@Cernel Really, you can balance the game by just removing the easiest +5 NOs for Japan (Manchuria etc.), from the original rules, all rest the same.
(in case Germans get their normal NOs, bombers spam with Americans is still an option, but not a mandatory or even prevailing one, as the added income from NOs goes a fairly long way in making Germany too hard to crack with bombing)
@Argothair The game’s unbalance is not terrible. With NOs, it merely requires about 10 IPCs worth of units added as bid to the Allies (you would buy something like 1 artillery and 2 infantry for Russians with) (you would need a bigger bid if you play with LL, as LL favours the Axis’ openings, but this is a houserule, albeit popular, so I’m not considering it). Since it’s the Axis that opens the game virtually everywhere, there is no way the bid is going to immediately produce some big advantage on round 1. So, yes, that is about the same advantage as getting consistently about +5 IPCs per each turn after a couple initial rounds. The NOs mildly but quite surely give a small advantage to the Axis, also in reducing bombing effectiveness, and this is what unbalances the game. Without NOs (and without LL), the game is balanced (as long as Americans capitalize on bombers’ effectiveness, hurrying to get a stack to bomb Germany to 20 damage or almost so).
@Argothair This game’s fairly balanced as long as you play it without National Objectives (that are optional). The only issue is that, without the added income from NOs, bomber spamming with Americans becomes almost mandatory, for being supereffective.
@Imperious-Leader Maybe you went this way since the original design does archetypally the same, but how about, in the land-to-land borders, colourizing the borders of the borders, while leaving the inside of the borders light grey?
This way, you could properly define the colours for the borders between territories with different ownerships (for example, having the border between Poland and East Poland grey on the west and red on the east).
The Soviet symbol in the turn order is different from the ones inside the territories.
The Azores are sometimes neutral and sometimes American (also probably it would make more sense as British than Americans, but debatable and pointless).
In the “AA50 Suplreme Edition” there are no territories for Azores and Malta, but only the roundels?
You might want to consider the fact that the description will have to go in the moment you would put it as a subforum, since, popularity aside, that would make the most sense, if more recent main/successor out-of-print games (Revised and Spring 1942) are already out of main page.
@djensen Uhm. I’m almost sure the Nova edition is not Classic.
My suggestion:
Axis & Allies (Classic) 1st/2nd/3rd Editions
and for the description:
Published by Milton Bradley (1984/1986) and Hasbro (1998), retroactively known as Classic
Probably, then, updating all other games’ descriptions, to tell the publishers.
Edit: Also, not all Classic editions are Milton Bradley’s. The 3rd edition, as well as the 3rd.1 edition (Iron Blitz), were published by Hasbro.
On this line, the old guy could be named:
Axis & Allies 2nd Edition (Classic)
or, to cover all:
Axis & Allies 1st/2nd/3rd Editions (Classic)
Since you don’t see “Classic” anywhere in the box or the manual or anything for real, it fits better between parenthesis (people that don’t know stuff might think it’s not the one, since the one they have is not called “Classic” anywhere, of course).
Also maybe they can be called “Axis & Allies Europe (Original)” and “Axis & Allies Pacific (Original)”, to cut confusion with the “Europe/Pacific 1940” ones, that also had 1st and 2nd editions.
Also, by reading the title of this topic, if one would overlook where it is, you would understand that you are talking of those, since you didn’t say “1940” (but I see it’s implied by being in this sub-forum).
To be clear, what I said, as alternative idea, was substantially splitting the “More/Other” section into two:
An “Out Of Print Main Axis&Allies Games”, having only these 3 games:
Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
Axis & Allies Revised Edition
Axis & Allies Classic: 1st/2nd/3rd Editions
A “Minor Axis&Allies Games”, having whatever deemed so, like:
Axis & Allies Europe
Axis & Allies Pacific
Axis & Allies Guadalcanal
Axis & Allies: Battle of the Bulge
Axis & Allies: D-Day
@djensen said in Should Pacific and Europe by Sub-categories?:
Do people still play Spring 1942 and Revised?
An alternative may be a specific subsection for out-of-print “Main” games. Getting all the 3 “Axis & Allies Classic”, “Axis & Allies Revised Edition” and "Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition” in there, as that would also help spotting your game.
Otherwise, having those games ordered by timeline would help quite a bit there; meaning in this order:
Axis & Allies 1942 2nd Edition
Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition
Axis & Allies Revised Edition
Axis & Allies Classic: 1st/2nd/3rd Editions
An arguable matter would be where to put Axis & Allies 1941 and Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition, as neither are really in the actual progression I listed, but respectively reduced/budget/entry and increased/premium/expert variants.
Sorry for the off topic, but I don’t feel like opening a new one for this.
I suggest to get back “Axis & Allies Revised Edition” and “Axis & Allies Spring 1942 Edition” to main categories.
“Axis & Allies Classic 2nd Edition” can be called “Axis & Allies Classic: 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 3rd Edition Basic/Iron Blitz”, to be clear and complete.
In Revised OOB, if a unit was already loaded before the turn, can you offload it during Non Combat Movement, if the transport offloaded something during Combat Movement, but only as long as you offload it into the same territory? And, one way or another, nothing changes whether the transport took part in a victorious sea battle too or not?
For example, you have 1 infantry already loaded on the transport. You load 1 second infantry on the transport, sending it into a sea borne assault, during Combat Movement. Then, if you conquer it, can you offload the already loaded infantry, to the same territory, during Non Combat Movement? And how about if the already loaded unit is an AA gun, rest being the same?
Also, I’m fairly sure that at least for any rulesets from Revised LHTR onwards a transport may never offload in both Combat and Non Combat Movement, which is the case for Classic too. So the matter here, then, would be whether Revised OOB is the only one exception to this general rule or not.
Shorter version, I’m substantially asking if in Revised OOB you can ever offload in both Combat and Non Combat Movement and, if so, in what cases (full list)?
So, the question would be actually this one:
5. Can a transport move during Combat Movement if having an AA gun already loaded before the turn (of course, assuming the transport is going into a hostile sea zone)? (I know this is possible in Revised OOB, and I assume it is in Classic too) (if it is possible, I understand we already clarified the AA gun would be unable to unload during the subsequent Non Combat Movement phase)
Never mind, for 1 minute I forgot that in Classic the AA gun takes up the whole space of the transport. Still, I would be interested to know how it would work if you could load 1 AA gun and 1 infantry in 1 transport (which you cannot), while everything else being Classic 2nd Edition rules, even tho I realize this is not relevant for the actual game.
Of course, aside from the Iron Blitz sub-edition of the 3rd edition, the other unit would be an infantry only.
Side note, I’m not sure if this sub-forum is about Classic, or restricted to the 2nd edition of the same only, and I should talk about the 1st and 3rd edition in “Other Axis & Allies Variants”? That wouldn’t make sense to me, considering how close the 1st and 3rd editions are to the 2nd one.
Another thing:
5. Can a transport move/load/unload (meaning either move only, or unload only, or move and unload only, or load and unload only, or move, load and unload, or load, move and unload) during Combat Movement if having an AA gun already loaded before the turn (of course, assuming the transport is going into a hostile sea zone, or it is making a sea borne assault with some other unit (it may or may not have been already loaded before the turn), or both)? (I know this is possible in Revised OOB, and I assume it is in Classic too)
Thanks. This is true all the same for the first, the second and the third editions of Classic, right? Is there somewhere a full list of all transport rules differences between Classic and Revised OOB. If not, I’m thinking to write one in the Revised subforum, if you can then check it if correct and complete.
Actually hoping for an officially valid answer, if anyone around to give it. I just think the rulebook is not clear enough on most or all of these points; so one could read it one way or another.
On this point, instead:
Therefore, I would surmise that you can move a transport in Combat Movement, fight a battle, and then bridge units from one territory to another in Non-Combat Movement.
I’m fairly certain this is not allowed, as bridging is moving.
Number of successfully finished Napoleonic Empires games in which all alliances are played by more than 1 player (I guess this is what a “Team Game” is (or would a 1v2 be a team game too, since one of the side was a team?)) I see in this forum:
So, excluding this apparently unfinished game:
1:
TFB Napoleonic
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28881.0
October 25, 2012, 06:33:07 pm
Games:
1:
Napoleon: Witt and Dawgoneit(Frog Alliance)vs Unknown and Degrasse(UK & friends)
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=32628.0
December 27, 2013, 05:32:56 am
2:
Napoleon: Witt and Dawgoneit(Frog Alliance)vs Unknown and Degrasse(UK & friends)
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33075.0
February 22, 2014, 05:37:56 pm
3:
Napoleon Game 3: Witt and Dawgoneit(Coalition)vs Unknown and Degrasse(Carolingia
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33479.0
May 02, 2014, 11:33:57 am
4:
Napoleon Game 5: Fixed sides
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=34508.0
October 05, 2014, 09:23:43 am
(I’m assuming this was successfully finished, but I don’t see any victory notifications or surrendering posts)
5:
Napoleon game 6, fixed sides again
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=35101.0
January 08, 2015, 01:47:03 pm
6:
Napoleon game 7 fixed sides
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=36940.0
November 29, 2015, 02:46:05 pm
7:
Napoleon game 8, fixed sides again
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=37819.0
April 22, 2016, 03:47:07 am
8:
Napoleon game 9, fixed sides again!
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38247.0
July 15, 2016, 04:09:20 pm
9:
Napoleon 10 - Let Battle Commence!
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39697.0
April 11, 2017, 01:05:04 am
10:
Napoleon 8 Players Game 10
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40740.0
October 19, 2017, 12:08:13 am
11:
Napoleon 8 Players Game 11
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41936.0
April 25, 2018, 03:26:44 am
12:
Napoleon 8 Players Game #12
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=42424.0
July 26, 2018, 07:05:14 am
Number of Napoleonic Empires FFA games I see in this forum:
1:
Napoleonic Empires: Free For All
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27181.0
May 04, 2012, 12:47:46 am
2:
Napoleonic Empires FFA alternate universe
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27758.0
June 30, 2012, 03:49:17 pm
3:
Napoleonic Empire - 5ppl - Free for All (Noll - Veqryn - Alex - Wheat - Gekk)
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28114.0
August 07, 2012, 05:23:07 am
4:
Napoleon Game 4: Eight players looking for their marshal’s baton!
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33585.0
May 21, 2014, 11:52:23 am
Considerations on the numbering:
Assuming that unfinished games don’t count and my definition of team game is correct, the first 3 games appears to be correctly numbered.
The number 4 game is numbered as number 5. This appears it is due to the fact that, in between of team game 3 and 4, this FFA game was played:
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33585.0
However, that is a FFA game, not a team game (there are no teams: everyone is on its own), so it shouldn’t be counted.
On the other hand, if one would argue that a FFA game should count as a team game (maybe because it allows you to create temporary alliances), then all the following ones should have been counted too (and moved into the “Team Games” sub-subforum):
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27181.0
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=27758.0
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28114.0
Of the aforementioned three games, both the first and the second ones were not successfully finished (thus I guess they wouldn’t count), but the third one was.
So, if counting FFA too as team games, this would add 1 additional game that was played before the first one in the team game list started, and this would make the first 3 team games incorrectly numbered.
Re-summarizing, as far as this game is concerned:
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33585.0
this is named as number 4, namely:
Napoleon Game 4: Eight players looking for their marshal’s baton!
however:
if FFA are their own thing, this would be number 2, or number 4 if counting the unfinished ones too;
if FFA are their own thing but you would count per game and not per map (so keeping the 8 players FFA separate from the 5 players one), this would be actually number 1, or number 3 if counting the unfinished ones too;
if FFA are team games too (I don’t think so) (and you would sum all the games of this map together), this would be number 5, or number 8 if counting the unfinished ones too (2 unfinished FFA and 1 unfinished 2 sides team game).
Anyway, the most reasonable way to account this is, in my opinion, not counting FFA games as team games, nor counting any unfinished games, and this would make that FFA as either the number 1 or 2 of its kind, not 4 (and it would be ignored in numbering the actual team games).
Also, for coherency, then this mentioned game:
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=33585.0
should be moved out of the “Team Games” sub-subsection, into the general “Play Boardgames” subsection, where all the other 3 Napoleonic Empires FFA games are (or having a FFA Games subsection too).
As long as all the above applies, and you don’t count FFA games as team games, the games from number 4 to number 9 are all over-counted by 1 (respectively listed as number 5 to 10), for having added up a FFA as team game, in between of team game 3 and team game 4 (instead, if you count FFA as team games, they would be under-counted by at least 1, as at least 1 other FFA game had been already successfully finished in the past, actually before any 2 sides team games were ever played (or under-counted by 4, if counting all Napoleonic Empires games started so far)).
The following two games:
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=39697.0
axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40740.0
have both been numbered as game 10, while they are two different games, both successfully finished.
Based on the above, the games from number 10 to number 12 (currently played) are correctly numbered, as the numbering was offset by +1 on the number 4 (counted as number 5), but then offset (back) by -1 on the number 10 (counted as number 10, like number 9).
p.s.: Looks like all FFA mods of Napoleonic Empires has been ditched. Disliked?