I love your tickertape long may it continue!
But you must add +10 days on for British players as they have to wait for the long shipping :( :( :( :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
ok thanks for clearing that up :) I wonder though if the UK can scramble in AA europe 40
Thanks :)
What about new guinea and the other island attatched to it by the anzac territories? If I build and airbase there can it scramble?
Hi there,
I cant find the search function on the forums, it appears to be disabled. I have got home, help, profile, my messages, chat and logout.
My question I was searching for is. Can Japan and australia scramble fighters.
Thanks
GC
WOW Just WOW,
this table is crying out for some painted minatures and it could win awards!
Where is the source of this post?
I’m keeping mine for the IC, money, extra units and boxes.
It just looks like a picture of the board with the triple A units photoshopped on it. Fake.
Was this ever resolved? All I see is a text file as well.
What about Pacific 1940?
So is there a consensus that 11 VC would make the game play out differently?
It might even shorten the game which is a bonus too if your pressed for time.
Also I would like to ask CJ if he would mind consolodating all his AA enhanced rules into one thread. I would like to print them out and all the different threads makes that task difficult. Are you going to produce a PDF maybe? That would be great.
Hi there,
I have just come to this thread from my other thread about using 13 VC.
I think that CJ has put forward an idea to bring about more variation in games and should be applauded.
Why dont we all test it out and see how it goes. I’m going to give it a go in my next game.
The only way to truly see if it works is to test it IMO :-D
Ok, so I guess what i’m asking is…
Is there a way to stop the usual playout of Japan moving to take russia, and Germany/italy can stand and win on their own without Japan’s help.
Does a non aggression rule for Japan/Russia imbalance the game?
There’s plenty of ideas that vary from modifiying the rules for the Chinese, to adding an IC for UK in India/Australia to tweaking NOs (making up some like an NO for the non-aggression rule) or just a pure bid for the allies.
The most commonly used is a bid. If you give UK 2 inf in Egypt on UK1, the whole Africa dynamics will change as it is then easy to pin Italy’s Med fleet in the med for a kill shot by UK in round 3. Does this change the playout that you described above? It can… if the usa player now realizes that less axis africa = more UK power = USA can really go after Japan, and it’s a winnable situation.
Which mod is best?
Check the house rules section for discussions. http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?board=41.0
Try a few out.Have you exhausted the permutations of the optional rules?
By that I mean have you tried adding the optional escort rules or the closed dardenelles?
How about no National Objectives (that really changes the game)?Tech is always a crap shoot in it’s OOB form.
I do believe that as the game approaches it’s second year of ‘life’, more and more players will realize that the play-out / strategies will predominantly be the allied KGF - Axis Turtle and Jap Tank dash to Moscow. First one to take Berlin / Moscow wins!
A bid balances the game. what does that mean? I think it means that BOTH sides have about an even chance to win the win.
…but it only stands to strengthen the allied KGF plan, and that accelerates the races to capitals, it will not open up the pacific as a truely viable theatre of war, IMHO.
Kick the tires in the house rules section. For your goal, specific mods geared directly against Japan have the best chance: (china mods, UK IC, no new Island IC’s, etc)
Hello Axis, thanks for your comprehensive reply.
I have tried the closed dardenelles rule and it did make for a longer game, but it did not open the pacific theatre. I suppose the goal is to make sure that the Germans and Italians are able to win the game by themselves, and also make it so that the Japanese are heaviliy punished for breaking a non aggression treaty and vice versa. Has anyone had a game where the japanese went after the americans only? After they finsh their initial expansion of course. Maybe it’s just that we are set in our ways and only see the tunnel vision of KGF, Japan help out.
Do you think more infantry in india would open the pacific? The uk would be able to contest india and get an IC down.
Cant wait for the global game tbh :x
A global game with different setups I think will require even more playtesting and therefore will reduce the amount of testing on the global game for 1940.
IMO a bad idea.
Man, this aint the 1950’s. Larry just put the numbers in a pc and print out a balanced set-up. Then some of his buddies play a game and this is the testing. We are not talking rocket science here, buddy.
And we recieve a poorly tested game…
What is the miraculous “computer program” you speak of…
There is no substitute for human players playing lots of games to see if the game plays one way or another. For example… most games of AA50 playout KGF, where Japan rushes to moscow. A computer is no substitute for the human mind.
Lets just test one scenario for the duration, and get it right so that the initial setup allows lots of possible routes to victory.
Ok, so I guess what i’m asking is…
Is there a way to stop the usual playout of Japan moving to take russia, and Germany/italy can stand and win on their own without Japan’s help.
Does a non aggression rule for Japan/Russia imbalance the game?
Im lost please explain.
I read on the Larry boards that Krieg plays to 13 VC.
What effect does this have on the game? Does it open up new theatres?
What are your opinions of playing to 13 VC instead of waiting for the usual japan takes moscow/allies take berlin dredge.
My friends are getting bored of the game I love because it plays out the same way and I’m trying to introduce some variety without altering the ruleset.
Cheers.
Thread derailed…
Lets get back on topic.
A global game with different setups I think will require even more playtesting and therefore will reduce the amount of testing on the global game for 1940.
IMO a bad idea.