Posts made by SilverAngelSurfer

@Hobbes:

Another factor that contributes to the game balance on AA50 are the National Objectives. They are optional but plenty of people seem to use them (and there’s talk concerning whether their inclusion balances or unbalances the game more). Another major factor contributing is definitely the inclusion of Italy because of the effect they can have against Russia.

That’s true, I forgot to include that in the differences.  I like the idea of national objectives and I’ve only played one game of AA50 so far, but I can see how it might tip the balance toward Axis because, in general, the Axis’ objectives are easier to obtain quickly.

I’ll add that to the choices in the poll.

1. DarthMaximus
2. BigRedOne
3. cts17
4. hobo
5. Battlingmaxo
6. U-505
7. Amon Sûl
8. Bigbadgoo
9. souL
10. SpiralArchitect
11. axis_roll
12. Bardoly
13. Funcioneta
14. Yoshi
15. Pin
16. Zhukov4
17. Mistergreen
18. DY
19. Chunksoul
20. Joe Cold
21. anchovy
22. ksmckay
23. Gharen
24. TheDesertJournalist
25. Zygmund
26. DutchmanD
27. SilverAngelSurfer  8-)

Ok, so I was just thinking recently about the differences between these 3 versions of Axis and Allies and their effect on the game.

Revised has the basic map/setup that is similar to the older versions of Axis & Allies, 5 countries, & the older prices and stats for the units (no cruisers, battleships cost 24, and transports can defend).  In this version, most people agree that the Allies have the advantage in winning the game.

AA50 has a new map/setup with more territories and sea zones, most of which are added to Eastern Europe and China (apparently to better represent the distance between Moscow and Berlin, and Moscow and Tokyo).  Also, introduced is a new system of prices and stats for the units (new cruisers & lower costs for some units, as well as defenseless transports), as well as the addition of Italy for 6 playable countries.  However, in this version, most people claim that the Axis have an advantage.

1942 has the same map/setup as Revised with the abbreviated territories in Europe and Asia, and 5 countries, but it also has the new unit system from AA50, and yet most people state that the Allies again have the advantage over the Axis.

The advantage in 1942 being the same as that in Revised, and opposite from that in AA50 would seem to suggest that the change in unit systems did not affect the balance of the games.  The question then is whether the AA50 map that attempts to make it harder for the Axis to get to Moscow isn’t effective in helping the Allies, or perhaps the AA50 setup favors the Axis too much in position or unit value?  Or is the difference simply that having a 3rd Axis country allows the Axis to be more versatile and better able to thwart the Allies?

I’m interested to see what people think, so post your reasons and discuss if you wish.

Thanks for the response.  The module looks good.  8-)

Battleships are almost all but obsolete now with cruisers.  As was pointed out in the first response, buying a cruiser and a destroyer costs the same, gives you 2 units to receive hits (the same as a battleship lets you absorb two hits), and yet you have the chance at giving 2 hits also, while also having the ability to bombard.  I haven’t seen anyone in AA50 or AA42 buy additional battleships beyond what are already on the board at the start of the game.

The rule changes between Revised and the new AA50/AA42 rules makes it so that subs have to be used more the way they were actually used in the war: as stealthy attackers used mainly for quick raids on vulnerable targets.  Intentionally including a loophole where you can intentionally use subs as shields for your bigger ships by comboing ac/ftr/des/sub is a little weird if the entire point of the rule changes seems to be to make it harder to just use subs as cannon fodder (unless your opponent is intentionally targeting subs by including destroyers), and impossible to use transports that way either.

@Hobbes:

@SilverAngelSurfer:

For instance, many people believe that in Revised the Axis have a better chance of winning with the starting setup on the board, so often the players will give the player with the Allies a certain number of extra IPCs right at the start of the game (usually under 10 IPCs) which that player can use to immediately place extra pieces in places where they think they’ll need it.

Don’t you mean the other way around?

Oops, yeah.  I typed Revised while I was thinking AA50.

I agree with Col.Stauffenberg on how to respond to a US sub flood.  Just make sure your transports are escorted by your massive starting navy, and add a destroyer or two to let your airforce help defend against those subs.  Either the US player will give up and have to do something else to get at you, or they’ll just keep wasting extra IPCs trying to break through.

A bid is a certain amount of extra IPCs given to a player (most often in a 1 vs. 1 game) controlling a country (or countries) seen to need some extra help to have a fair chance of victory.  Like I said, it’s most often done in 1 vs. 1 games where one side or the other is seen as being favored.  For instance, many people believe that in Revised the Axis have a better chance of winning with the starting setup on the board, so often the players will give the player with the Allies a certain number of extra IPCs right at the start of the game (usually under 10 IPCs) which that player can use to immediately place extra pieces in places where they think they’ll need it.  The general rule is that you must already have at least 1 other piece there, that the piece you add must be controlled by the country controlling that territory, and you can only add 1 extra piece per territory; until you use up those extra IPCs.

IJN & JIN, as far as I know, are abbreviations that usually stand for the official title of Japan’s navy: Imperial(ist) Japanese Navy or Japanese Imperial Navy.

Because the friendly airplanes aren’t going to be scoring hits on friendly subs.  :wink:  You need a Japanese destroyer for the attacking Japanese planes to score hits on the defending US subs, which are still useless regardless because if Japan is attacking with only planes, the US subs still can’t hit the planes even though there’s a US destroyer. So you’re both right and wrong. :-P

Ah, yes.  That is true, but you’re right that Russia having cruisers and destroyers with square sterns doesn’t come up as a problem much…  :roll:  And one is still obviously larger than the other while the Russian transport is still the standard Allies sculpt.  Square stern still applies for the rest of the countries that matter for navy.  :-P

Is there a map for Pacific '40 yet for abattlemap?  Or can you only play P40 on triple a so far?

Make sure you have the “Axis & Allies 1942” map chosen in abattlemap (from the New tab), because the “Axis & Allies Revised” map is exactly the same (with the same pieces starting), except that in Revised z63 DOES touch Western Canada, while in 1942 they have the map fade out into white so that z63 DOES NOT touch Western Canada.  In abattlemap, the 1942 version map shows a white block labeled “Frozen Perry Channel” to show that z63 does not touch.

In different versions of Axis & Allies, they sometimes had the Perry Channel open, in which case z63 touched Western Canada; and sometimes they had the Perry Channel frozen, in which case z63 did not touch Western Canada.  The Revised map/setup and the 1942 map/setup are exactly the same except for this one important detail.

Short version:
1942 = z63 does NOT touch WCan
Revised = z63 DOES touch WCan

In the rulebook for Revised, there are silhouettes for each nation’s sculpts, while the 1942 rulebook only shows the silhouettes for the US sculpts.  According to the Revised rulebook, the German transport is the sculpt that almost looks like a barge with just a couple buildings on it, and all the destroyers have a square stern.

My group had a hard time with the German sculpts at first, and we had a big argument over whether the square stern like the other nations’ was significant of a destroyer or whether the large building in the center of the flat sculpt was a depth charge…  Another friend with the Revised rulebook straightened us out.  Thankfully all the battleship sculpts are the largest/longest of the navy, the cruisers are shorter than the battleships, and the destroyers all have a square stern.  All of the allies have a 3 column transport, while the Japanese have a transport with 2 columns, and the Germans have the flat, barge-like transport with no columns.

No problem, just started here myself not long ago.

Did you download tripe a or abattlemap?  Because at least for abattlemap you have to scroll to the right to see the West US and scroll down to see the status part of the map.  If you right-click and drag in abattlemap it lets you scroll around the whole map.

@Veqryn:

50% you kill all 3 and live, 50% you die without hitting anything
bad game design for a first round battle imo

Since subs hit on attack on a 2, wouldn’t it be a 33% chance of getting a hit on the surprise attack?  Then if you miss it’d be a 50% chance you die without hitting anything…  Then rinse and repeat…  Doesn’t look like a bad game design to me, especially when you have the choice of going after a 100% kill with the one UK transport, or supporting a more even odds attack on a battleship in sz2.

I agree that playing Total Victory seems pointless and tedious, but I’ve recently been considering a 10 VC game and how that would change things…  It seems to me that it might be more accurate historically since Japan didn’t capitulate even after Germany totally surrendered, and I doubt the US and UK would have surrendered immediately if Moscow fell.  However, I’m not sure if anything more than 9 isn’t just pointless anyway because after 9, 90% of the time one of the capitals will have been captured leaving one country entirely out of the game and the surviving countries lopsided because of this…

@Hobbes:

@SilverAngelSurfer:

I must say that I am a new player to Axis and Allies and have only played this 1942 version, but my group of, again, new players have been commenting on the apparent Axis slant of this game as far as they’ve seen it.  Karelia is hard to defend, as is India, so as long as Germany gets to Moscow while the Allies are still setting up, the Axis has won.  I’m sure we’ve been missing the Allied coordination and strategy, but with Germany mostly gunning straight for Russia, the Axis has won all 5 games we’ve played.

If you are keeping track of Victory Cities I’d say to ignore them. The game is decided the moment Russia or Germany (or Japan) falls. If G is heading straight for Russia then the Allies need to be able to keep trading Karelia, Ukraine and Bielorussia with Germany, while at the same time to take advantage that G’s forces are on the East to take and hold Western Europe.

I figured that’s the general idea, but the main issue has been coordinating attacking on the West side while trying to effectively reinforce on the East, with the reinforcing part being the bigger issue, plus getting my Allied partners to work with me has been challenging…  :-P  Though I suppose that’s part of the strategy/challenge.

Not keeping track of Victory Cities kind of makes sense in that typically by the time Germany, Japan, Russia, or UK falls (I’m assuming US falling is super rare), the opposing side would have 3 extra anyway, but do you not play to the end of the “round” (the end of US turn)?  You don’t play with the chance of liberating a capital?

I must say that I am a new player to Axis and Allies and have only played this 1942 version, but my group of, again, new players have been commenting on the apparent Axis slant of this game as far as they’ve seen it.  Karelia is hard to defend, as is India, so as long as Germany gets to Moscow while the Allies are still setting up, the Axis has won.  I’m sure we’ve been missing the Allied coordination and strategy, but with Germany mostly gunning straight for Russia, the Axis has won all 5 games we’ve played.