Posts made by Bluestroke

@Driel310:

Apart from the two bombers in the USA there is not much that is really strange… I know that functioneta disagrees about China, but to be honest a J1 where you attack every territory of China is not the best J1 I think you can play.
In the end (let’s say 5 turns) China is usually buried alive yes, but that’s part of the game, it was the same in the old A&A…

Personally I believe the current setup is a nice one, it seems reasonably good balanced. It’s very normal that the axis win the early games, cuz their strategies are the easiest to discover. Germany/Italy walk to Moscow (I mean Sea Lion is a real dead horse in this game) and Japan tries to expand to as much IPC as she can grab, after which she puts pressure on Moscow as well. Fighting in the Pacific means only 5 IPC for Japan, why put in so much effort since you can’t take Western USA anyway.

The USA can’t take Tokio either, so why bother going there, Berlin is easier.

I agree with most of your points.  I like japans odds in the Pacific.
Again, our 3 games, Japan was a Samauri, cut deep into USA strength.
USA has to pay attention w Qty 2 carriers and 4 FTRs spear head in their waters, on J1-ouch. 
You almost feel the anxiety USA must have felt in 1941.   
Italy, makes Germany stronger, at least in our 3 games it has. 
Italy keeps Axis Africa and the Med clear.
better surface Navy then Kriegsmarine, Allowing Germany to focus more on USSR.
We have our 4th 4 player AA50 game today.
I am puzzled though, other players are having Allied sucess, Axis seem strong for our play.
I like the 1941setup, though, thought it was going to be different. 
I will post my own speculation soon.

@Subotai:

Whats teh real AA50-41 setup???

I’m thinking I’m thinking… :lol:

If the BGG setup is the correct AA50 setup, I’ll be really suprised   :-o

Do you care to enlighten us, challenge-point out the incorrect/unlikely 1941 placements, from the BGG setup?  We will build a Subotai 1941speculation map,
others can help or like Funcioneta place your own distinctions. 
We can then compare, when the game arrives of who had the closest 1941 setup.
If your wrong, you will have a record of what you thought the 1941Setup should have been-LOL.

Second Situation:  This is a partially contrived situation to help me understand the rules better.  If America had the Rocket tech, UK had the Radar tech, and Russia had no techs, but Karelia, controlled by Russia, contained an AA gun from each of the Allies, then I assume the following:  that on Russia’s turn, he would not get the Archangelsk bonus, and on America’s turn he could fire Rockets at Germany from that AA gun, and if Germany attacks Karelia with air units, then the UK AA gun would fire at a “2” instead of the Russian AA gun firing at a “1”.

Hey, I thought, I read somewhere, you may only have one AA gun in a territory at a time, singular not plural.

@Funcioneta:

Yes, you made a good job. Of course, this setup could be not balanced still (would need testing), but seems more logical than BGG setup. China deployed for war and USA undeployed it’s historical, not the opposite.

By the way, I noticed you called Spain “España”. The “ñ” is important. Very good job!  :-)

Thank you kindly,

Item:You are the first one to complete an alternative possible 1941setup, congradulations.
item:I have updated the Map and renamed it, AA50Funcioneta1941CHG.
Now someone has the setup they can test it.
Item:I also added your last comments to the map, as editoral, above its title.
item:the map is now posted at the map Link.
Item:Does anyone else out there, have an Alternative 1941setup?
You either disagree with what has been posted from Gen Con or
Believe it to be unbalanced and have an alternative,
you believe is closer to what Larry has really completed.

@Funcioneta:

No, I meant z57, my mistake, but number could been wrong. Let’s say Midway sz. That one is for Japan not being able of killing California fleet, that would be very ahistorical

Anyway, thanks for including my name, you got a karma +1  :-)

Thank you kindly,

Updated 1941CHG Map. 
item:I have moved the Japanese midway Task Force, to Japan’s Sea Zone.
After your review, let me know, if their are additional Changes or are satisfied with your speculation of how the 1941 setup should look.

I will use both. 
We have played three games using the Tech rules, the new game mech, cheaper units and added cruisers(using the Classic battlewagons.)  We played on the 2004 Revised Board.  We have not used the NO’s, no board yet.
I think, I posted some of this info, on a prior thread.
The Tech’s were fine, ALLies did not get Heavy Bombers in 2 out of 3 games.
This added some variance.  Also, Axis won 2 out of 3 games. 
Note:one game Germany got Naval Yards and had fricken subs everywhere.
It ended up stopping all Allied Atlantic Naval moves cold.  No matter what they tried.
Disclamer-Your gaming may provide different results-LOL.

@Funcioneta:

Some possible changes:

*** China ***

• Chinese fig to Sikang instead of Yunnan
• 1 more inf to Yunnan
• 2 inf to Sikang
• 1 inf to nim, 1 inf to chi

*** USA ***

• Add 1 AC, 2 fig to z56
• Delete all aircraf in mainland USA
• Delete z44 fleet
• Change art inf EUSA for inf

*** Japan ***

• Move fleet z47 to z62
• Maybe add 1 inf to Manchuria (soviets can stack near, maybe Japan need this)

*** UK ***

• Delete 1 inf in saf
• Delete 1 art, 1 aa gun in aus
• Add 1 inf to nzel

Not sure about Europe, maybe don’t need changes, maybe yes

Ok, updated map with your changes you noted, except Japan,
don’t have Fleet unit in Sea Zone 47.  I speculate-LOL, you meant Sea Zone 51?
also, noted updated maps to R12 version as noted at map Link.
the CHG map has your name as editoral Asst. since you are presently driving the thread.

Hey black Elk,

We have completed three AA50-42 games.  We have not used National Objectives.  We did use the Techs. 
The Axis took two out of three.  I have said before, more fluid game then AAR.
which sides did you play?

@Funcioneta:

@Bluestroke:

item:I can not deny someone like Perry or Funcioneta the truth of possible error.
I have challenged them to deduce, as a group, an alternative 1941 setup. 
Somewhere, Perry indicated, he"s somewhat conservative and this speculation, may be distasteful.

Interesting. I’d say a chinese fig not in the frontier and enough chinese inf to launch a slim counterstrike in China 1. Zero bombers for USA (it’s ridiculous having 2 in 1941), less Pacific fleet for USA, and less troops at saf and aus. You would have a decent China but less allied forces to counter it

Anyway, China unable of attack FIC means they cannot suport India as well as in Revised. They should cancel that rule, it’s too buggy anyway. And if they don’t want Kuomingtan at Stalingrad round 2, well, I don’t mind playing as Japan if allies make a such poor move as utterly ignoring Japan.

Ok, I have updated the first map with a partial change.  There are Two maps noted here the base 1941Speculation- setup for reference, then map with your changes 1941SpeculationCHG
It would help, if you gave me specific units numbers and locations,
instead of " less Pacific Fleet "
Item:CHG ADDED qty(5) for total qty(9)Chinese INF and FTR moved off Frontier.
item:CHG Removed qty(2)USA BMB.
was this what you had in mind for china?

@Lynxes:

The setup is there. They played the game at GENCON, didn’t they? There’s a thread over at BGG where they discuss China and then Krieghund admits that the Chinese fighter is vulnerable and instead says that Japan has a reason not to go all-out vs. China (India, Russia, presumably). This is the thread:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/342710

On the other hand, we might have an explanation for the delay of the game in that they decided to change the set-up a bit, presumably to boost China and maybe India? I realize that I never heard of how sweeping the sub-rule changes were until a few weeks ago, when Krieghund dropped the bomb that subs can now submerge BEFORE combat if no destroyers are present! So it might be WOTC and Larry and his playtesters are actually listening to our talk here and making some changes. So much for the “game is locked and ready, no changes will be made”. Or am I only the victim of delusions of forum-grandeur…  :wink:

item:I am axious as anyone, for the game to come out.  I  like the work we completed here so far, on the Rules, maps.  It will be fun to see how close we come. 
I am 90% sure of information we gathered. 
Indeed by Larry, Krieghund, Yoper and others we have confirmations, Techs and IPC Bonus, dice.  Thru pictures we have a map.  One game play, provided game mechanics.

item:I can not deny someone like Perry or Funcioneta the truth of possible error.
I have challenged them to deduce, as a group, an alternative 1941 setup. 
Somewhere, Perry indicated, he"s somewhat conservative and this speculation, may be distasteful.

item:This game only lives the life we give it.  We are its lifeblood.  A game is merely a stack of plastic and cardboard. If we dont play it, it dies.  Larry designed the stage, wrote the opening lines, we take it from there, delighted or cursed…. 
we do the happy dance or mime the sad face. 
From the maddogs to the pumpkins, we are bringing it.
" Oh game where art Thou "

@Constantinople:

The Russians weren’t merely told to cross the battlefield without a rifle and pick up one

from their dead comrade.

They had a gun at their back!

Agreed,

Good point, I was wondering, if I should have stated orders at gun point.

In AA50 1941, I would agree with those who point out, the rules, as we understand them, is to allow the Chinese to distract the Japanese and not become a full viable playing power.

item:China can not be ignored or they become a problem.  They should not be so powerful as to be conquering other territory.  Along with, Burma, Hongkong and China, they distract-burn the resources of the Japanese, limiting/slowing the japanese India push.  It buys UK and extra round.  Thats all UK really needs to get the India IC up and running.  The main confrontation will still be India.  Uk has slightly better odds, in this setup, of making that IC viable.  And as someone pointed out, the extra Chinese territories, will slow down a tank push from Japan to Moscow.  It looks like a slight change from AAR, with good balance IMHO.  I believe those who want China to be more viable are on the balance beam, too much, too little.  Only game time under our belts will tell the truth of Larry’s balancing act.

item:a big item, no one mentions much, the US pacific carrier is now safe for US to base a pacific fleet.  Now with two Japanese carriers, this close to the West Coast, US is forced to spend/defend resources in the Pacific.

Greetings,

Thanks Perry, nice breakdown.
I believe the rule changes in AA50 will the big difference. 
item:I see the point of  more territories for deployment options, defensive requirements and offensive possibilities, a nice leap, in the AA50 evolution of the game.  ( Remember well, the days of Classic, 2 spaces between Berlin and Moscow-in your face from get go, no room to recover from bad dice. )

Item:Rules;the CT’s non-combat status and sub cover from air, seasoned with lower naval unit costs and the cruiser, I like those changes he most.  We have not even begun the expanded SBR capacity and Bonus IPC moves.  This is the most evolved set of rules, maybe almost mature( enchanced. )
CMDR Jennifer and Perry, have you guys played the new AA50 subset w Abattle map?  I don’t play online, just face to face with my group.  So we don’t have a wider variety of opponents, then you guys who play online?
What has been your experience, hae you have attempted some games?

Ok Challenge,

Use the new unit costs in your next game.  We have, using 2004 Revised Board.  There is enough information on this site to play some house games with the new unit costs and mechanics.  You will see, I believe how much more mobile the Navies have become, especially subs, very useful unit.  I am curious to see if you guys are having the same results we are getting.  Then a real discussion of how good subs are or are not will some potency.

item:I salute the brave soldiers and sailors of Canada and Italy for their contributions to their countries, right or wrong the average soldier went out and did his job, bravo!! 
No one sucked.  You can have an opinion, fine, your tactical assessments are poor IMHO. We are suppose to be students of this war. 
Unforunately, the victors write history, and leave out the brave, bright contributions of the losers, German and Italian or Japanese and important members, like Canada.
Think Poland, 4th largest Allied Army, no press, fought every where and zilch credit. 
Speaking of percentage losses, the Russians, can you imagine being told to charge across a battlefield without a weapon and told to pick one up from your dead comrade, ouch.

Agreed,

I made the AA50PlayersAid maps from those photos and used posted comments from Gen Con game played.  These are entertainment items for me, something to do, while waiting.   
In the end, we only speculate, hunches from observations and comments,
won’t know for certain, until the game release.
I found most of my game comments from Moreys… on the game using the 1941 setup they played at Gen Con.

I agree with your logic.  Display, to drive hungry A&A players, blightly…
Why more bombers in 1941 then in 1942? Wouldn’t it be opposite? 
Speculation, we seem to have some additional time…
What are the missing units???Your Hunch, deduction, or WAG… 
People can Post and Ill edit the group project Map each day and post the changes, entertainment…
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449ab1eab3e9fa335cae9fc2a6a9099e97f
Updated maps to R12 Added Axis Wide Borders 10/18/08;
(Dark Grey for Germany, Red Brown for Italy, Kakai Yellow Japan)
There are two maps here,
AA50GroupSpec1941CHG, this represents changes made, edited after each post.
AA50GroupSpec1941Ref, this represents the Base Reference map we started out on.
update 10/23/08
1)Missing units, 1941setup map completed, AA50Funcioneta1941CHG.
2)Missing units, 1941setup map, inwork, AA50GroupSpec1941PerryCHG2
3)Missing units, 1941setup map, inwork, AA50GroupSpec1941LynxesCHG
4)Missing units, 1941setup map, completed,AA50GroupSpec1941BluestrokeCHG

IL,, Perry

this is all my fault.  I was locked into the Deep Abyss of those AA50 Gen Con pictures, three weeks,
while drawing, the AA50playersAid.  I began to see things.  Like Iceland, yea and then…
Attila shares my bad dreams with others and now the game is delayed and…
no more whiskey for me, its all coming apart…

Black Elk,,_Nuclea_r
I agree Africa should have more territories.  I think it was Aldertag, who noted, to him Territories represent road and rail systems.  You can move across Europe and USA quickly, fewer territories.
Places like Africa should be more broken up, additional territories, to represent the longer transit time attempting to cross undeveloped country.
Perry,
Black Elk, I think,  posted(other thread) that IPC should be applied to locus points.  It should not represent merely production, but also the importance of the locale, ojectives, if I understood his idea correctly.   Like Hawaii or Egypt, worth more for their positions and transits.  Are you implying the same?

@Sherman:

What would have made the game more interesting is if they changed that rule so that you collect only half of your income, because counterattacks from somewhere else would have been a realistic possibility. Thoughts?

I like this idea, new house rule to pose to the guys.

Greetings,

Great thread. 
Excellent delivery and point made by Builder_chris on game pc representation.
Loved how you presented it, nice long delivery to labor the point of complexity. 
In spite of your last post Chris; you noted a general abstraction of all FTRS, and Jets represent an improvement for the whole class of the unit. 
Let me wave my arms at the sky, having spent most of my adult life with jets.
I could argue a strong technical perspective, I will not take you down the edged path of techno merit.  I will provide general strokes, I hope stand out; 
item:munitions were the determining offensive punch factor, not much change really. 
item:Those early jets had a very limited range, as stated previously.
item:The speed factor, gave the fighter certain immunity against interception, fine for offense. 
item:If, given strong offensive value, then the abstraction could reflect a more limited range, move of only 2 spaces, thats not going to be popular. 
item:In the defensive role-Dogfighting mainly, poor turn radius (more important then dive speed, IMHO, yes its arguable, jets had good climb rate) and no loitering time (also factor for ground support,)
are strong defensive requirements lacking in jets. 
These low defensive values for early jets, argue against a strong defensive abstraction on Tech alone.   
Item: Air doctrine was poorly concieved on how to deploy the technology and coordinate, again important factors for area defense
( War college would need several thousand sorties to build a model, each war took time to find a techs place for proper deployment( prime EX:korea-jets evolution.)
Item:This game does not model interception, less house rules. 
Extra-Maybe thats the point, the tech could add interception to the game, new tech, new game mech-yea facing complexity again(KISS.)
Sum:Jets are simply not a good defense value for this game, take an offensive abstraction, Larry got it right.
In the end, I agree with IL, jets don’t #$%*belong. Were not a factor for WWII.
added note:
I love those old WWII fighters, those pilots and crews had a special moment in time.  You can see it in their eyes today, years later. 
To those who fell, I salute.

Hi Guys,

I forgot to ask.  Have any of you started using any of the new rules we have discussed from AA50?  I have posted in other threads, my results.  What about you guys?  Granted, I want to add a new rule every game session, or so my friends tell me ( I love variety. )  We play face to face on a 6’ 2004Revised board, now we play with the new rules we have collected on this site,
(thanks Krieghund and everyone else.) 
So, I am curious, have any of you guys, did the same and what did you think.  I loved it.  Like I have said before lots of Navy now, operational and useful, especially subs.
also, the planning map prints nicely on legal paper(found at staples for me,) most printers can use, even when not mentioned in the printers manual.
Hell, todays game was cancelled, too many people, missing ill.
light the fire and drive that game, man I am having fun.
I found you guys and getting a new AA game to boot -fire!!!

Greetings all,

A guy in my gaming group asked me to make a cleaner map to draw arrows on, for planning moves in our games.  So, here it, an is updated cleaner Map with reduced  interference;he was happy,
maybe someone else will find it useful:AA501941Planningmap
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=db7389213b434449d2db6fb9a8902bda
item:I have removed the WWII factoids.
item:Redrew more of Map now at 85%, moved Caspian Sea to proper Lattitude, Moved Gibralter (now East of Africian as S/B,) added Weight to Africa, reshaped Germany,Czech-Hungary, and Baltic States, added volume to Black Sea and Med, moved Afghanistan, Reduced some print sizes for map clarity.
item:Added Allies Frontiers in Classic Colors, Kaki-UK, Red-USSR, Green-USA.
UK now has Kaki Territory print, Color coded Blue, Vichy French territories names.
item:Highlighted all of China’s Territory( china + Japan portions as one. )
item:Retagged Poland territory names with its own color-white.
enjoy,
getting closer to game time.

updated (10/15/08) to mapR11;
item:All Allied Territories now have wide Borders in classic colors,
easier to see on 11 x 14 print outs.