Posts made by Canuck12

I’m with swiss. Everyone seems to be analyzing the attack/def numbers for the Mech inf to death. Its easy to say “infantry are statistically a better buy” on paper, in a battle. But when you’re finishing off Russia and you’ve got to move 7 territories to get there (as you might with a bigger europe) these half-tank half-infantry might actually be put to pretty good use.

There is way more to this game than numbers and you never know when a little bit of canon fodder that can sneak in from 2 spaces away might come in really handy.

Will the Maginot line feature into the new game? Or will Germany be able to attack across the French border freely?

If I recall correctly it was not included in AAE original but I understand this game to be far more complex than its predecessor. There has been talk about fortresses or “blockhouses” butressing defence but what about the possibility of a stationary “drawn in” feature, like the burma road of AA40P, preventing attack or at least strongly discouraging attack?

Thoughts?

I see…

I was a little confused because the Japanese territories cover the whole coastline, whereas in 1940 China still had significant coastlines unnocupied by the Japanese in the south.

In the photos valiantly stolen from gencon you can see an orange ring around all of the Chinese costal territories, similar to that around the Japanese territories (FIC etc.). Which suggests that these are occupied by Japan. However, given that these territories were not occupied by Japan in 1940 and that there is no Japanese rondell in any of them, I take it they are in fact not occupied by Japan at the begining of the game.

Anyone know what’s going on here?

Interesting discussion of the finer points of the eatern front… but there were 2 things that went undiscussed.

Perhaps this thread is dead but I must ask Karl Parsons two simple questions that I believe are the keys to the game:

You said the Axis wins every time.

#1 Did they control even part or Africa for any significant length of time? (4 IPCs for 2 turns?)
#2 Was Germany being decimated by at least 3, hopefully 4 SBR per turn?

Because if Germany was not strategically bombed every turn with every bomber that didnt have something better to do, OR if Germany controlled more than a couple IPCs in Africa for a turn or two they will likely win the game.

I have found it very difficult to loose as the allies if you stick to these 2 basic tennants: Control Africa and SBR Germany.

Any thoughts all?

Looks handy, thanks!

Wow, that is a very cool looking map. I wish they would mass-market that one.

As far as the distorted looking AA42 map: nearest I can, tell it looks funny because they tried to maximize the space in each territory. So some of them look really fat and distorted in order to allow the maximum amount of space to place units. Not necessarily a bad thing… if you can live with the change in aesthetics of course.

I’ve got to agree with gamerman, those Indonesian islands seem a little to big in value.

Like you said they sit at 4 to reflect the resources (mostly oil) that Japan gained from capturing them. But remember Persia had the largest oil reserves in the world at that time and her value sits at 1.

I’m sure I will hit a few negative karma points for saying this but I don’t know that the pacific theatre is AA50 is a very accurate reflection of historical reality. (Or perhaps it simply reflects a motivational difference between the actual Japanese Empire and the one we create which can perfectly coordinate its moves with the other axis powers.)

Perhaps what I’m getting at is that if we were to play out the pacific theatre as close to history as we could, the United States would get annihilated, and would be hard pressed to open up a western front against the Germans.  One could perhaps say the same thing about Africa…

…and now I have opened up the whole “historical accuracy” can of worms.

Choose up to 4 for the poll. Obviously a significant amount of elaboration is required for any of the options. So please describe what works best for you.

Yeah G, looks like that ugly block of land you were talking about is Finland (how apt) and Norway/Finalnd is divided from eastern Europe by the Gulf of Finland.

Looks like its still going to take your best effort to keep me out of Finland/Norway!  :wink:

Does anyone think it is a coincidence that just 3 days after this, admittedly bland, AA42 leak Larry drops the A-BOMB on the AA community with the announcement of the biggest most bad-assed AA game anyone could ever hope for?

I am of course talking about what appears to be the ultimate mother(s) of all AA games, far surpassing AA50: AA Europe and Pacific 1940.

Here’s my take:

A few people have already mentioned this fact and they are absolutely right: AA42 is not for us. It was not designed with anyone in the AA community in mind. Take a look at it, compare it to Revised, and try to convince me that they expect all of us to pay for a copy of this game which features NOTHING we haven’t seen before. We weren’t meant to buy this game, we were meant to pay attention to it and then decide to save our cash for AA40E/P.
AA42 is designed to sit on the shelves next to Settlers and the new RISK and Monopoly etc. It’s really the most basic version of the game ever produced and would be fantastic for a 14 year old RISK fan to open on Christmas/Hanukkah/Kwanzaa/Ramadan. (or all four depending on your family tree). That’s precisely what is game is and it will serve its purpose very well.

Now… as we all got real hyped up on the news of a new AA game and started buzzing around this forum itching to get our hands on a new version of the game, Larry was quietly cooking up a 7-layer triple-chocolate ultimate-amazing fun-tastic new version of the game that would blow away just about anyone on this board.

This is actually an extremely smart business decision. First, announce a new game and get the community really talking about it. Then, issue a reprint of Revised (AA42) and get everyone super bummed out about it. Then, announce a new game that will keep everyone here salivating for months to come. This offers AH 3 things:

1. They get to cheaply mass produce a basic (yet still very good) version of the game that is really easy for newcomers to pick up and will not only bring in revenue for years to come but will also open the door for newbies to buy other versions.

2. They get to extend the hype on the forums for the new AA40 Europe/Pacific Mega-game for an extra half year or so as to make sure every last person in the AA community is aware of its presence (they do this basically for free.)

3. It allows them to make a ton of dough when we all willingly shell out $100+ for each of these 2 games. This is in addition to the revenue they will make from the mass-market 1942 edition which will likely be the bread and butter.

Does anyone here think that Larry Harris is not a strategic genius?

Agreed. It does seem a little fishy that there will be totally new country specific sculps and at only $35 they will have to be cutting corners somewhere…

Perhaps they are going with paper pieces this time.

I think the AA50 naval rules change it up nicely. Cruisers are a more versatile unit than battleships and people tend to keep diverse fleet. (which is pretty accurate) Cheaper subs and the advance submerge rule make them more usefull for thwarting enemy advances. So, overall I think the AA50 naval rules were pretty good. (Transports especially.)

Personally I wouldnt change a thing.

I don’t expect we will see rough terrain appear in AA42 which is probably a good thing given the game’s complexity. Though I think that keeping some of the territory divisions of AA50 could help compensate for that: Fin/Norway or the Balkans are a good example, and Burma aswell.

To respond to Lynxes:

I agree, Europe was a little too chopped up un AA50
the pacific was great but I would keep the AAR 2 zone Sea of Japan
Liked south asia for the most part
I would like to see at least some of the new territories for China stay. At least 3, maybe 4 chinese territories, and toss them a few more infantry, maybe 2 in each forward territory.

Sounds like a pretty cool idea to me. I never liked the ability to blitz from Alaska to east Canada, it seemed like a bit of a strech :-)

… of course there was the Alaska Highway…

Excuse my ignorance. But there was mention of “Mech Infantry” being included in AA42.

Is this simply the infantry supported by artillery that débuted in Revised, a trick from AA50, or something new entirely? (I’m thinking guys in robot suits  :wink:)

@questioneer:

Larry needs to throw us a bone and give us some more details!!! :-(

More details would be nice. (Though it will be a shame to see each of our perfect AA1942 fantasies destroyed by reality.  :wink:)

But overall I really like the idea of a new simpler (than AA50 at least) version of the game to introduce new players to. I thought Revised was a great edition, maintaining the simplicity of the original game while introducing some important nuances and increasing the historical and strategic realism. IMHO they got a little carried away with AA50 and I hope this edition is more Revised than it is Anniversary. It looks like it will be.

Glad Italy will be gone. They were nothing more than an unnecessary complication.

Hope its great! (As if we would expect anything else) Loved the changes of the Revised edition and most of the changes of the Anniversary Edition.