Posts made by Craig Yope

@Gargantua:

a 10 hour drive is nothing.  I flew 3 hours to get there! :P

And boy are my arms tired!!! :-o

ghr2- I did half of that drive from the north side of Detroit, but I can understand doubling up that from Chicago would be tough.  Especially when you can go to Origins, GCI, and Spring Gathering from where you are for under half of that drive.

Don’t get me wrong, it was a good time.  The guys run a great get together.

Now if the border goons would leave me alone, the trip would be perfect. :roll: :| :cry:

You are definitely going to hurt your chances of anything good happening if you end up knocking over that “tea” onto the white carpet. :-o

A rule set that receives too little playtesting and a game that comes with too few parts are two separate issues.

The first is under the control of the game designer while the second is under the control of the game manufacturer.

And having worked with Larry on other A&A games, even the first issue can be seriously affected by the game manufacturer and its deadlines.

Now don’t get me wrong, I am unhappy with the amount on work that seems to be going on after the fact on games like AA1914 (and AA40 for that matter).  But at least there is work going on after the fact.  Larry could have just washed his hands of the situation and moved on.

The best thing to do is actually be a constructive part of the discussion instead of bitching.  Make your displeasure know and then more forward with helping out.  Otherwise people are just going to tune you out.

Larry is stubborn enough as it is.  You pull this act over on his site, in his face, and see what you get.  Won’t be pretty. :-o

Border crossing nonsense aside, the trip was well worth it.

Friday night was beer and AA1914 in the FMG Bunker with Jeremy, Tim, and INGWU man.  (Sorry, but with so many new faces I always have trouble remembering the names.  Maybe after a few more events it will finally stick!)

We central powers were rocking after three reounds. 8-)

Saturday was a long Global 40 game in which I played Japan as part of the winning Axis team.  It was called after 8 or 9 rounds with it looking like USSR would eventually fall to the German assault.

I fumbled a round five amphib on the Philippines that start a bit of a chain reaction on non combat moves to cover my ass.  The US then went for a knock out blow on the weakened Home Island defense fleet.  Only through good dice rolls was I able to turn that battle into a (mostly) mutual annihilation affair.  The Pacific then kind of stagnated through the rest of the game as the US then had to try to rebuild while spending more in the Atlantic to help out the UK there.

Italy did well early on and even amphibed the West Indies, but was slowly slapped down by UK efforts in Africa and the Middle East.  I cleared out China but burnt the majority of my land units on a UK India stack in Burma.  I was looking for a wipe out of both sides but the Inf/art stack that the UK had rolled really well and I had to eventually bail the air out.

USSR contested Leningrad for along time but finally fell back as the Germans pushed in the south.  The Germans traded Stalingrad with the Soviets just as the Japanese moved in from the back side with some units.  At the same time a small recon task force of the Wermacht was starting the long slog across Siberia.

The Germans even took a turn to put in a small nuisance fleet turn 6 to harass the Allies in Atlantic.

Good game!

End of the night was a game of Conquest of the Empire- the second rule set.  Got crushed by Aaron in the third (and final) round of play.  Ah well, still fun.

Sunday was a couple of other games (Ticket to Ride Europe and Carcassonne) and then a bit of talk with guys before making the trek home.  Some of the same guys (and other new guys) who played Global 40 with me on Saturday were playing Oztea’s Global 41 set up.  Looked like a fun change of pace.

Jeremy and crew run a great event.  I would highly recommend it to all A&A gamers.

Rolling in Friday afternoon/early evening! :-D

What bar is the gathering spot for the pre-party? :wink: :mrgreen:

Here is a link to a similar attempt by me to redo a map (Xeno’s Europe at War/Russia at War) with mostly hex sea zones.

http://talk.consimworld.com/WebX?14@@.ee6d70e/59

In the Atlantic is works brilliantly, but I soon realized why the original designer choose the sea zone lines that he did in the Med.  It is always a compromise when doing this kind of work,

When he shows up on Saturday we just tie him to a chair.  Then he can’t leave!  :evil:

I blame most major “incidents” in my life on Jeremy.  It’s easy, he’s in a whole 'nother country. :wink:

32 unique participants.

There 15 games the first round, with 12 or 13 in the second round.

Maybe 8 games in the third round.  Ty Hansen ended up capturing the championship again beating not only Goia son in the semifinals and then the Goia dad in the final.

Unfortunately, I lost a close game to the dad in the second round and then another close one in the third round.  Good time though and didn’t feel outplayed in anyway.  Just needed to tweak a few things and could have won.

@toblerone77:

@Craig:

We (playtesters for the AA50) talked him into/worked with him to come up with defenseless transports based on our experiences with other games. �

The main example being this game (the first edition):
http://www.ww2wargame.com/

That game along with Xeno’s Europe/Russia at War have more involved combat systems that allow for air to air combat prior to each round of ground or sea combat. � As such, nuances like naval AA and extra warships (cruisers and destroyers) allow for defenseless transports.

Classic (and even Revised) transports could be said to have escorts (corvettes, destroyer escorts, etc.) that are included in the unit but not big enough to warrant an individual piece at this scale. � That way they have a defensive number but not an offensive number. � Also, the inclusion of two hit battleships and now two hit carriers have shifted the damage taking to warships.

Is it perfect? � No. � But the using of transports as hit takers is a joke. � On the scale of the Classic and Revised games, it is a necessary evil. � Only by giving the map more sea zones can you then bring in more units and start differentiating better between the unit capabilities.� � We were able to start that transition in AA50 because of the expansion of the map.� � And it continued in Global.

Craig, that’s fine. However showing a game that isn’t Axis & Allies but similar doesn’t outright invalidate others opinion. Secondly, totally away from this particular subject discussed in this thread, play testing hasn’t exactly hit the mark of perfection in quite a few releases since revised. I don’t think I need to list all the problems including the latest game 1914 that have come up.

The transport issue wasn’t about absorbing hits. It was about transports having some protection. DK suggested a 10 IPC TRN, costing more than what a DD costs, at a 1 defense only roll. who in thier right mind is going to use a weaker transport that costs more as fodder?

Lastly, I simply pointed out that I leave it up to my play groups as to give a defensive roll to transports or not. My arguement was that at the right cost DDs and TRNs play thier intended role and keeps easy picking air raids to a minimum in some games. This entire thread started as a way to give LIGHT protection to transports while not negating the role of a destroyer as the workhorse of naval engagement. It was also brought up that in several editions of Axis&Allies the destroyer has performed differing roles constantly. This may seem ridculous when it applies to transports to some, but ask those same people what they think about Cruisers. You’ll hardly get a standing ovation for the addition of that unit. MANY HAVE CALLED THOSE GIMMICK. In fact our Liason Imperious Leader has suggested increasing the movement to 3.

So I simply ask WTF is so outlandish about DK’s HOUSE RULE? It’s not going to change anyone else’s game here unless they choose to use it. Why throw venom at those who choose to use it in thier own house games or even thier own tournies?

Well, I wasn’t trying to attack anyone, I was just giving some background on where the defenseless transport came from.

As always you have to put the info into its proper context and that is why I gave some other games as examples of where the idea came from and how it is used is said games.

The biggest difference between a game like Struggle and A&A is the ability of the defender to retreat (or not).  But the complexity of the combat system also affects how the various units are used and what combat values they have.

All that has to be weighted when balancing the needs of something like the transport.

As for the playtesting, we did a good deal of work on AA50, but were brought in late on Global.  Only got in three sessions on Europe and then only three sessions on the Global rules.  REALLY unhappy with that situation.  We haven’t done anything since, so I won’t take any responsibility (or acclaim) for 1941, 1942 2nd Edition, or 1914.

Really to get the interaction that most seem to want concerning transports you are going to have to change many of the variables concerning naval combat and pricing.  Maybe even the unit line up.

But I don’t see that ever going anywhere with Larry.  Global is about as far as I ever see him going in complexity.  And that may have even been too much for him in hindsight.

We (playtesters for the AA50) talked him into/worked with him to come up with defenseless transports based on our experiences with other games.

The main example being this game (the first edition):
http://www.ww2wargame.com/

That game along with Xeno’s Europe/Russia at War have more involved combat systems that allow for air to air combat prior to each round of ground or sea combat.  As such, nuances like naval AA and extra warships (cruisers and destroyers) allow for defenseless transports.

Classic (and even Revised) transports could be said to have escorts (corvettes, destroyer escorts, etc.) that are included in the unit but not big enough to warrant an individual piece at this scale.  That way they have a defensive number but not an offensive number.  Also, the inclusion of two hit battleships and now two hit carriers have shifted the damage taking to warships.

Is it perfect?  No.  But the using of transports as hit takers is a joke.  On the scale of the Classic and Revised games, it is a necessary evil.  Only by giving the map more sea zones can you then bring in more units and start differentiating better between the unit capabilities.  We were able to start that transition in AA50 because of the expansion of the map.  And it continued in Global.

Long ago I lobbied for this change:

_India as a separate power-

To clear up any confusion concerning territorial claims, just treat UK India as a separate power. They would still move and attack at the same time as UK Europe, but they would be able to take back UK Europe territories from the Axis on the European map and use the IPCs if London has fallen. ANZAC can, why not UK India?

Also, it would clear up all other rule cross over questions, like the use of money for tech rolls and tech usage. The only exception to the base game rules at that point would be that the two UK powers would be moving and attacking at the same time. That is a lot easier to remember than the current rules exceptions.

While a separate color for UK India would be nice, it isn’t absolutely necessary. A set of control markers specific to UK India (Union Jack CM) would be all that is necessary. If a map redo is in order, then the UK India control could be incorporated into the initial map set up.

Here is the break down that would be necessary:

UK India- (17 IPCs)
West India
India
Ceylon
Burma
Shan State
Malaya
Kwangtung
Borneo

ANZAC- (10 IPCs)
Western Australia
Northern Territory
South Australia
New Guinea
Queensland
New South Wales
Victoria
New Britain
Solomon Islands
New Zealand
Gilbert Islands
Fiji
Samoa

UK Europe- (28 IPCs)
Yukon Territory
British Columbia
Alberta/Saskatchewan/Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick/Nova Scotia
British Guiana
Iceland
Gibraltar
Scotland
United Kingdom
Gold Coast
Nigeria
Malta
South West Africa
Belgian Congo
Alexandria
Rhodesia
Union of South Africa
Egypt
Anglo-Egyptian Sudan
Cyprus
Trans-Jordan
Kenya
Tanganyika Territory
British Somaliland_

Also, my group tried to play with different combos of India and ANZAC producing and/or moving together, but the shifting of the IPCs was too powerful against the Japanese.  The separate purchasing is a needed mechanic to simulate the spread out priorities of defending the Commonwealth

While I still think that the moving/attacking at the same time (of UK forces) is a good thing it may take powering down the UK India and ANZAC forces early on to make it viable.

Once again the A&A event at the World Boardgaming Championships is a Precon. Which means that it is run on the weekend before the main convention runs.

The event uses the 2004 Revised game as the base edition for tournament play.

The tournament format consists of three preliminary rounds determining the top four players who advance to the semi-final round. The winners there then fight it out for the championship “wood”. “Wood” is the term used to describe the plaque given to winner of an event, but depending on the prior years’ participation there may be plaques given for multiple place in the event. This year shows a plaque will be given for the top three places.

First round is random pairings, but the next two rounds is matching based on like records with seeding based on VT scoring in the prior round(s). The idea is to get to the point where you have (depending on the number of entrants) three or four 3-0 players who then advance to the semis. Any spots in the top four not filled by enough 3-0 players are then filled by the highest ranking 2-1 player(s). So based on the scoring system on the event preview page, there is a reason to lose “well”. You never know if a good loss will still pan out in getting you to the elimination rounds.

I haven’t been there for this event for a couple of years, but I am looking to go out early this year and actually competing in it (I was the event GM for multiple years and only played games in an Eliminator role.). Still in the planning stages though.

http://www.boardgamers.org/yearbkex/a&apge.htm
http://www.boardgamers.org/wbc/precon.htm

For convention info:
http://www.boardgamers.org/

For WBC info, just click on the shortcut listed on that page.

The colors have always varied widely, even when they were calling it by the same name.

As for the latest color names, I can’t verify exactly what they represent or if they are close to anything that has come out lately.  It has been a few years since I have ordered from Xeno.

The way I see it is this:

A. If the rules do not specifically ban it, then it’s legal. �
Bidding is a house rule, it’s not to be found in the rule books, or I have yet to see it as even an optional rule. � For perspective, TECH is optional and is mentioned in the rule book, so it’s not a house rule even if implemented in a game.

B. The rules already put non-Chinese units on the board for China and allow China to use them as if they owned them. � Allowing them to do the same for other pieces does not feel like much of a stretch,….

As Krieg has stated, the units that China can legally have are set out in the rulebook.  From those that it can produce to the one extra special unit that it is given pre-game start, it is all in the rules.

Any bid would have to conform to units that it is able to build.  Anything else would be a stretch.

Bidding is a nice mechanism to help level any inconsistencies and to give the game some variety, but giving a power the ability to obtain a unit that it normally can’t possess is beyond the scope (and intent) of the game.

@djensen:

But it needs to be done with grace and tact.

He can’t do that.  It’s not in his nature.

The way he posts is “a window to the soul”.

@FieldMarshalGames:

@Craig:

We’re hoping to snag a ‘celebrity’ guest attendee or two…

Wait a second?!?!?!?! :-o :-o :-o

I don’t rate as at least a “B”-lister in the A&A community? :cry:

You are an “A” in my books….  the biggest AAA “celebrity” that I have ever defeated in Battle  8-)

Jeremy

You beat whom???  I don’t remember any such thing!!!

Actually, all I really remember about that game of AA50 was the young guy who was playing Italy kept leaving and coming back.  I remember more about the multiple Acquire games and the Agricola game that we played.  Also, I think we played Cosmic Encounter.

Must have been the Sleeman’s!!!

We’re hoping to snag a ‘celebrity’ guest attendee or two…

Wait a second?!?!?!?! :-o :-o :-o

I don’t rate as at least a “B”-lister in the A&A community? :cry:

Well, it looks like I am coming!

It’s either that or I just made a $50 donation to the FMG cause.

I was thinking that I could bring all my playtesting material from my work on AA50 and AA40 for all to see a glimpse into how the process works.  A real look at how the sausage is made. :wink:

I tried again with a variety of name variants and it still gave me an error message every time I hit the buy now button.

I don’t know what to say.  Is there another way to pay?

@IWillNeverGrowUp:

@Craig:

I tried to register this morning and I kept getting this screen when trying to sign up.

Error Detected
Error Message

Some required information is missing or incomplete. Please correct your entries and try again.
Some required information is missing or incomplete. Please correct your entries and try again.

Please advise.

The only way I have been able to replicate this while trying to register for the event (ie : pay for admission) is to NOT fill out the “Name on Gamer Pass” field.

You have to fill out that field or you get this error.

I did fill it out.

I will try again though.