Posts made by thrasher1

We came across this during a game:

A player wants to move units into an area he controls. This area contains Zs. He/she attacks these Zs. But then, after combat, wants to non-combat move some units out of that very territory into an adjancent territory.

So more in general: may you ‘keep units’ apart when attacking Zs in an area controlled by you?
(With the purpose of non-combating moving these units into an adjacent area. Say to bolster defense there…)

If this issue was already tackled: sorry. In that case please post a link here to the answer.

thrasher,

EDIT: We thought this was NOT allowed. We just want to be sure.

In general: in these six games who won most of the time?
Seen any ‘extreme’ effects of the Z-cards? Like tipping the balance of a game or moving a piece of the action to say South America (neutrals!) or ‘remote’ areas?

Thanks for reply, 655321.

Personally I think it is way to easy to get that one infantry bonus then.

Just imagine there is an area controlled by one Z.
You enter with just two infantry. The Z rolls first during combat. Only 1/3 chance it will hit you. Then you can stop after that. Regardless of you hit the Z or not.
And… voila… get an infantry unit as a bonus. Of course, I know… the next turn this Z attacks you on a 1 out of six. So even if this one Z will hit you next turn… You can ‘sacrifice’ that additional infantry for that.
OK, maybe I do miss something but is this not just to easy?

This is a question regaring receiving the 1 infantry bonus for liberating a Z-held territory.

This is how we interpreted this rule:

If you cleared a territory of ALL Zs then you receive a free infantry on that specific territory.

Now, it seems we interpretated this rule wrong. See: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32350/axis-allies-and-zombies-q-a

Is it really the case that:

You can attack a Z-held territory. Have one round of combat (of course the Z will first ‘attack’ and you must remove a casualty immediatelly). Then after that call off the attack and - presuming you got one surving land unit - liberate/conquer the territory and gain that additional free infantry while there are still Zs present in this very area. ?

Basically: the question is the topic title :)

Introducing Zs in Axis and Allies 1914 might be hard because of the combat round limitation. And maybe simply to much Zs would spring up…
Any thoughts?

thrasher,

@DoManMacgee

DMM,

You experimented with any of this house rules lately?

David,

Let me first say we all really appreciate the time and energy you spend on Axis and Allies and on this very forum.

Still, I ask: when can we expect Part Two of this interview…

@DoManMacgee ,

Just some more ideas:

IDEA 1:

Japan/Germany/USSR were police states (to say the least). So they can implement very harsh matters much easier then UK/US.
So…

At the very start of their turn Germany/Japan/Russia may remove one Z from a territory they control,
(Or maybe even: from a territory they originally owned - though this might be too ‘strong’ an advantage.)

Ideas are welcome!

IDEA 2:

Germany and Japan (and maybe Russia too) get one free Tech Roll Attempt each turn. A classic-1984 style one…
Roll one die (for free). If you roll a six roll again for a specific technology.

But these are just ideas…

@DoManMacgee ,

Thanks for the extensive analysis. Almost all territories are included in the deck of cards.

Maybe a more diverse, well fine-tuned, deck of cards should do the job. So say some US/UK areas being represented in the deck twice. Maybe some even receiving two Zs…
Maybe some Axis territories should not have been in the deck at all. Maybe Axis (and Russia?) should have been given some cards that only apply to them. Say GER/JAP/RUS being allowed to change a Z into an own infantry. But this card can only be used by an Axis player. Just some ideas :)

@taamvan ,

I agree: the cards are fun. That’s why I liked Fortress America so much…

One more thing: if you remove say half of the cards then you also remove the ‘Desperate Measures’ part. This might unbalance the game…

@DoManMacgee ,

Please share your thoughts and ideas and opions :) And ideas for house rules are welcome of course. But I guess they should be posted in a different forum.

@DoManMacgee ,

I do not agree. I think your proposal is way too much ‘pro-Axis’. So that’s why I came up with this idea.

@DoManMacgee,
You came up with an idea for a house rule. Being: only Zs in UK/US controlled areas. This to balance the game.

Just an idea:

This might be too harsh. But what might be an idea:

If a player draws a card adding a Z in a German/Japanse/Russian controlled area then simply discard this card. Draw another card. This card is implemented regardless of the territory a Z is added to.

So basically Axis and Russia have a bigger chance not to have Zs added to areas under their control. But it will happen. Only not so often.

What do others think?

(Moderator, if needed to be moved then please move this message)

@Midnight_Reaper Then also please add (the great game) Buck Rogers: Battle for the 25th Century.

See some nice pictures of the game here:
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2018/07/retro-buck-rogers-board-game-was-twilight-imperium-before-twilight-imperium.html

@thrasher1 Maybe it is time for me to thank some people. The people who came before me… All the guys (and maybe girls) at game magazines who published Axis and Allies (and Fortress America and Shogun related stuff). I never got one of these magazines myself however.
But for now: a big shout-out to these pre-internet guys! If anyone from you is here on this forum: please send me a message if you want.

@Midnight_Reaper Thanks for the kind words. I spent so much time on that site… But got so much reward from people around the world. The internet was rather new back then. It was so nice having seen it emerging…

On Europe at War: between Axis and Allies Classic and Axis and Allies Europe no new games were released by MB/Hasbro. In that very era, say mid-80s and 2000, we were stuck with this standard Axis and Allies and… ourselves. So that is what we did: scenarios, house rules, map modifications… So many people sent me their own house rules and own scenarios.
I guess most of it can be found through archive.org (great site BTW).

Edit: fix typo

@Midnight_Reaper

You are right. This is a stand-alone game. On my old site I called both real expansions and stand-alone games ‘commercial expansions’. Having said that: the distinction is a hard one…

Regarding Bells of War: this game was around the time Avalon Hill was bought by Hasbro. So maybe it should be in your other list.
Having said that: as you notices it is not an expansion in the literal sense. Then again: nobody plays this with the counters coming with this game and the rules are VERY A&A-like…

So then let’s add to this list:

Conquest Gaming:

• Operation Barbarossa
• Conquest of the Pacific

More info: https://web.archive.org/web/20030402070658/http://www.wargamer.com:80/axisandallies/CE/cg/cg_main.html

As AH was bought by 1998 and Axis and Allies Europe was released late 1999 (but only really availible in 2000) I think the watershed here can be: 2000.
OK?

Please add this one. This one is very rare:

Bells of War by SillySpace
https://web.archive.org/web/20030426063259/http://www.wargamer.com:80/axisandallies/ce/BOW/bow_main.html

Yes, that’s right. Hexes on an Axis and Allies (-like) map…