Posts made by SgtBlitz

How about the US can “set aside” some of its income for another power the next turn (up to 5, 10 or 15 IPCs worth).  The money is set aside until the Russian or British player’s turn and they get to spend it on their income phase as if its theirs.  If the Axis powers have subs in Allied convoy zones they get a chance to intercept the convoy money; each sub gets a 50% chance to destroy 5 of the incoming IPCs?

1.1  Yeah, improved arty should be better than the “match with two infantry” crap now.  I think the idea of artillery firing first like surprise submarine hits would be awesome, and more realistic, as WWI battles tended to show.  It would give people a reason to spend that extra ipc instead of cranking out all inf every turn.

1.2  Rockets should be able to be improved upon, I like the idea of building AA guns to mass SBR on enemy factories.  Its a gamble, like everything else, but its still cheaper than building bombers, once the tech’s rolled.

1.4  Jesus God, improved industry is a game breaker!  If the enemy is doing a SBR campaign they can lose the game.  The fact that it needs to be rolled helps somewhat.  Maybe remove the extra 2 production and only have the reduced cost to repair factories from the tech.  Or maybe go back to old school Revised A+A and reduce the cost of units overall by 1 IPC.

1.5  I agree, anything but War Bonds would be useful.  Maybe add a Partisans or Liberated Nationalities or Resistance tech, and you get to produce 2 free infantry a turn in a territory you control of your choice.  They would be deployed like how China plays its turn or something.  Would be a meh power but at least useful.

2.2  Jet fighters could be made to roll on a 4 for attack and a 5 for defense?  Maybe let them have a chance to intercept SBR bombers?

2.3  Yes, replace Improved Crapyards with something like NUCLEAR F**KING WEAPONS!!!  3 dice should be a minimum for attacking and bombing with them.  Still pretty unbalanced tech.  Maybe increase the cost of bombers by 3 once the tech is rolled, or every combat in which they are used requires 3 IPCs?  This is just to make sure there is a reason people roll tech dice every turn.

2.6  Yeah, HBs need some love.  Maybe reduce actual bomber attacks to 2 after the first round of combat (of which they rolled at 4, since they’ve dropped all their bombs)?  Improved HBs get to continue rolling at 4 every round, due to increased bomb capacity?

Meh, most of my suggestions suck.

@Brain:

@idk_iam_swiss:

if i want to play with my grandparents i HAVE to be the axis…they refuse to play if they have to be japan or germany

My grandparents actually fought against the Germans

I set up the board one time for my Grandpa who was based on Tuvalu Island in the Solomons; he took one look at it, smiled, and shook his head.  “WWII was no boardgame, son.”

@Razor:

HERE ARE THE LATEST NEWS

Greg Smorey says the Global AA40 will be played at Smorey’s spring gathering april 10 2010

A thread on Smorey Swamp forum says AA 40 Europe/Global will be available in may 2010

The bottom of my AA40 Pacific box says AA40 Europe/Global will be available in july 2010

Greg Smorey says at “General Discussion” at Larrys forum LGD that AA40 E/G is deleyed until august.

These are the field roumors today.

Heh, September, if AA50 is any guide to release.

@allboxcars:

Really then, looking at how the games play out as our guide, I guess there shouldn’t be any VCs in the Western Hemisphere since establishing an Axis foothold there is (a) uncommon in gaming and (b) requires such an Axis juggernaut that continuing play is futile?

#475

Sure.  You could probably cut down the VCs necessary for endgame to 10 or something, since its so unlikely to occur.

@i:

whats pact of steel??

Bitchin game included with TripleA, had Revised third edition ruleset (I think) with Italy as a major power (but no NOs as in AA50).  Was hella fun before AA50 came out, Germany and Italy doubleteam was a lot of fun in preventing D Days and can opening Russian blitzkreigs.  POS was probably the precursor to AA50, and was pretty balanced, though some people say adding italy was overpowered for Axis.

Sure the war dec turns will be drastically changed in a global game.  Still wish there was a way Germany could opt out of dec of war on US…

Or dear lord, LONDON will be going first before Ottawa falls if the game has tipped that far to the Axis!  Britain has lost most of its ipcs and is the hardest to reinforce by then, nevermind that the US player can easily retake Canada before the round is up, if British counterattacks from England can’t do the job themselves.  Ottawa is a stupid VC in Axis and Allies anyway, Washington and London are better targets endgame, and the Allied player(s) have usually given up by then too.

(This isn’t that I hate Canada, lol, its more about game design.  BLAME CANADA!!! BLAME CANADA!!!)

@i:

wont germany get a ton of naval troops in e40 because the normal baltic fleet plus the bismark and some crusiers??

Yeah hopefully the Baltic fleet will be better represented this time around.  I liked the battleship inclusion of Bismark in Pact Of Steel games, let you actually run the fleet out off France without it being totally suicidal.  (Though most games it was).

@Flashman:

Rail movement should be unlimited between adjacent friendly territories during NCM.

They should be combined with not allowing new factories or the use of captured factories.

Or consider these:

http://www.thewargame.com/rules/Mod1 Rail Movement.pdf

Um, how about in western Europe, that rule is feasible, while in Russia, not so much…  Don’t railroad tracks in many countries have different gauges of rails, so your trains couldn’t realistically run on them?  That’s an issue they ran into in Russia.  Also, if your army just crossed the border, guns blazing and artillery firing, wouldn’t the rail lines be a bit messed up?  Wouldn’t the constant SBRing be playing a number on the railroads as well?  I hear the major reason Germany was losing the war in 42-44 was supply issues, not manpower.

Also, this would turn the game into a giant game of RISK, with the NCM rules.  It could also lead to exploiting, as you could pump many many more troops into adjacent territories where you rolled favorably, rather than needing to march them there.  Instant reinforcement wouldn’t be very fair.

About enemy factories, what’s to say that you couldn’t REDEPLOY troops in a certain area?  Or wouldn’t it make sense in areas where you’re already industrialized, rails ARE present that would allow you to concentrate enough men and supplies to train fighting troops?  Recruiting from the foreign population aside, there ARE benefits to controlling the industry in a foreign nation.

@allboxcars:

Actually, personally I’ve never had a problem with the idea of Ottawa being a VC.
It’s an absolute pain to capture sure but… realistically what else would have made the US throw in the towel? 
Cairo?

Not to say Cairo shouldn’t be a VC but c’mon comparing the strategic impact… one you’re losing sleep about oil field IPCs and the Suez but the other… man you might as well start checking Amazon.com for discount English-German dictionaries!

#471

Meh, gives more reasons for the Allies to put troops in the center of the board rather than exist on the fringes…  The US still had awesome production advantages but if you’d have cut the Middle Eastern oil supplies to the Allies it should be reflected somehow in game.  Canada?  How in hell are the Axis realistically supposed to take and hold that for a turn?  You got both Britain and the US right there.  Canada should not be the final say on how a game ends…  “With the seizure of Ottawa, the Allied powers have conceded to the military superiority of the Axis powers and have declared a ceasefire…”  Right.

@allboxcars:

Imagine how shocked we’ll all be when AAE40 comes out…. in a Trading Card Game Format…. Axis The Gathering.

#469

I tap two black and three colorless mana and summon BLITZKREIG!!!:  THE UBERFUERHER MARCHT!!!  All your Black colored attacking units get a +3 to attack and a -3 to defense!  Germany attacks Russia with two 3/2 Wehrmacht SS Elite Troops, one 4/5 Tiger Panzergruppen and five 1/1 Volksturn Recruits!!!

Russian player taps 1 red and 3 colorless mana and plays Instant:  STALINGRAD!!!:  NOT A STEP BACK!!!  All your Red colored troops get a +3 to attack and a -5 to defense!  All your troops are sacrificed at the end of turn!  Russia blocks German units with 8 1/1 Workers’ Militia!  All units involved in combat die except for the Tiger Panzergruppen and are sent to the discard pile!  Russian player taps one 1 red and plays Instant:  KATYUSHA ROCKET!!!  Deal 3 damage to unit or player of your choice!  Tiger Panzergruppen has been destroyed!

Yeah.  This would be SO awesome.  Wait.

Yeah, I know, Britain + Russia superstack in the north isn’t very fun for the Axis.  Karelia is a nice NO to have but its just too vulnerable with Britain dropping off troops + bombard shots every turn.  It does do a great job of focusing the Brits attention up north rather than sending troops to Africa, however, so Italy might get some short term benefit out of it.  There’s a very good reason the Germans went through the Causcasus to attack Russia, you don’t have to worry about England dropping troops on your head.  But giving up Norway and Finland so early in the game kinda sucks for the Axis.

If you DO build a fleet, you’re going to have to sacrifice it to kill the British naval stack or cut it off from Britain for a few turns, but nobody said naval supremacy was easy.  A lot of people just build a bomber or a fighter or two a turn and bide their time until the Allies finally split their fleet out of overconfidence or necessity and send Britain’s naval stack to the bottom.  You do this at the right time, you have a decent shot at winning the game.  Playing defensively as the Axis with infantry from the get-go gives the Allies too much initiative.  Make them fight for it.

@oztea:

Larrys site is down, but he gave up some info recently

Finland, Hungary will be axis neutral
Axis neutrals will give you their units if you step into their territory (if you are the axis obviously)

Norway starts in german hands

Greece will be allied neutral, it will give its units to any allied power that enters it, and fight any axis power

The middle East will have six territories, 12 total IPCs are up for grabs in there
(I assume, Syria [FR], Palistine [UK], Trans-Jordan [UK], Iraq [Axis Neutral], Saudi Arabia [Neutral]. Oman [Neutral])

Cairo is a victory city

YES!!!  Good news indeed, sir!  Would be nice to see the Brits actually fight for Egypt for once, AND YOU’RE NOT STUCK INVADING CANADA FOR THE LAST VC!!!  Italy may actually have a role to play now!

@Razor:

May ….  :-o are you kiddin me ?

On Larry’s forum they said juni or july, after the summer holiday, but with all the problems from Pacific it maight be delayed. I guess nobody know, but it sure aint may.

Yeah, AA50 was delayed till November or something last year.  Sucked, I had a Axis and Allies game day set up for the release.  Wouldn’t surprise me none, what can we actually do about it?  Boycott the game if it comes out late?

@fanofbond:

They may not be as stupid as you guys think. They should realize that they can save money by releasing the game with ample pieces for all the countries and hiring a new spell checker and double checker of game components. That is all speculation of course and I could be entirely wrong then in august or whenever Europe comes out we are back at the emails complaining.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!111!!!eleven!!1  This is WOTC we’re talking about, right?  The same guys that made MAGIC cards and wrote D+D 4th edition, remember?  You’d think with AA50 edition SELLING OUT COMPLETELY AND NEEDING A RE-RELEASE they’d be able to afford a competent AA professional GAMER (that has actually played the damn game) that’d get all the details right the first time.  And playtesters, Jesus God Almighty, do they do ANY playtesting on these things???  AAP40 doesn’t look like they did that good a job, there’s glaring mistakes in the errata.  I guarantee that AAE40 has the potential to be HUGE with the Global game setup IF WOTC can get it right the first time.

Just shows that WOTC doesn’t really understand how good the Axis and Allies franchise really is.  A damn shame, actually, they could be moving thousands of these boxes if they advertised it correctly and put the whole trading card/dungeonmaster’s guide sideshow aside.

@Gwlachmai:

I would think that a combined US income might provide a bit of incentive to keep Japan from making a J1 attack in the Pacific. Especially in light of potentially giving the US a 60-70 IPC income boost. I can’t wait to try the combined game. The only real debate with my gaming group is do we play Europe alone a few times first or just jump right in.

Hell, I would like to see just how they balance the Global game more than anything.  Or unbalance it.  Who would want to play Europe by itself anyway?

Europe and Pacific by themselves just seem like the Axis powers have objectives spread out at the extreme corners of the map, and lack any real reason to concentrate their forces at any particular area for long.  Since the Allied powers don’t have attacks coming from the opposite sides of the map, any moves they make are somewhat scripted and lack any real decision making (compared to Global).  In the Pacific campaign, Britain HAS to attack Burma and French Indochina with land units.  Britain doesn’t have to worry about Italian or German units coming through Persia or the Suez as a second front.  Not much room for different builds.

The most fun part of Axis and Allies is seeing Japanese and German troops meet up in the Causcasus and hold off Russian counterattacks.  Or Italian carriers, German planes, and what’s left of the Japanese fleet come through the Suez to stop the Allied fleet off Italy.  Teamwork.  If you start rolling crappy as Germany in AAE40, you can’t expect Japan to come through India and save the day for you.  With only one (or two, if you think Italy is a power) Axis sides in Europe and Pacific the game is not going to be as fun.

@Flashman:

UK planes can land in Karelia after sinking the German fleet.

If Germany is going to use the Baltic as a RATS between the fronts (rather than, for example, it’s excellent rail network), then it needs a carrier or two there, and can Germany really afford this sort of luxury before it’s eaten up half of Russia?

Yeah, at some point your fleet is going to be put at risk and require a carrier for protection.  If there’s some way to have fighters scramble from land zones nearby when its moved within the Baltic, that’d be cool but probably not enough at some point in the game.  Baltic fleet at any point is a gamble that you’re going to get more out of it reinforcing Norway and Finland, and threatening and invading Britain and Russia, than the Allies will get destroying it or taking advantage of your weakened land forces.

Its an expensive proposition, and usually gets destroyed by combined British and US attacks, but if it buys Germany 2-3 more turns it can give plenty of time for Japan to finish things off in Russia.  It usually does a good job focusing the Allies on Europe since it can threaten many fronts, but the downside to any big fleet is that Russia is going to get huge in the short term.  If Russia gets reduced income like the US before war is allowed or has severely reduced units at game start then that may not be a problem.

And how do you plan on defending these German transports from the RAF?

Extra SZs.

Meh, more like a few carriers with planes from the mainland; otherwise RAF gonna be all over those transports like a spider-monkey.

Although, we have scrambling rules now– can planes in Denmark or Germany scramble to defend the SZ if there is an aircraft based attack?  Or can they join the naval battle if there are ships present?  It would be nice if building the carriers for defense is unnecessary (little bit more historically accurate).  If this is unbalanced I’m sure there’s opportunities for Britain to do the same with its fleet off England.

Also, how many SZs are we talking about?  It is at least 3 SZs to reach Germany from Britain?  So there is at least some downtime between Baltic SZ shucks or time for a counterattack?

Seriously though, are there any plans for making naval unit entry into (or exit from) the Baltic SZ impassable if either Axis or Allies control both norway and denmark (northwestern europe)?  The Baltic straits are only like 20 km at their widest point and there are tons of bottlenecks, couldn’t we make them like the Suez and the Panama Canal, where control of the nearby territories gives access?  It would make more sense because in real life Germany wasn’t hampered by 50 British Dieppe raids through the Baltic, which occur in 95% of our games, (sometimes really early in the game too).  Hell, the Allies didn’t even have a major port in Northern Europe until 1945, since the harbors were mined too well.  Germany wouldn’t be forced to keep a large part of its army back to defend from ahistorical British/US raids into Berlin.  The Allies would have to come through France (or Norway) for a reason.

In the same manner, could control of Gibraltar and French Morocco be necessary to send naval units through the straits of Gibraltar?  They’re only like 9 miles across at their widest point, it would be hard to sneak a battleship through that without some warning being sent to the enemy navy/airforce to pick it off.  Would force a little historical accuracy and make invading Spain or Gibraltar a necessity to get units from Italy into the Atlantic.  Same goes for Allies getting into the Med.  A force in Spain retaking Gibraltar every turn could make the Med impassable.

For obvious reasons, submarines would not be beholden to such impassable SZ rules, though a canal with water locks would still stop them in their tracks.

Ugh…  Round 1 Russian battleship build in the Black Sea, doodz!  This is going to be SO awesome!!!