Posts made by murraymoto

@FieldMarshalGames:

c) We need legal council; Will our company be sued into non-existence if we make these?  Any professional legal council from the community would be appreciated.

Excellent.

I believe that I’ve read a post from Imperial Leader that states that if you are making your own sculpts, ie, not simply copying, that you would be completely in the clear legally.  And not that I’m wanting to confirm/deny IL’s legal counsel status, but from a layman’s point of view (that’d be me), if you make your own sculpts, there should be no problem in making/selling your own pieces.
–maybe you want to change the name slightly or don’t use AH’s logos and such…

@Krieghund:

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

what you say contradict the rulebook and i would like to have acces to the correct rulebook.

so give to us psatw the opportunity to play the game right using no house rules

give us please acces tho the correct game book if there is one

The only rulebook is the one that came with the game.  However, in order to play by the proper rules, you need to also include the errata from the FAQ, the latest version of which can be found on Larry Harris’ site.

Dooh, how’d I forget that one, nice save Krieghund.

Lema,

listened to the soundtrack last night, it really does add to the atmosphere and gave Russia the will to fight on!

sounds great!

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

If i understood, subs can be hit by other ships without the presence of a destroyer if the subs do not submerge, but can not be hit by planes even if the sub is not submerged.

If this is right then the OFFICIAL ERRATA AND FAQ should make a change to the rulebook saying that subs can only be hit by planes if there is a destroyer present.

It would probably be easier for you to get this question answered if you don’t open multiple topics on the same ‘topic’.

The Official Errata and FAQ are the changes to the rulebook.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/article/ah20081212

states:
Additionally, your aircraft may hit enemy submarines if you have a destroyer on the battle board."
(my italics & bold)

and if anyone knows the whys and the reasons for the way the rules are, it’s Krieghund- it’s in his job description.

@MEGAEINSTEIN:

what you say contradict the rulebook and i would like to have acces to the correct rulebook.

here’s a couple places where the rules errata is being posted and discussed:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/article/ah20081212

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12601.0

We usually just play the Imperial March when it’s the axis’ turn… have to check this out…  aaahh, the pc version… those were days…

nice job lema

@LT04:

Don’t get me wrong I like the D-Day game but out of all the times I have played it I have never seen the allies win.  It has to be the most unbalanced game in the A&A group.

LT,
When you have played DDay, have you played with/without the tactics & strategy cards?  Has that affected much?

I have had the allies win in DDay; think the learning curve is a bit higher for them like in Bulge.

another aspect to consider might be how many players you are gonna have play often–these 3 games are only up to 3 players, GC & BOTB being only two players.  DDay lets you add a 3rd player.

probably if you are asking the question about winning in 3 turns you should have already been looking for the rules tune-up…

sealion can work, sure, but barbarossa is a guarantee without rule-changes, and that I can guarantee on turn 1.
{edit}  no longer a guarantee, Rumanian Wedge counters Barbarossa Tank Push.

I’ve played it a few times, I think IL did a nice job with it. (as usual)

I like how the size of it and as the general scope of the battle becomes bigger, gotta love that.  More options are nice with it.  Hey, you can actually reach Antwerp–talk about doing better than the Axis originally!

I’ve played it with and without the additional units (the Mechanized INF, different fighters… i forget the details) --when without, we substituted them with different mold tanks or just regular fighters.

I think it was easier to play the original after playing IL’s and the variant took longer to play.  but I enjoyed both.  He adds some interesting tweaks to the gameplay, with extra rounds if you gain a minor victory, weather variables and such.

If I recall, there was still a learning curve on the allies and they got their butts kicked the first few times, as you can flank the northern cities on both sides, but then the Allies came around and started learning where to fall back to and strike out of.  There is more opportunities for breaking through the Axis lines too, as they are made longer.  I’ll stop rambling, but if you like the original, why not take the variant for a spin, I wouldn’t be surprised if you like it.

sorry GR, gotta check the date on the post, that was from December 2008

Ahh… someone wiser has spoken, and I personally am glad, I had a couple moments of self-doubt there.

Thanks Kreighund!

@frimmel:

I could certainly go for another game in a similar vein to BOTB. A light game but with a decidedly traditional wargame take on the matter.

Something on the Eastern Front perhaps?

Eastern front would be great.  I hear the scuttlebutt about hope for a Stalingrad game, maybe that could be in the BOTB flair.

@frimmel:

I’ve had that experience as well especially with folks who mostly have played Classic. Telling them they’ll have more fun as the Axis is always met with a you’re-trying-to-put-one-over-on-me attitude. I chide them they’re going to lose no matter which side they pick and they seem to want Allies even more.

Actually had someone laugh at me when I said the Axis has a better chance to win in D-Day. No one ever wants the Axis in that one.  :roll:

LOL  …I think it’s the planes the Allies get, think you are guaranteed more advantage with them.

@LT04:

I would be interested in putting something like this together for a BOTB style game if any one would care to help.
LT

Sounds cool LT, haven’t gotten much into AAM as yet, so not sure if i’d be much help in game play plans though.

I’ve always played it that they lose the IPC’s off the National Production Chart immediately (Germany isn’t affected, only Allied Country’s production goes down) but there is no losing of IPCs immediately from the hand.  On the Allied Nation’s next turn they would receive the lowered amount of IPCs, unless they first retake the convoy zone.

At least that’s been my take on it–someone wiser on this subject may have a better answer.

Pages 16-17 I think can be a bit confusing on the issue, yes, but I think the example on 17 helps.  It mentions income as compared to IPCs.  Income would refer to the amount to be received rather than the amount in a player’s hand.

The German player moves four naval units during Germany’s turn.
A German sub in the Central Atlantic moves into the United
States’ Convoy center. Another German sub in the Azores Sea
moves into a British Convoy Center and back out to its original
zone. A German destroyer moves through a British Convoy center
and into the Azores. A German transport in the Central Atlantic
moves through a Convoy center and into the South Atlantic.
However, because a transport has no attack value, it does not
take control of the Convoy center. The German player places
three German markers on the Convoy centers it now controls,
and the IPC chart is adjusted. The U.S. loses 4 IPCs in income,
while Great Britain loses 8. Germany’s income is not affected.
On the U.S. turn, the American player moves a destroyer from
the U.S. Coast sea zone through the Mid-Atlantic to the Convoy
center. Since the German sub is no longer there, the center is
liberated without combat. The German marker is removed and
Britain’s income is raised 5 IPCs.

@Aretaku:

I’m not of the opinion that Germany is unbeatable even if it uses the tank-blitz the Russians strategy. Committing to all tanks frees up the US/UK quite early, and Germany will have to produce results in the east quickly (read: NO bad dice) because they will eventually have to commit resources to taking back vital IPCs in Western Europe.

Once the Germans are booted from Africa, things start looking grim for the Axis unless Moscow is under direct threat by superior forces.

Maybe I’ve not been thinking outside the box on this enough, but once we discovered the tank-stack plan and decided to stick to the plan even though we usually played a balanced war previously, it was frightening how “lights-out” it was.  We never played bids for AAE before that, but since it’s either been bid or agreement to not tank-stack.
  A reasonable GER opening in the 1st round can clear out the UK navy and can all but guarantee that the Atlantic will take till at least round 3 to be Allied controlled and by then there can be enough GER INF & ARM to drive to Moscow.  If UK/US buy more planes just gives more time for GER to add troops.
  I’ve read IL write this a couple times, that AAE is broken unless a way to beat the tank-stack is found and right now I’d agree.  I have a list of options we’ve tried but to no avail thus far.

@Aretaku:

3)Do Not attack Russia on G1. Force them to attack you & trade land for time as you ship units into the Mid-East to flank them from the South.

While I do like the strategy of flanking via the middle east, I think that it is better to attack Russia in round one…lightly, but take some land, and force him to expose himself to counterattack if he tries to take it back.

Also, Middle east shipping requries naval investment that I am often loathe to spend IPCS on…initially you need tanks to press Russia, later you need inf for counterattacks against US/UK landings.

Even if not going for the “tank stack”, taking a round to allow INF to get into Poland before invading Russia is not necessarily a bad idea.  (Also allows troops from the Balkans vicinity to get abit closer.)

the whole idea is progress in that at least it gives another look for the German navy.

Often I think a number of players with UK are in the mode of attack attack attack or prep the convoy route.  You throw a bunch of German warships out into the Atlantic on Rd1 and some of those UK players are gonna double-take.  No carrier, no destroyer, what’s going on, and they built a plane–hahaha, they are so dead, and then they don’t adjust.

Really I think there’s a lot of thought put into this plan and many players on the UK side are not going to take a good look at it until they have it go sidewise on them a time or two.  --They will not change their plans or way over-react, and yeah, either is probably fine with Germany.  They have opportunity to get some mileage out of the Baltic Fleet.

What I’d like to know is if anyone has found a way to subtlety change the rules to rebalance the game.  I mean, there have been times we’ve played and simply agreed that no tank stack, you must fight a balanced war.  And then, sometimes the Axis win, sometimes not, but just knowing that you can pump a round or two of infantry followed by nothing but tanks and win on round five is crazy. 
  I think it may be about getting some more contact between the Germans and UK/US on the Western front in the first couple rounds because by round 3, all the tanks that are gonna reach Moscow by round 5 have been created and Germany can turtle in Europe.

hmmm… maybe we just need to take the AA50 board and use the Europe half… :roll:

@frimmel:

As Axis I like to bring supplies into the line when the aircraft hit the skies. I tend to leave the Axis INF and/or ART on the reinforcement chart in turn 3-4. That way I bring them on with the supply truck prior to the aircraft turn for the extra AA instead of having to pay to move them. I will also leave INF behind as the line advances in a hex I would like to supply from during the next turn.

I tend to put one dump in the line getting all five AA dice and another one behind it getting three or four dice (2 from supply and truck one or two from a straggling Inf or art.) This has a tendency to split the Allied air cover giving you a bit better chance to not get completly mauled in any one spot.

Putting these two types of hexes adjacent to each other can also have the benifit of a unit on the line being forced to retreat to the supply dump by aircraft. This occasionaly nets another AA dice if the Allied planes have split up.

Each turn the Axis faces planes they must be aware of where the hexes that MUST attack and move are. You will come up against protecting the dump that supplies those and sacrificing the others.

Interesting point about staggering the dump two deep.  I believe you are saying to put one right behind the other.  Have to try that.

I generally put them right into the line when the airpower comes, as my group has not been splitting up the Allied air forces–they take everyone and pulverize 1 target as best they can.  So I need as many AA dice as possible to parse them down.  It would be nice to find a way to make them split the targets, but we found that airpower was neutralized when you split up didn’t level everything you had really on the trucks.  Those may be more important than supplies.  I have had 15 supply chips sitting off board but only 1 truck to move them.  “How’d that work out for you?”  --Not well.

Even losing 1 truck per Airpower round is still enough to win though, especially if you can capture some supplies or (better) trucks from the Allies.

I can often also leave 1 truck at least off board in rounds 5-6 altogether, if you feint towards Bastogne and then reallocate the bulk to the central road towns just north to insure a breakthrough.  You put enough towards Bastogne to attack and keep the Allies resupplying, but make sure and punch through the northern 3 towns and the central towns.  If they pull from Bastogne, you can take it.  If they don’t, you can take enough and not need it…

Since you supply to more hexes from less spots; less trucks.

@frimmel:

This should probably be a sticky at the top of the BOTB and Guadalcanal forums:

@Krieghund:

The first thing that you have to realize about trying to understand this game is that you have to take everything you know about previous A&A games and chuck it out the window.  When you read the rules, treat this game as though it were not an A&A game at all.  Any preconceptions you bring from other A&A games are just going to confuse things, as you are going to read things into the rules that just aren’t there.

That’d probably be a good idea.  Your approach to it is a big part.  You have to forget what you know about other games and learn this like a new game with many of the things you love from the others.

I just play BOTB with a friend over the weekend, and it was his first time playing it.  I tried to explain that it would be easier to play and he would have more fun as the Axis the first time as they get to attack more, but he insisted on the Allies.  Well, turn 4 came and he gave up in disgust with the game.  He pushed everything to the front (against my warning) thinking it was a typical AA game and got clobbered.

I personally am loving BOTB, it’s one of the best and have GC on order-should arrive this week.  Really gives you a tactical aspect that the larger theater strategic games don’t have, and you get actual pieces rather than only cardboard cutouts.

As usual, Krieghund & Frimmel, on the spot making it clear!