Posts made by Bluestroke

Title: Kido Butai**(1941)**
Date: 2-6-09
Special Rules: optional Rules Black Sea Closed, carrier Islands , 
_National Objectives_yes,
Tech yes  U.S. shipyards, Supersubs, jets;UK paratroopers.
Victor: Axis win -Allies Concession after Japan takes US West.
Game Length:4.5Hrs/8 rds- Hours/Rounds
Bias:  Going into the game, Japan had the higher skill level.
Description:  UK/USSR vs Germany/Italy and US vs Japan
Japan/Germany expand typical first 3 rounds. 
Japan had easy time going through China, this time.
Italy drove everyone out of Africa took India. 
US concentrated on airpower using carrier Island. Japan countered with massed Fleet strength, 3-CV, 6-FTR, BB, CA, DD,4-CT.  Japan stopped US Air Armada in Hawaii, then surprised US, instead of hitting Hawaii where it was strongest, Sliced into US west Coast and ended game. 
Germany beat back UK invasion of NW Europe, advanced on USSR.
Victor writes the History,Allies put all their eggs into a single basket Axis massed their strengths, Japan Naval/Air, Germany INF/ARM.   
Observations/Recommendations:  China still too weak in 1941.
I believe the US needs its CA and SS units in 1941. 
UK needs better NO’s tweak, Like some of, not all of.
I felt unstoppable as Japan.  Next time, I would want to play US.
I think the guys are going to choose a 1942 setup again for next time-2 weeks out.

I want to add this to your AA50FuncionetaCHG map.
( a AA50 Variant-Alternate 1941 setup, I made from earlier comments you made on items missing in Gen Con pics -AA50 variant folder. )
A fair amount of people are downloading that map.

Or would you believe this to be a different map? 
I like to try lots of options.
Your testing online-I believe, we are playing face four player games -will pitch it for next game session-and let you know how it turned out for us.

I have cobbled together suggestions voiced online here and Larry Harris site,
what players believed may be missing from AA50 1941,
   This is a simple compilation of those ideas, just started testing;

1)selected Neutral Territories can now be invaded ,
     with added defensive units for Neutrals.
     also:see house rules for additional ideas on how to handle Neutrals.)
2)Earlier setup than OOB-March 1941, Greenland is still a Neutral territory,
     Persia(Iran) is also a Neutral territory.
3) Added suggested IPC strength to Allies:
         Canada divided into (4) Territories;
         Australia divided into (5) Territories.
         U.S.A. added (1)new territory Rocky Mtn West and
         moved Central U.S. next to Eastern U.S.
4)Axis Africa was still in play;:
         (Italians control East Africa, Vichy control West Africa/Madagascar, )
          with added Vichy and Italian units to support.
5)Added for those who wanted value, (1) IPC to all island territories,
    only for those Islands that previously had no territory value.
6) Added Player’s suggested Units for balance:
     Germany-Battleship-BB
     U.S.-Crusier unit-CA, ARM
     U.S. UK Japan-SS units missing from Pacific added.
     USSR-FTR and several RTL
     UK-CA, DD, INF units to Africa campaign.
     Vichy French-Naval-CA, SS, DD, RTL, INF for Africa campaign.
     Italian-DD, SS, FTR, INF for Africa campaign.
     Japan -BMB, DD
     1941 China starts with qty (11)INF

Suggested Optional Rules:
Optional rule:Non-Aggression Treaty between Japan-USSR, if they attack each other penalty invoked, focus Japan on Pacific and U.S.S.R. on Europe.
optional rule:Stealth Subs-pop up undetected and ambush your enemy.
optional rule:Vichy units-will they Defend yes/No.
optional rule:Carrier Island to give Islands tactical value.
    (this provides Island based Air units a slight range increase.)

Thanks everyone for the ideas.

Setup Map can be found here under Folder AA50 Variants-AA50Shades of Grey;
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda

@Perry:

@TimTheEnchanter:

… how is that different from greenland?

Yeah, that’s kind of my point. In theory it could be useful as an airbase (in theory though!) - but Greenland is already in the very same sz.

Greenland/Iceland, two zero-ipc allied territories, entirely enclosed within a single SZ; it’s a first, in the history of the A&A Franchise!  :-D

Perry, you may be horrified by this, I took your objection about Islands not having Territory values and made a AA50 variant map and made all Territory Islands with a Territory value of 1:its found here:In the folder AA50 Variants-AA50Shades of Grey,
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
Thanks, for the idea, your credit.
And yes, it could have been different Sea Zones between Greenland and Iceland.

Anyway,
we have been using this for the last year and its been great fun to see everyone in action at once.  And on the team play, each attacking the same territory gives you the feel of an alliance, even though you attacked seperately like chris Ex B.
  I had friends who did not really want to play, cause it took too long in between turns and now those same guys are big proponents of getting together for games.
  I mentioned this over at Larry Harris site.  Larry seemed curious, but thought it would favor the Allies.  I like, Moses idea of an Indian factory, interesting, may propose it for the next game.  The time savings has been so great and the win lose record so even, we thought whatever balance issues happened would be minor.  Moses argument and Imperious have me thinking, thanks.

@Unknown:

Hey Bluestroke, that link doesn’t appear to take me to the right page…  :? I can’t find the files you’re talking about.

I’m interested to see what you’ve come up with, as I’ve been working on my own alternative setup as well. It seems to me that, in the official 1941 setup, the European and Pacific theaters seem to be out-of-sinc with each other by about 6 months.

For example, the Germans launched Operation Barbarossa in June 1941 (this is supposed to happen on G1), but then in the same round in the Pacific Japan launches its attack on Pearl Harbor, which of course didn’t happen until December. So it seems to me that the Germans should be well into Barbarossa on their first turn, at a minimum.

What I’ve done is update the Eastern Front to reflect this, giving the game a starting date somewhere in the late summer/early fall of 1941 instead of spring. I’ve also fixed some big annoyances, like the lack of a  German BB in the Baltic, no subs in the Pacific, China’s impotence, etc. There are some other minor tweaks here and there, of course. The overall idea is to slow Japan’s expansion slightly to counterbalance Germany’s stronger position. I’m still playtesting it, but the results thus far have been promising. There also seems to be many more viable openings for each power with my setup, especially for the Japs and the Brits, but perhaps this is simply a consequence of not having played it enough (yet).

If other people are interested in trying it out, I can post the complete list of changes.

Wow, this sounds just like my AA50Shades of Grey Variant.  I have fixed the Link and reposted to that reference.
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
  Thanks, I would be interested in the list of changes you made. 
I listen to what players say, taking notes of things, they thought were missing from AA50.  Ex:subs missing from the Pacific, German Battleship, Invasion of Neutrals,  Extra territories , darker borders,  more space, Axis Africa etc…
( Similar thread about things missing from AA50, on Larry Harris site. )
  The missing subs is what I noticed, from the Gen Con pics, back when we were speculating about AA50 setup.
Game Balance, I like what Larry did, I think each setup was unique and offers different problems, 1941 problem for Allies to overcome, greater advancing Axis strength.  In 1942 greater Allied advancing strength.  I find together, it is balanced. I am repeating this argument from earlier threads.
Sorry, it took me awhile to get here,
so was withdrawing subs from the Pacific, a bigger problem for the Allies?  I think it was.  A large Naval presence for Japan, reduced Allies… subs are good raiders perfect for ambush.  Immune to the long reach of Air units.  When attacked they can submerge and may survive.  As Imperious Leader often says the destroyers will have to become infantry of the sea and be everywhere to defend. 
Japan has to be more careful, during it’s deployments.  As it stands, Japan is relatively free to deploy without hinder.  Those pesky subs, may have slowed down the Japanese advance, small argument yes.
Again, we use stealth subs, so you have real surprise when those babies pop up and hit out out of the blue. 
Early U.S. subs could have made problems for Japan and this steadily gets worse as more subs enter the arena and the game progresses.

@klh:

I’ve been playing A&A since I got it for a graduation gift in 1984, and was excited to see the many of the changes, including Italy and a 1941 scenario.

The one thing that surprises me in the 1941 setup is that the US has no subs.  The silent service was crucial in the Pacific, especially in the early months of the war.  Any idea why the designers left that out?  It seems to me that it could have been included in the sz with the carrier or off the west coast so it’s out of reach of the Imperial Navy for Pearl Harbor.

I noticed this when I was drawing up the PlayersAid maps.  No subs for US, UK or Japan in the Pacific.  I added some to the AA50Shades of Grey variant for an alternative setup Map.  Of course their are several other Changes like Axis Africa, Vichy units invadeable neutral countries etc… added also, enjoy.
You can find it here under AA50 Alternative setups:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
enjoy.

@Imperious:

Bunker unit?

You mean something like a coastal concrete encasement with a large gun sticking out a slit in front?

I like that idea alot. A bunker is a final refuge for people on the run.

Wait a minute, IL do you not have a basement Bunker to play the game?  So, what are you telling us.  Are you on the run?? LOL

@TG:

We play 4 players face to face.
We set 4.5 hour game limit.
We use all Axis go, then all Allies go.
this adds a cool element to the game, everyone moving at once.
before each turn there is a conference between Allies or Axis to consider the upcoming moves.

Could you please explain this in more detail? 
Doesn’t the team going first always have the advantage?  How do you balance this out?

Yes, in the same respect as a normal move, tempo is dictated by the Axis on the move going first.  You lose individual turn position advantage,  to gain the time advantage element. 
item) In the all Axis go, then all Allies go,
if two players attack the same territory, the turn priority takes precedence. 
The original order of play is the turn priority. 
Ex: if, Germany and Italy arrive at the same Russian territory, Germany would determine its combat first.  The Italian player would resolve his other combats and comeback to this territory afterward.
The Italian player resolves his combat on the Russian territory, following the German attack. 
If there is no resulting combat, left for the Italian player then, he moves his units into the Russian territory, now coexisting in the territory with the German player. 
item) This is why you provide a 5- min conference, prior to your turn move, to discuss attack vectors, who’s hitting what territory, and do you need two players to hit the same territory.  This play emphasis the Alliance aspect of the game.

I am not sure I understood your question and provided enough detail.
This idea was not our idea, we lifted it from AAHRE rules, to speed up our game.
This play works for our group and has become our standard of play for each game session.  It save a lot of time, each player is busy attacking or defending constantly, with no wait times.  Prior to this, we would wait 45 min or more for each turn, in 4 player face to face games that we play.

In twenty years of gaming, there is one rule that speeds games;

We play 4 players face to face.
We set 4.5 hour game limit. 
We use all Axis go, then all Allies go.
this adds a cool element to the game, everyone moving at once.
before each turn there is a conference between Allies or Axis to consider the upcoming moves. 
Its speeds things up considerably for face to face games.  Who wants to wait 45 minutes in between turns.
We got this rule from AAHE the historic game, works great, thanks to IL and others great rule to add in face to face games.

@Cmdr:

I find that the better player seems to win most of the time, regardless of what side they are playing.  Therefore, it’s my opinion that the game is pretty well balanced.

You might want to rig a system where the inferior player is given 3 IPC to spend on unit upgrades, starting IPC or new units to even out the players ability, but the sides themselves seem to be in pretty good balance. (Obviously with different sides having different starting units, different positions, able to move before each other, etc, it’s darn near impossible to get a perfect balance between the two sides.)

We have used a system where each player adds 12 IPC worth of hardware anywhere on the map to begin turn 1, to simulate intelligence failure.  The Axis and Allies did not have perfect knowledge of what and where, though Allies had a clear intelligence edge, they still ran into surprises.  This adds an element of the unknown, at the  begining of each game.  The perfect setup is not known, only close approximations and 12 IPC is enough to throw a surpise on any front…

3 days, 18 hours, 36 min.  I am so new, I smell like fresh plastic-LOL’ 
My game play is quite old…

@Krieghund:

There’s a new version of the FAQ up at Larry Harris’ site.  It contains additions to the FAQ on the Avalon Hill site, and they are marked in red for easy identification.  This new FAQ should be considered official, as these same changes will eventually be made to the FAQ at Avalon Hill, as time and resources allow.

Nice Krieghund, You should mention the nice new optional rules on interdeptors and closing the Dardenelles to Naval traffic-sweet, again great seasoning for the goose.

@FieldMarshalGames:

Maybe I am just to hardcore, but I bought an extra copy of AAP so I could have an extra set of FLEET MARKERS!  The Fleet markers from Axis & Allies Pacific should solve your problem of crowded sea zones…  AND they look really cool on the board as task groups.

I recommend borrowing them from your AAP game OR buying a copy just for these FLEET MARKERS.

I completely forgot about those markers.  I will bring them up at our next game, great idea, thanks.  Though, I still would rather play the game on something that is more map like and less of a board.  This is one of the reasons I draw out the PlayersAid maps.  I believe one guy in my group would play on a checker board if we would let him.  So it boils down to personal taste, of how you like to play your game.  I still love IL’s idea of playing in a replica German bunker while dressed as a Field Marshall, while arriving in his own cabrolet!!  LOL-Now, that is a game I would like to be in on…

Interesting think happened on the way to the printer.  I had increased the ocean sizes so much, they ate up all the increases I had made in land size.  IL and Black Elk are probably smiling.  Oh well bump into the wqll again.
  So I carved some ocean off to find my increase in land size, shrunk South America some to accomplish this and increase Finland and the Baltic, just because one of my group thinks he needs a larger Baltic, so be it.
I made the new Rev AA50PlayersAid2MedBlueR4, then increase map size from 66 x 34 to ( 72 in x 36 in ) this has larger land area, less ocean, still good size Atlantic and Pacific ocean, but I wanted larger land mass and more ocean, this is a good compromise.

Are are you guys seeing more Naval Action with AA50?  We have overflowed several Sea Zones, at times filling the North Sea or English Channel with Naval Units. I do not want to be too critical, the out standing effort that went into AA50. First and foremost-Kudos!!  I like the out of box board, yet we are having a hard time playing on it?  Limited Size! 
On land, North Western Europe required another inch at least.
Pacific Islands, why so small!?!  Others, have noted the poor territory border contrast-clarity.
And of course, its nice to have the setup ghosted onto the map.
all this may be personal taste.  So here is another flavor;
.
one solution, PlayersAidBigBlueR1, I redetailed much of the AA50PlayersAid map.  Now have a Full size Atlantic and Pacific Ocean,(66 x 33 inch ) with oversized Pacific Islands, full size Norway and Finland and nice big fat sea Zones;
This is a 1941 Setup with reduced clutter, allowing the addition of a 1942 setup with territory markers per the game rules.
We printed this at Kinko’s on vinyl mat for $144. had we used bonded paper,
it would have been cheaper.
I changed the setup unit ghost, simplify to unit only symbols on the map, if it stated 3 INF, then I placed three INF symbols at that location etc…
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
This is still low Tech Bit map, not as Fancy as IL’s high tech vector map or one of Black Elks specialities.  I am surprised, in the age of high end vectors, these AA50PlayersAid maps are still getting 50 or so downloads a week, from all over the world.  Interesting places, like Yemen, Hong Kong, Korea, of course the US, Germany, Canada are still the largest Users.
Hey, even  Functioneta’s suggested alternate AA50 map setup is doing well, enjoy.
I note, this map will be large enough, to incorporate some of the interesting ideas talked about on these boards.  I will incorporate these variants, into future projects.

@Adlertag:

I miss convoy zones, or some kind of bonus when you controll strategig sea zones. Lets say if UK controll sea zone 1, 2, 7 and 12 with a surface warship, then UK get a 5 IPC bonus.

I agree Adlertag, convoys are a strategic deployment, not modeled in a strategic game abstraction.  Yet, Larry likes them in Tactical setups- slightly different cup he’s drinking there-LOL.

Some counter weight,

China-42, has been very effective at slowing down the Japanese.  They lost five Ftrs to the Chinese, last five full rounds.  And were attacked every round.
I wounder if players are coordinating with UK factory and balanced push US?  This spreads the Japanese, considerably.

Terrain-this is a strategy level game, not tactical.  I like tactical games, for terrain, not sure it belongs in this arena.

Phase sequence-agreed, collect phase first, would be more practical.

National Objectives- surprise, it has altered our play, we need those extra IPC.  It has directed our attacks and strats, lot more IPC, resulting more units in play, faster paced game.  Great fun, once you get used to ending your turns by going through the cks for extra IPC.

Italy-agreed, color s/b grey, another little change with great results.

You forgot game mechanics, great changes…

Title:  Doolittle Rides Again/1942 Setup
Date:  December 6th, 2008 
Special Rules:  NO’s + Tech
Victor:  Allied Victory by Concession. 
Game Length: 6.5 hours.
Bias:  I am the oldest player, all others about even. 
Description: 
Allies: Pacific Used balance strategy, UK built factory India.  Shocked at how effective China was at absorbing Jap Ftrs, it took Jap five fullrounds to catch China.  Typical stuff in Europe, Italy still very effective, constant push btwn USA/UK and Italy in Africa.  Typical maxium extend by Axis, Allies catch up at Mid game and push back, great fun had by all.

We play with four,
hoping to add another.  We also speed up the game by going all Axis then all Allies.  We are going to add timers, to keep the game moving, we include a 6.5 hour time limit on our games, with pizza and beer, or in my case a shot of whiskey can not be with held.