Posts made by Col. Ty Webb

Is the new '42 game a joke too?

@techroll42:

I meant that a hand drawn map shows its fake.

You actually think that’s the picture Wizards released for the map of the game? That somebody in 2008 drew a map shows that a 1941 game can’t be printed in 2012.

You’re not even being objective about it. You want it to be a joke and now are turning everything you see into evidence that it is.

Sorry, but April’s Fools jokes don’t begin in Jan. only to run past Apri 1, and they don’t involve this much disinformation. You’re giving the people at WoTC much more credit than they deserve for their “role” in this joke.

Delusional :-D

I’ve laughed for 45 minutes over how a man who thinks an entire company is playing an April Fool’s joke on him can call someone else delusional.

That’s good stuff.

Remember Crusty, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to fool you. Don’t worry. When the game hits the shelves I’ll be here to remind how silly you made yourself look for a week.

Bad thing is that I’m sure that even after you’ve opened the box, set up the pieces and played a game of Axis and Allies 1941 that you’ll still say its WOTC playing a big joke on all of us.

You’re right, uncrustable.

Everybody but three people in the entire Axis and Allies community decided to go through this entire scheme of putting up links that someone found, then taking them down months before you even looked for it but having other people tell you they saw it, putting out a news release on April 2nd (but telling you about it on April 1) so that the rest of the world will know it’s not an April’s Fools joke, then paying techroll to come on here and agree with you so you’re not alone.

You’re a very important man to have thousands of people conspiring on a joke aimed at just one person.

So random people who have nothing to do with the company who speculate about a game, OH THIS MUST MEAN ITS TRUE lol

Learn how to read lol, when you do, go back and reread my post you responded too :P
[/quote}

I read it, just don’t see how any of it means you make any sense.

LOL! Oh sorry, Djensen told you on Aprils Fools, THIS MEANS ITS AN APRILS FOOLS JOKE lol. If that’s when you heard it, though everybody else in the world that know about it heard about it well before April 1 or after April 2 on this site. So a random person who has nothing to do with the company tells you about a game on APril 1 and it MAKES IT AN APRILS FOOLS JOKE. LMAO

Learn how to think and then go back and try to reason again how an April’s Fools joke would begin in Jan and is still going past April 1. You either don’t know the meaning of Aprils Fools day, or don’t know anything about jokes.

Keep being so positive you’re right with absolutely no evidence to support yourself. It’s been good for a few chuckles.

Where has it been talked about since January ?

Harris Game Design. Somebody posted something there on Jan. 11.

Don’t have a calendar near me, but that’s at least a few weeks before April.

I think it’s funny you’re so sure it’s a joke when you are as clueless as anybody.

I like your approach Gar, but there’s a problem - I think what we players as a community might do is often very different from WOTC (see Global OOB).

One thing that seems a little funny to me is that they move the start date back to 1941 (as opposed to '42) then say it’s going to be a shorter game. I know that it’s mainly marketing, it wouldn’t make much sense to make another '42 game with Spring 1942 still on the market.

To address Gar’s list,

1. no new units or rules (Absolutely, maybe even take a couple units out. Cruisers and arties maybe, or like you mentioned, subs.)

2. less pieces, less income (I also agree here, but if all countried are scaled equally then it will shorten the lentgth of a round, but maybe not the number of rounds)

3. Smaller map (I think this is the worst way to shorten a game, but it needs to be done if this is to be an introductory game.)

4. No specail china rules, airbases, etc. (These weren’t in the Spring 42 game, so if they are basing the new game off of it they propbably won’t be in there.

5. no sbr (I would add no optional rules to that as well. No option of scrambling or a sea zone being open or closed.)

One I would like to add, if it’s a game for newbies, is moving the purchase unit phase to the end of the turn. The couple of people I taught it to had a much easier time purchasing their units after all of the fighting was done than at the beginning of the round. Â

I found a WWII scenario for Civ IV BTS that’s pretty good. By a guy named Tinder. It can be found on the civfantatics site.
It’s the only thing I’ve actually played on Civ IV.

@Bunnies, maybe the programmer is a pervert and if you give him some hallucinogens and a hamster… there’s only one place he’s gonna put him, and it ain’t on any tile.

And I’d rather have a box of donut holes. They’ll be lighter.

@The:

I do agree. But you should br able to do Bombing raids on there units too so you could not only could lose I.P.C, but tanks and infantry.

You can. It’s called attacking or strafing.

Kim,

All facts, but not implemented very well.

You compared a heavy cruiser to a fast battleship with the Wichita and the Iowa classes.

In real life each different type of ship (battleship, cruiser, destroyer) had their own variations within each other. Yes, there are many times when the line was almost completely blurred between one ship and the other, but in Axis and Allies there are no different classes among each of the ships. There is one type of battleship, one type of cruiser, etc.

To say that the fastest of the battleships was the same speed and range of the slowest of cruisers is an unfair comparison.

There were also cruisers in the Alaska Class that were as big and sometimes bigger as some battleships.

By your logic, they should take two hits to sink.

I voted other.

I don’t think it was ever plausible for Japan to win a conventional war and most in Japan knew that. Even with many of the options you listed, I think it would have mattered little against the production capabilities of the US.

I think the only way of Japan being able to keep the gains they had acquired was if they had used they defensive tactics they went to later in the war, from the very beginning of it. Had they defended Guadalcanal the same way they did Iwo or Peleliu (causing as many American deaths as possible from hidden defenses and abandoning the banzai charges) they may have been able to cause enough American deaths to force peace talks.

Even that was probably unlikely, though.

I’ve always thought cruisers should be able to move an extra space.

At least historically, they were made for higher speeds and more fuel capacity.

I live in Cumberland.

I’ve only ever played a handful of games of Spring '42 online, but own both 1940 games (Never played). I’ve been to Morgantown a few times and would have no problem coming up. My work schedule sounds similar and I can usually get any day but Friday or Saturday off with ease.

Shoot me a message or something and I’m sure we can figure something out.

The US doesn’t get those IPCs.

You can’t move UK troops on the US turn, Doc.

I think that about does it. Not making enough money to keep up with Germanyin europe, let alone Japan.

Good game. Be more than willing to play again after a small break.

18 Dice rolled and not one 1

Inf retreats to Rus

Results
Kaz lwlo inf
Nov dwlo 3inf

Placement
6inf Rus

Collect 18 for total of 18

Flip v Col.Ty Rus12.AAM

One hit would be nice!!

Nov(?) 3inf
Rolls: 3@1; Total Hits: 03@1: (2, 5, 3)

defending 2inf
Rolls: 2@2; Total Hits: 22@2: (1, 2)

Nov(3) 3inf
Rolls: 3@1; Total Hits: 03@1: (5, 5, 6)

defending 2@2:
Rolls: 2@2; Total Hits: 02@2: (6, 5)