you include all the messing around on the battle board I mentioned earlier) but it will be worth it, because now your players will be fully invested in the game. They just built it out together, and it took a while, so they’ll be eager to get back to the battle board and the fun of rolling the dice!

      Lets call everything I’ve discussed up till now, just a bunch of suggestions or advice for introducing new players to the most basic appeal of A&A. You might not get in a full game this first session, but you don’t really need a full game. Just making it through the set up and the first few rounds can often be enough to hook your new player and make them want to come back to finish what you’ve started. Or to do it again, “even better next time!” That’s what you want to shoot for, get a hook in, make it fun the first time, so you can get them coming back. Most people won’t have the patience to play a game like this, until they see how it just sucks you in, and once you’re sucked in, it’s like a happy black hole, you don’t wan’t to escape from, and couldn’t even if you did.
      :-D

      With visions of tiny tanks dancing through their heads, they’ll be going home and concocting strategies for “next time” maybe they search a few things online, try to up their game. But the whole point is to make it engaging, and in this respect I think pacing is important, part of what you’re doing when you play A&A is to create a “bigger” story about what’s happening on the board and with the dice. The narrative component of the gameplay, and this can take a little time, but there’s no need to rush it. Historical banter and high drama, more snacks! You know the drill

      Right then, just wanted to draft something I could use here as a jumping off point, in order to keep the echo chamber echoing. For a more substantive outline of an actual article what I’d like to do is this…

      Units: full examination of each unit in the 1942.2 roster. Discussing their abilities, attack/defense/movement and TUV significance, along with their magnified abilities. Battle board focus: Land, Sea and Air.

      Map/Production Spread: overview of the games basic economy and how this relates to the map.

      Player Nations: General overview of each Nation, following the turn order sequence. I’ve touched on this in the Russian openings thread, but I think it makes sense to have a look at each nation individually. Then analyze the situation “by sides” for both Axis and Allies.

      First Round: Looking at potential opening moves, and opening builds for these 5 nations, with a discussion of “Theater focused” strategies/builds.

      Endgame: Thinking about the overall production spread, income parity, double dipping etc. Then a discussion about capital control, capital trading, center control, and VCs. Here I think it makes sense to think of things like how to use turn the order, and builds/logistics/attacks over multiple rounds to set up viable endgames for each side. Lot of ground to cover there, but hopefully once the rest is fleshed out it will be easier to approach in a more coherent way.

      Ok, that feels alright for a start, and a goal. I’ll return to this soon, as the ideas come. Catch you guys in a few.
      -Elk

      posted in Blogs
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: G40 Variable start to turn order: Opening roll

      I will continue opperations, even in a vacuum, like a V2 rocket in outerspace.  :-D

      The main principle and goal is to get a 6 position turn sequence. “Why six?”

      Do we really need to ask? :-D

      Cue up Black Sabbath and this image below to make all my arguments for me hehehe…
      Someday hopefully someone will take an interest here. Until then I will continue my work on Variable for all boards until I find the right system for each

      rps20140831_190022_828.jpg

      posted in House Rules
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      ps. sorry I mixed up this thread with your other one. You’ll use tilebreaker but navigate to the map just called “Expansion.” I think you just need the relief for that game to match the UHD one.

      Hopefully that helps :)

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Names to Faces

      For sure!

      Yeah, there’s like some sort of weird uncanny valley aspect too, like when the game becomes a bit too realistic that way visually, sorta loses an element there which I kinda dig. So in Iron Blitz for example, it was just a name and some stars, sorta at the level of Looney Tunes cartoon, but not fully visualized in any way.

      I think what might be more interesting is some sort of caricature of a General, or probably even better would be just some Officer Corps thing, or an advisor who could maybe grimace when the dice go bad, but without going much beyond that. Then one could give it the flavor, but without going out in the weeds. I think the little gif style video clips or newspapers clippings, or even the cool end game stats graphs could probably do a similar type of visual flare but I don’t know how to do that stuff really. Like the sound or animation stuff. But yeah sorta cartoons and penny flyers, I just feel like that fits the plastic army men vibe of the thing somewhat better somehow hehe.

      You can do whatever makes the most sense, but to me it’s sorta not necessary for a global style game, but then I didn’t really know what all might be useful for an expansion really. I found for myself that, as it starts to look more realistic in the vibe, the uncanny valley starts to open up. Even with the map I see the same, like if you magnify in too close on a topo it sorta starts coming apart at the seams a bit in that way, but then the cartoon aspect kinda compensates with map colors or whatever. Kinda trippy how that works

      ps. Anyway I’m kinda rambling, the short of it would be something like just trying to keep Global more general audience or pg13 in the vibe. I think there’s probably room for other takes on it as well, but for the regular game probably anything not assigned could get nixed? Then whatever else just lives in some sort of customizer thing where peeps can riff and do variants, in the same ways they do on the home board. At first I was thinking just put a bunch of stuff in so it’s easier to play around with, but then that could get confusing if trying to figure out which stuff the game actually uses, like for tech say or default options of that sort, as opposed to just like random HR idea I had once hehe. Basically so that when they open the Global folder or the UHD analogy the player would sorta see the same stuff in the same place, like even if the graphics are different, same folders and such, just so they’d know what’s what like that when browsing. Anyway, just let me know, whatever seems best or easiest for you. I’m playing Dragons again, so just hit me up if ya need anything dude. Catch ya next round!

      pps. oh and just one other thought, so for the commander dude graphics, if any, I would probably follow the cues from the Box cover art of the OOBs, but like post AA50. Meaning I probably wouldn’t highlight any figures that aren’t making those more recent covers. The old MB box art blue box from 1984 and even the Revised box from 2002 features figures and flags that I would just avoid in 2024. Like if the they weren’t in Tora Tora Tora or the film Patton as an already semi iconographic figure, but even the poster type art for a box cover or manual art feels different than say a piece that moves on the gameboard. For that it’s almost like you’d rather see something off brand, than big name historical figures, since it’s always kinda dicey. Faces are somehow charming though, and I think there is something to be said for providing something to RP against. You know so like instead of pretending to be anyone specific it’s more like some other name or just Commander 1, 2, 3 etc. I think if it was more like random non commissioned officers who pop up in some news reel at the end of the year, or in a battle screen, you could sorta capture that. Like those old Might & Magic games where dudes look upset and scowl cause the battle is going south lol. Maybe like an operator who patches in the news from the front at round’s end, ticker tape style. For a general or admiral type unit that plays on the field, I’d consider just some extra jumbo Tank or Ships or Sculpt-look inf type, an abstract Chevron maybe? Not sure though, I’m not familiar enough with those house rules.

      posted in General Discussion
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Russian NO, Errata rules clarification, and how to play G40 without a Bid

      but like i said, if russia needs more units why does everybody put their bid in for the UK iso Russia?

      The simple answer to your final question is… because competent players will always use the bid to break an opening battle. For the Allied player it makes little sense to bid in Russia, since the DoW restricts Russian play. The goal with a bid is always to have the greatest impact, and trade as much TUV as possible (either on attack or defense) as soon possible for the bid amount spent. This has been the case on every A&A board. The reason everyone bids UK in G40 is because UK is already at war, and they are the first allied nation in the turn order that can make an effective attack.

      Sz125 doesn’t matter for the purpose of the NO until Russia is at war. So unless Germany DoWs it’s not even relevant yet. The problem in subsequent rounds is that Germany can disrupt sz125, and doesn’t have to hold the sz for the enitre round to do so. All they have to do is park a single sub in sz 125 through Russia’s turn (which follows their turn immediately.) It’s a cost of 6 to disrupt 5 from Russia, and draws a UK dd at 8 which can easily be destroyed if Allies attempt to contest the sz with light forces.  In later rounds the NO is disrupted by the no western units on red land or the Archangel requirement. Basically it’s an inconsequential NO if the German player does their job.

      But again the reason to give the money to Russia is for balance on the center crush, without disrupting first round battles. A UK bid just busts the game vis a vis Italy and the med.

      This is similar to the way an extra tank was used in an Axis bid to break Egypt in Revised, or to break the Ukraine battle, (or doing those, but saving some extra for a 4th Japanese transport to be purchased on J1 as well.) Similar again to the way UK can break naval battles on 1942.2 board. A preplacement bid will always be used to break the game in favor of the side perceived to be a disadvantage, creating first round battle conditions entirely different from the OOB game. This is what we’re trying to avoid, and why Russia is the prime candidate for a boost. Because the political situation prevents them from distorting the opening round,  and because Moscow is invariably the focus of the endgame.

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • The "Lend" in Lend/Lease (or ideas for a basic "Loan" phase)

      Here is a simple rule we sometimes use.
      Any player/nation may elect to “Lend” ipcs to an ally nation at the beginning of their turn, at a cost of 2 to 1.

      These ipcs are immediately removed from Players cash, and transferred to the Ally at 2:1. The minimum loan is thus 2 ipcs, as their is no “half” or “0.5” IPC in this game.

      The cost of the loan is built in to the transfer. The recipient will always receive half the value loaned out, with the rest of the cash going back to the bank. This allows for a way for nations to prop up weaker powers on their side, but only at a 50% cost and the subsequent delay on purchase (as the ipcs are being used by an ally instead of immediately.)

      Also provides a way to “Transfer wealth” before the fall of a capital, as the Nation may elect to send their remaining gold to an ally using the whole pot (giving half this value to the surviving belligerent nation.)

      Examples of how this can be used, America may spend 6 ipcs in a “loan” package to Russia. 3 ipcs go to the Bank, and 3 go to Russia. Germany may spend 8 ipcs on a “loan” to Italy, 4 ipcs to the bank 4 transfered to the Italian purse. etc.

      Basically on a 2:1 for cost

      so 2 ipcs “loaned” gets 1 to the ally
      4 ipcs gets 2
      6 ipcs a 3 and so on.

      The “lease” concept is in “Lend/Lease” is something that could receive an independent treatment if desired.

      ps. The main interest in this rule is that it allows for more potential purchasing strategies, as stronger ally nations can prop up weaker ones, or allow for an enhanced purchase, but only at a cost of 50% in ipcs. So for example, a nation could help their weaker ally afford a carrier deck, or a fighter, or a transport, to attempt magnified or specialized purchases to change things up. But always only at a cost. Essentially here, any player could effect the cash on hand for any other nation on their side at a ratio of 2:1.  For this may reason, you may want to use a restricted opening, where no loans can be made until the second round.

      posted in House Rules
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Game 2: VictoryFirst (Axis) vs barnee (Allies) - G40 House Rule Expansion by The Captain

      @victoryfirst Fortunately this one will be an easy fix, you just need to update the relief. You can run the tilebreaker map utility with this one. Or beelee can probably get it you, I sent it to his email the other day

      https://www.dropbox.com/s/9epukg9ouprozou/relief_uhd_global_1940_blue_new_5-9-23.png?dl=0

      You will put the relief in your downloaded maps folder, the one called Expansion with “boxes.”

      Map Creator Tools> Run Image Tile Breaker

      Then you’ll navigate to the downloaded maps folder and select the folder in the directory called reliefTiles. (The default will send you to your main tripleA directory, but you need to back out and send it the downloaded maps (like next to where the saves are stored, for me it’s in Users). Then it will ask for the image, and you’ll choose that relief in the dropbox link above.

      a81b1aab-58d9-4ffb-b182-cec747c6ff48-image.png

      Or probably Beelee can get you the stuff from the Git, which may be simpler. Running the tilebreaker is pretty quick once you’ve done it, but all the map creator tools have a bit of a learning curve.

      posted in Play Boardgames
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Names to Faces

      ps. @barnee Amusingly, I didn’t even realize this was a separate thread until right now lol. I just clicked the little notification to bring me here, thought it was the other UHD thread, so apologies if the above/below sounded sorted confusing. I thought it had just kicked on to a new page. I actually forgot there even was a General forum down at the bottom of the tree lol.

      @Panzerstahl-Helm Yeah this is like the main thing that appeals to me about tripleA, the fact that you can go under the hood and tinker. Sorta like painting sculpts or using pennies on the physical boards to do whatever. Some of the original graphics have been adjusted many times to change the tint colors, add drop shadows or things of that sort. The main thing that sorta organized most graphics is that they were 48px squares. Though tripleA can go up to 96x54 px. The extra 8px tall isn’t the most massive ever, but the extra width is pretty significant, since that’s almost double if you use a graphic that is say 2:1 rather or 4:3 aspect rather than 1:1 aspect. For stuff like tanks, aircraft, ships, bases etc this is pretty huge. But when I wanted to try and do an upscale for global the only set of tripleA WW2 units that attempted to go jumbo were Frostion’s, so I asked him if I could use those to create a national tinted set. In his game the presentation was more fully painted with a roundel at the feet and a 3/4 drop shadow on everything.

      Mainly I just removed the roundels and shadows and colorized the units for a monotone tint in the same color family, then went back in and painted on some faces or a safety color. Essentially to make it looks more like the standard World War II sculpts (which are totally monotone) but just larger and with some flare to spice it up. I added basically main infantry units and whatever tech stuff was missing, so mostly aircraft to fill in the gaps there. Basically substituting the graphics in the standard folder for the newer stuff at the larger size. Most games don’t really work like that, like where you can just open a subfolder and see hundreds of tiny png image files of like everything used in the display the way you can in tripleA. To browse around see what’s there, replace stuff by using a different file with the same label etc. Typically that stuff would all be just encoded I’d guess. But tripleA is so oldschool that you can just see all the tiny rasters for everything and get a sense of how they come together in-game.

      This is great for stuff like customizing and house rules, but then there’s also a dilemma of uniformity or standardizing stuff so that it looks cohesive and doesn’t depart too much from the basis. That’s what I meant about the whole pg13 thing and sorta separating off the main materials from whatever additional stuff. Because one can go in and and explore other aspects in more detail via mods and such, but when it’s all in the standard folder kinda gets confusing potentially.

      Current Global package is very much like that, where there are additional graphics to support all the mods and whatnot inside the main map folder. This is why it was challenging initially to know which stuff actually needed to be replaced or which graphics where just like holdovers from other iterations or only used in a mod say. Initially I just copied everything I was using into my UHD global folder to keep it all together somewhere, but now I think it’s probably a bit easier to have inside the UHD only the stuff that is actually used for standard Global, and everything else can live alongside that in some separate customizers/mod folder, or basically separate maps for separate mods to keep the main one lighter footprint. I don’t know that we’re going to do much better than like 80mb, even if removing all the extraneous graphics, so it’d be more just to keep it orderly. Most of the filesize is coming from the reliefTiles themselves, since the single image is quite large.

      TripleA can’t use svg really, like for anything other than font, and even that if displayed in the UI is treated as a raster graphic, so the main map image we see in-game, the relief is just a giant ass PNG. It get’s pretty hefty the more pixels that have to be displayed, especially if in color. At first I tried to do this UHD thing at like 16000px the same as the other big map, but I had a lot of difficulty there since the image becomes so large and it’s a challenge to say create an image off it in GIMP with a dozen layers. At 11000px I was able to get maybe 6 layers going at once before GIMP would just devour my ram and start locking up, like any sort of filter or copy/paste action taking many seconds and the whole map to take a few minutes to export. And that for an image not particularly crazy, like these reliefs are sorta basic and bare bones in the grand scheme, but then the unit graphics sorta carry it, just cause they’re all jumbo and have a bit more detail.

      Anyhow, to the earlier point, if looking for some familiar faces I’d restrict it just these figures… Not these box cover illustrations but perhaps the photographs they painted from, or just the same figure in a different photograph, or stuff like that. Basically for the stuff that is in print

      aap1940-2998.jpg

      aae1940-5876.preview.jpg

      the 1941 starter board just uses the same box cover art as the Anniversary.

      1942 Spring, and 1942 second edition, A&AO all use the same illustration.

      I think probably any historical figure depicted on a box cover since AA50 came out would be ok to use for a visual, but probably comes down to how it’s purposed. Like if you go to the source image, not the painted illustrations I mean, but the dudes depicted. So like you see on the boards for Japan like Genda and Yamamoto, I think maybe Hara? Like usually IJN seems to be the theme there. Basically the films Tora Tora Tora or Midway. The theater boards tend to show more like the regular GI Joes, but I think Guadalcanal has like Nimitz and some other dude who’s face I can’t recall right now. The Pacific board 2000 didn’t have figures just painted aircraft and ships. Europe 1999 had sorta the generic soldiers in a photomontage. I think the more recent boards post AH aegis are sorta more in the ballpark.

      It’s hard for me to remember who painted what or when, but Jim Butcher, Beasley, Sansaver etc the gang there all kinda set the art direction over the years so that it’s fairly consistent from board to board even decades on. I think the stuff from the 80s and early aughts still looks pretty cool, but for figures I’d stick to the more recent boards for the changing times. Anyhow, massive digression there. Glad you like it though! Have fun out there!

      posted in General Discussion
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • RE: Russian NO, Errata rules clarification, and how to play G40 without a Bid

      I’m curious which statements here are differing from what you’ve seen in the league? Do you feel that this NO is playing differently or is more relevant in the league?

      I suppose its important to realize that any statements you read here on the boards are largely anecdotal. It comes down to how much of what you read accords with your own experience. And of course results will differ depending on what conditions you typically play with. For example, I noticed just now you mentioned the Russian bomber in another thread. In G40, and in other prior A&A games, many people have used additional Russian aircraft as an expedient alternative to the open pre-placement bid. An Extra Russian fighter in AA50 for example, or a Bomber in G40. In G40 specifically, that option is preferable to me, than an open bid for UK. Its the sort of set up change you really have to force though, because given the option most people would take that same bid amount and instead throw down 4 infantry or 3 art units in separate territories to spread the advantage, or a pair of subs to break a naval battle. Anyway, the point being that if you are using a Russian bomber in your games regularly, then chances our you’ll be seeing different results from people who try other balancing options. Beyond this, there is also the No Tech aspect, or things like whether or not players are using standard dice rules or low luck rules. All this stuff can skew the results in a given set of games, or provide somewhat different play-balance results from the games of people who play other ways.

      I will say this about G40, if you play standard dice, there is a fairly substantial swing potential on sz 110 and sz 111, not to mention with casualties in France. This can be a pretty big deal for an opening battle that sets the stage for the whole game. The results there can be a lot more consequential than say Classic/Revised when a transport hit, or a destroyer dudded out was in the opening round. The old German battleship headache comes to mind. Or take for example how in Revised the swing on the W. Russia battle could really effect the whole game in a massive way, such that some players would just quit outright in the opening round, if the dice didn’t go their way. Something similar can occur here (though perhaps not quite as extreme) with sz 110 and 111. If the Luftwaffe trades well in those battles it can be a huge boon for Axis. If they trade poorly it can be a small nightmare for G. Low Luck can control for that to a certain extent, but what you gain in consistency by using LL during the opening round, you lose out on in dynamism during the endgame. This is why I tend to prefer dice since they are so unpredictable for the endgame, though I appreciate the place for LL and understand why so many are fond of it. Still even a small bid disrupting either of those battles, or the battles in the med, can take it from a risky swing to a clear and obvious choice, especially under LL conditions.

      So all that is just to say that the conventions in your playgroup, the typical bid, what sort of rules you option in or out, can really affect the patterns that emerge.

      You’ll probably have noticed as well, that because A&A uses a very fixed set up and involves a number of scripted first round battles, that players often use a technique that you might call mirroring. Where players tend to model their strategies and opening moves, on things that they’ve seen stronger opponents do. Adopting the strategies that beat you last time, we might call it. This happens a lot after a board first comes out, or especially with players who are new to the game. So what happens is a kind of gameplay evolution, that selects for the best opening plays and weeds out the poorer ones over time. So right after a new board comes out everyone is excited, since the playing field is leveled, and nobody really knows how to exploit the map. Very quickly though, players start adopting standard buys and standard openings, until at some point (after a year say) someone hits on a strategy that is very dominant, which never remains secret very long. Soon variations in it get more popular, until eventually it becomes a scripted move (something everyone does.) Its usually at this point, if the advantage is clearly going one way, to one side over the other, that people start seriously examining bid solutions.

      Whats interesting about all this, is that if you are playing with someone who is inexperienced, and does something totally batshit crazy, that you wouldn’t expect anyone to do ever, sometimes that sort of game can actually get entertaining as well as challenging. Since you really don’t know how to predict the erratic behavior of the newb. These games can be fun, since they force all sorts of weird decisions on you. Like wow, he built that? I guess I have to go destroy it now, and do something I wouldn’t usually do haha.

      I agree though, from an archival standpoint, its nice to have a league and a way to track what sorts of things are happening in games (what sort of bids are being used for example, and what opening moves.) The overall tally Axis wins to Allied wins. But even there, the nature of the dice can be pretty nuts in providing different experiences.

      All this is just to clarify something that it might have been worth saying at the outset. When I talk about game “Balance” or “Balance by Sides” what I am really referring to is the ‘feeling’ or ‘sense’ among both players that the starting conditions provide a roughly even shot for either to prevail. There’s no way to be really absolute about this, since as soon as you roll the dice in a single round of combat, you shoot off into so many different variables that its probably impossible to say anything with certainty… eg. whether a bad roll somewhere can be recovered by an amazing one somewhere else, later on. So really what we a striving for is the sweet spot, where the feeling of balance is the same for both players at the outset. Where one person isn’t constantly grumbling about how the odds are totally stacked against them from the get go, or how if they don’t win battle X, “its basically all over!” I’m not sure how much you could learn from seeing my games in an after action, since I’m perhaps not as cut throat as others, and I like to experiment a lot (often with game mechanics.) I don’t mind losses and haven’t bothered to keep a running tally on anything.

      If I’m in the lobby and I have more time to play, I also almost never concede defeat, at least until I see the deep endgame ;) Since that’s the one that fascinates me most in A&A games! The deep endgame, for those unfamiliar with how I use the term in A&A, is how things play after capitals have already fallen. So in Classic or Revised or 1942.2 the Deep Endgame is when you are down to just 4 nations. In AA50 when you are down to 5 etc. Another way to think about it is the gameplay when W. Allies can take over Russian land directly because the capital has fallen.

      Pretty good at grinding it out, since even a losing game can be entertaining, and it teaches you about the production spread and the importance of the center ;) But now I’m just rambling.

      Is it the general premise of this thread (that Russia’s NOs are too weak, and virtually pointless) that you find problematic? Or the proposed solution as a bid alternative? I guess I’m just a little confused where you think we’re running off track. Most of the results posted in that league forum for g40 games (at least for the last several months) show Allies being bid out consistently, often at above +10 ipc. So I feel that it supports the general position of game unbalance in favor of Axis. I’m not sure what bearing any of those games would have on my proposed solution right now, since those games are virtually all using pre-placement bids. What I have suggested here is a standard income modification for an NO as an alternative to what people are currently doing, which is bidding pre-placement. Does that make more sense from the perspective of a bid replacement/balance perspective?

      posted in Axis & Allies Global 1940
      Black_ElkB
      Black_Elk
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 6
    • 9
    • 10
    • 4 / 10