Posts made by LuckyDay

@Krieghund:

Semantics?  I don’t think so.  Not sharing a turn is a big change, especially for the navies, as they can’t attack together.  Not to mention adding another player position.  It may be a small change rules-wise, but that doesn’t mean it’s not significant.

@Captain:

I asked Larry over at his website if ANZAC would be separate in the global game, but he said:

Q: Being as Canada is a Commonwealth of UK, and ANZAC is a separate power, how will that play out in the “full” game, both economically and with territories?
A: In the Global game both the ANZAC and Canadian forces will probably be controlled by the UK player.

Q: Will ANZAC control all of the UKs territories in the AAP map, with UK controlling the ones on the Europe map?
A: No, again the UK player will control all commonwealth territories in the global game. I’m not 100% sure about this however… In the AAP there will be a dedicated UK player - based out of India and the ANZAC player out of Australia/New Zealand.

that change is getting smaller and smaller.  No one said it wasn’t significant, just that it was a stretch to say it was a brand new power.

@Krieghund:

@LuckyDay:

@Krieghund:

It’s just as much a separate power from India as the United States is.

India now separate too?

I should have said “UK”, not “India”.  I was thinking classic Pacific.

no, we were talking classic Pacific, just wanted to make sure whether we were getting a fresh news scoop.

@maverick_76:

I usually do boardgames.com but I’ll wait and ask for the pacific one for Christmas I think. If it comes out before that then I will order it immediately, not making the same mistake as I did with AA50. I think as long as these are less than $75 a piece that is a fair price to pay.

don’t worry too much, I read that Dec. 21 or 22 was the expected release date.

@johnnymarr:

IL’s maps and FMG’s pieces really have to be the smart way to go, once those are combined, AH’s sales should drop dramatically…. but sshhhhh!..

does anything make you happy?  i’m guessing you’ll find problems with anything, and probably blame it on Krieghund

dang, and here I thought that those little smile faces were quite obviously sarcasm…. so much for emotion-icons, eh!   apparently more of that mis-understanding what is implied.  
And here I was trying to help.  And never blamed anything on Krieg.  even gave him props during…

@Emperor_Taiki:

Yah, but 1939 is a boring start date.

not if you are the axis and like seeing things blow up with little chance of retaliation!

@Brain:

although I would have loved to see Germany invading Poland in the game. I want a game that covers the entire war.

mighta been interesting for Poland to start and be controlled by the UK player, or the French player, since they were together as allies to start.  Then Germany would have more to worry about on both fronts than just USSR and FRE… who knows…

So France will have 2 ICs, one of which being a major IC in Paris that touches Germany.  Once the Allies liberate Paris that should be a real fun thing for Germany to have touching it’s border… yipes!

IL’s maps and FMG’s pieces really have to be the smart way to go, once those are combined, AH’s sales should drop dramatically…. but sshhhhh!.. :roll: :-D

@Emperor_Taiki:

In the global game, when you combine Europe and Pacfic, what will be the maximum number of players. Will Austrilia still have its own player or will it be controlled by the US or UK? and will Italy be its own player or will it be controlled by the German player?

@Brain:

Are you saying I have to go purchase the $25 AA42 to get better pices than my $100 AA50! Go figure.

ET & BD:
from LH via the Fact thread…
@Imperious:

But if you want to know which powers have their own “Income/economy”, they are:
US
UK
Russia
France
China
Australia/New Zealand (ANZAC)
Germany
Japan
Italy
(LH 7/29/09)

Did I tell you that Russia now has a new Battle ship sculpt.
Source: (LH 8/1/09)

though those AA42 pieces may be a bit different…

M.I.R.:
@Make_It_Round:

Will the USSR be represented in the AAP40 game? I saw some USSR territories on one fuzzy pic of the game board [BTW, can someone post the link to the board pix? The box cover shows up here, but I can’t see the map in the other thread for some reason… thanks], but with the game being billed as a “2-4 player” game, I can’t help but wonder if the Russians are going to be there, and if so what they’re going to be getting up to…

link to pics:  http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=15181.0
and about territories…
@squirecam:

Notes:
The russian territories are useless for AAP40 but will be used in the “global” version.
French Indo China is indeed French !

@Krieghund:

ANZAC has its own economy and pieces, and its own turn.  It can be played by a separate player.  It’s just as much a separate power from India as the United States is.  In the original Pacific, while its economy was separate, it shared its turn and pieces with India and was controlled by the same player.

that’s a pretty semantical argument.  It’s just a stretch to say it’s a new power, they were in the old one, had their own economy and used the same pieces as UK would, just weren’t called it and moved at the same time.  Now they do all that, with different colored UK pieces, and move separate.  Should a group have played 4-player, they have have split control for a separate person from India and wah-la…  but whatever floats your boat…

@Krieghund:

It’s just as much a separate power from India as the United States is.

India now separate too?

My feelings are that with AA42 being the flagship of the series and that Larry wants to do more revisions further on down the road as well as the price for them that all signs point to “yes”, these will be limited edition runs and those who want them should grab them.  If you can get $250 for AA50 on ebay now, imagine at least double that for the complete set of the 40’s you will get 18 months from now.  I mean, wow, AA50 will be sitting on shelves not even being looked at next to Guadalcanal and Dday, because those will be up for revisions too.

@Krieghund:

By the way, the Australian forces aren’t simply being renamed.  ANZAC is a separate, playable power.

@CWO:

Do you know to what extent (if any) the ANZAC forces will have different sculpts than the British pieces, and/or if they’ll be differentiated by color from the (I assume) beige-colored British units?

@Krieghund:

They will be the same sculpts as the UK in a different shade of tan.

In AAP, the “Australia” player/power, whatever you want to call it represented Australia and New Zealand, as well as some of the small British colonial islands and such around them, correct?  While India was “india” and the rest of the BCW controlled/influenced territories on the board.  So can ANZAC be separate ‘power’ different from what we experienced in AAP, while having the same basic oversight and control and using the same UK pieces, only in a different color?  Is there something more to all this, or is this just a terminology game?

Krieghund,

I don’t believe I ever stated that I believed you worked for AH or WOTC.  I know quite well who you are and what you do.  I simply pointed out some items that could be misleading to customers, because I have that point of view, where-as AH, WOTC, and honestly you and Larry look at things from a different view, because you are the other side of the table with the games.  (i dunno, maybe there are more sides as you and Larry don’t want to sit on the same side as AH)  Normally for businesses that want to grow market share and cliental, they want feedback about good and bad and how they are viewed.

We here at this forum have some mighty powerful impressions about AH/WOTC and I have been part of the group that has sent correspondence on numbers of occasions to them.  Hopefully, that helps, who knows!?  Mostly, I’ve gotten the cold shoulder from them on those subjects and a bunch of BS about the website will have all the info and yada yada yada.

But hey, if people’s impressions of how the games are marketed, priced, described, etc are not wanted, then hazzah and that.  My businesses and others are different.

You chose to respond and try and correct my impression of the release, great.  You didn’t understand I knew what was meant, and came from there.  Thanks.  This whole thing is really blown way up here far beyond what was intended and is becoming a drag, man…

i haven’t’ seen too much specifically released yet about the ports, one thing though IL has on the info thread:

FYI… naval bases, factories and airbases now each have their own air defense. AA guns are restricted to protecting land units only.

so defense can be increased.  other stuff’s been bantered about but I don’t see much straight from LH yet.

@Captain:

LH 9/5/09

No to Railroad (as much as I love the idea).

There will be TECH system but only in the Global game. . Probably no paratroopers. There will not be blockhouses.
I don’t see blockhouses as a potential TECH.

France will be split into 3 territories. Indeed you cannot attack the same territory from the Med and the Atlantic. There is a central territory called France (it contains Paris). It has an IC. It does not touch coast. Coastal territories of the country (France) are worth far less than central France. No buffer between Paris territory and German border. France has two major ICs (This might change to one major and one minor). France will have a major or minor IC on the Atlantic coast. French fleet will have its own turn sequence… It will be controlled probably by the British player, however. Like any power, if the capital falls it cannot produce new units until it is liberated. France will fall! How many axis units it takes with it is what is in question. France can be liberated… In which case it will receive and activate its own economy. It will also receive a certain amount of infantry units (free) that are immediately placed in the game. Viva le France! England will be two territories…

-was going to ask how rail might work in places like NAmerica and Europe where all the territories had rail systems already.  Redeployment or unlimited rail may need to be limited to units that weren’t involved in combat.  Alas, rail seems to be on the sidelines for these games.

-No blockhouses, not even as tech. Well, hello house rules.  seemed like that one was gonna go through too with Larry.

-France in 3 territories, with Paris touching Germany and 2 sea zones each touching Atlantic and Pacific respectively.  French IC on the Atlantic coast, hmmm… should be interesting.

Krieg,  It isn’t that I don’t what the release meant and it isn’t that I don’t understand the way AH writes stuff and even supports the products that Larry and you make, sadly, I understand all too well.  What I was trying to point out was what was implied in the release.  There is a big difference between what is implied and what is meant there and for many people they just won’t grasp the differences because they haven’t been around.

It is a customer issue.  When customers expect something from a product and what they believe they were supposed to get, and then don’t, then you have angry customers on your hands.  Simply telling them that they are wrong will not help, it only makes them more discontent, with the product and the salesperson/company/etc.

Take for instance that the release cites AA50, well, since that was a limited run that is over, and they can’t even get the rules from the AH website, citing that as the basic framework for the new game really means little to many people who are thinking about spending $80ish (American) for a game.  They can compare it to AAP, and they see the Australian forces now simply being renamed as ANZAC, which doesn’t truly make them a new power, and they know what China had before and now will see only artillery as new pieces, but they thought it was much more.

Truly I point out these things not to just throw the ‘negative waves’ out there because that is the opposite of what I want to be doing. (the avatar doesn’t just look nice, eh).  I’ve enjoyed these games for many, many years and it’s sad to see customers turned against companies, (maybe not so much AH, but you and Larry) because of poor advertising and support when they shoot themselves in the foot.  I have dealt with customers for years and have picked up a thing or two about business and people.  They may not always apply, but sometimes yes.  Lose the customers’ trust, you lose the customers and I don’t think that there is a certainty that this demographic is busting at the seams in growth.

I believe LH said that the extra move is only out of port.  Going into port there is no free extra move.  it’s just a game mechanic to make ports more viable to be in…

Riiiiiiight.

In that case someone needs to explain proper grammar to ‘someone’ at AH, and how paragraphs deal with the same topic, so when someone changes topics they are to start a new paragraph.

no blockhouses would be built where ever they are desired to be.  Would be a unit that does not enter the game at an IC, since they have no move points.

picking a border in a territory would make them the equivalent of IL’s forts, yes-no?  that would be a fine thing in my view.  The cost will keep them from being at every territory.

Picking a direction (coastline) is a good thing for Axis, like in Japan with one SZ, bad for Uk with multiple SZs.

@LuckyDay:

who writes these things?!

I get it Krieg.  You wrote it didn’t you or at least were in on it?  Never have I seen you be so adamant about something before.  Ok, I take it all back.  It’s gonna be a beautiful game!

“I do believe he doth protest too much!”  -rough translation-

@Krieghund:

You’re reading more into the terminology than what’s there.

Right before the statement about China’s “more forces” is talk about the new unit types, then ANZAC.  Clearly the line of thought for the whole paragraph directs one to think new units.  And besides, the entire game is the “biggest” AA game ever according to Larry and the next paragraph.  Wouldn’t that mean that every country has “more forces”?  Why then would someone point out that just China gets “more forces”?
I can’t believe you wrote the above statement and then went through arguing all those details!  Here’s my response.  You’re reading more into the terminology than what’s there.

@Krieghund:

@LuckyDay:

on a slightly connected note, any chance you could pass along to the wizards over yonder that they can move AA42 off of the “Upcoming” list and into something like “Now Available”?

I’ve been told that they have their hands full with the new message boards.  They’ll get to it eventually (maybe).

dude, that response is so worth the +1! (+182)

yeah, that’s pretty normal.  Even though the instructions want you to set up all the pieces on the reinforcement charts during set-up there isn’t the piece count to do so.  Good thing is that by the time you need to use those pieces you will have lost sufficient pieces from earlier rounds to use them.

Annoying, yes, but more or less an honest oversight in the compilation of the book and pieces.