Comrades,

Thanks, Ivan, for those tips.

I should add that originally this problem arose because the last time we play (months ago), I could only find an electronic copy of the Revised rules to hand out to my players. This time around I managed to find 2nd Ed. Rules in PDF to spread around, so that problem is solved.

Secondly, when I put the various options to my players, they all voted to play straight 2nd. Ed. Rules, so my proposition is moot at this point. Clearly they do not understand the subtle difference between a one-hit and a two-hit Battleship! Arg!

Cheers.

Thanks, Hobbes!

Not helpful!  :-P

Well that makes more sense. Bidding rules and strategies do not seem to be spelled out clearly elsewhere. They seem to skip the basics.

Greetings All.

I am organizing a game in a couple of weeks with mostly new/inexperienced players. Unfortunately, I am stuck with the Classic/2nd Edition board and pieces, but like the Revised Edition rules, so I am thinking of running this as a hybrid game. In this case, it would mean:

NO: Artillery
NO: Destroyers
YES: 2-hit Battleships
YES: All other Revised ed. rules, including new production values and unit stats, submergable subs, limited production at ICs, etc.

So my questions are:

1. Has anyone else played this way?
2. How does the combination of new rules/old board affect game balance? (Off hand, I can see an advantage of the new tanks for Germany on the Eastern front, but a disadvantage when invading Egypt on G1.)
3. Any suggestions for modifications of rules and/or pieces?

Theoretically, the Revised Edition rules are all “Better,” as they represent years of gameplay and feedback, and personally I like most of them. My concern really is about only getting half the benefit while lacking the new pieces.

So if the lowest bid is 6, then do all players start with an extra 6 IPC?

And generally, the bidding method assumes everyone wants to play Axis, which certainly cannot be true of everyone… So if you want to play Allies you just make a higher bid?