Posts made by ch0senfktard

@Gamerman01:

I think ANZ and India are OP, esp. having 3 aircraft at start, each…

I think Japan is OP, esp. having 21 aircraft at start…

Seems like a great a idea, as long as Canada is only allowed to have its own territory IPCs and any that it captures, Sea-Lion isn’t totally out of the question in this case.

@Daedelus:

Anyway, I a about to play AA WW1 for the 1st time on July 13th which I am happy to say is my 40th B-day (not to be confused with D-day).  Which errata should I use (and/or any rules modifications)?

Check out Krieghund’s post on page 14 of the FAQ thread.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30272.195

And there is the “Potential” tournament rules, give it a look.
http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=18335

@ryguy:

@Krieghund:

1.  Yes.
2.  Yes.
3.  Yes.
4.  Yes.
5.  No.
6.  No.

In respect to the answer to “1”, I thought the U.S. could NEVER load transports before being at war?

They’re referring to Allied and Central Powers transports loading and unloading with neutral U.S. ships in the same sea zone.

The way I interpret your situation, I’d say…
No, UK Pacific would still have control.

In order for ANZAC to control another ally’s territory, they’d have to capture it from an enemy while said ally doesn’t have control of their capital.

Just because ANZAC is already there doesn’t mean the territories will switch ownership…
They don’t have a Dutch like relationship with UK. (Even though I really think they should… and vice versa.)

@Pacific:

HBG already makes them:

http://www.historicalboardgaming.com/Facilities-Acrylic_c_184.html

Yes and those are MUCH better than the cardboard from the game… I still have many to replace.

But I think they were talking about plastic pieces that look like facilities, not flat acrylic that only represents its facility by the wording and image on it.

Yeah. I think it should be tilted 45 degrees counter clockwise.
It would fix the problem of tilted territory names.
The extra space on the corners could be filled by information like rules and unit stats.

@almashir:

I wonder if it’s possible, with a deliberate strategy and coordinated ganging up, to cause a collapse of one of these powers before they even get their first turn?

Italy is pretty safe turn 1.
Ottomen… well… Lets see:
Guaranteed to be atleast contested-
Russia can invade Mesopotamia - 3IPCs
Britain can invade TransJordan via Egypt - 1 IPC

The other 3 territories that can be invaded by sea have 6 Infantry and 1-2 artillery.
Also, to cause at least an economical collapse, the one French transport and/or British transport in the med will have to invade Ankara and/or Constantinople. With only two units each, there is no way they’ll survive the mines, artillery preemptive strikes and then the usual battle. So they’re pretty safe.

Is this set the only WW1 set that HBG will do?

@Johnson73:

My I ask what you are going to do with all those units?  If US bought 5 tanks during a game that would be about 4 more than they would need.

Yeah, that is way more than enough pieces for US tanks in A&A…
But, on the other hand, they don’t necessarily have to only be used in A&A.

@Shakespeare:

Kreig

I complained about the various Alpha’s becz I thought the whole Alpha process was a joke.
You and Larry “fixed” 1940 with a sledgehammer rather than some simple elegant adjustments.

You still did not address the questions I asked about the 1914 playtesting about the number of units and about Africa.

And why not address the question I had about wether or not you believe there was enough playtesting for 1914?

I mean come on and try to be accountable. You like the the “Official Answers” aspect of your association with Axis Allies, 
But you don’t want to accept responsibility.

Your answers seem to indicate you have much in common with the IRS and The AG’s office and the State Dept.
Where no one knows nothing, like Sgt Shultz; and no one has any accountability.

This is not the complain to Krieg about 1940/1914 playtesting thread, its the potential 1914 Tournament Rules thread… lol…
I don’t see the problem with the multiple Alphas anyway. The way I see it, there are now multiple set ups and rules to play by, even if some may be considered “unbalanced.” I found it pretty fun to run into a new set up and rules to play with my group.

Anyway, I should have a game at the end of this month. I’ll post a report on HGD afterward.
I’m pretty excited about the collapse rules, but I think the check for collapse phase going first in a player’s turn is harsh. I think it should happen at the end of their turn, so they at least have a chance to prevent it from happening… But, oh well. I guess I’ll have to see how my group can try to avoid collapse, even with it being the first phase of a player’s turn.

“Base Production” simply means the amount of IPCs that territory gives, which happens to be “3”

In many A&A games, the IPC production of a territory is directly linked to the limit of the amount of troops that may be produced from a factory there. (Which I guess is why its called “Base Production” in TripleA)

In Pacific/Europe/Global 1940, the factory production limit is not linked to the IPC production of the territory they’re on.

@Commando:

I thought this was the appropriate thread? If not, where is the appropriate thread?

The new rules are actually just officially proposed rules to try out… To test it out for a future Tournament ruleset

Two-Movement thread:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31111.0

Tournament Rules thread:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31187.0

You can’t build ships at India… No naval base…

@oztea:

Dont you have grey chips?

Obviously he does. The problem is that there are 14 TERRITORIES with tanks.

@AK_Grown:

I thought it was one china infantry/gun per territory?  No stacking builds.

That is how we play it on the board.

I can imagine that the Japanese player would have a swell time in Asia.

I could have sworn that Germany declared war on Russia and France first, thinking war with them was inevitable anyway.

I once sent a tactical and a fighter into Paris… he rolled snake eyes… I’ll never attack Paris with planes ever again…

No, those are too large… And aren’t even decals…

Well, over at Harrisgamedesign, Krieghund said this:

Yes, it’s legit, but there are some errors in the post that need to be corrected, most notably the turn order.

http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=18258

Wonder what the actual turn order is then…