Posts made by Upside-down_Turtle

Did anyone else notice this?

maybe once you took back Egypt, it could help vs Italy.  Just drop two destroyers in the Med.

neat.

I agree totally, and in the end, it all comes down to having fun.

I also really like you’re A&A Advanced variants.  Maybe I’ll make my own A&A game and sell it, too.  Then I can buy yours  :wink:

i figure id wait for an opening, then do a hit and run.  Land, then pull my fleet far to the south and try and bait the US into chasing me.  see how far they’ll go.  :lol:

Thanks.  perhaps commenting on any of my house rules would be bad at the moment.  they’re still a work in progress.

destroyers historically bombarded all the time.  sure, they weren’t the U.S.S. New Jersey, but they got the job done.  Larry Harris just doesn’t like an 8 IPC ship to have too many abilities.

BTW, for anyone just joining, this is the continuation of a conversation between me and Ogrebait that got started on Trisden’s AA50 House Rules.

Basically, it’s a debate over whether there should be a “clearinghouse” for A&A House Rules that tests and endorses them for general use.

Ogrebait’s position is that too many isolated groups create too many wacky results.

My position is that’s precisely what’s good about it.

As I said, I’m against the idea.

Ogrebait, you spoke about players using incorrect methods to develop house rules.  Yet whose to say or judge what the proper method is?  It’s not to say all house rules and the methods used to develop them are equal.  That is, when I say equal, that no one is better than the other.  Some may be worse than others, and others supremely better, but you can’t have those different results without freedom.

Why shouldn’t variety in result be accompanied with variety in method?

If our goal is to reach the “Ultimate Axis and Allies” game, then there are only two ways to achieve this.  One is through Divine Revelation, the other through Natural Freedom of Creativity.

Say, this is supposed to be about Trisdin’s House Rules.  I’ll start a new thread, and we’ll move the conversation there.  Look for “Axis and Allies Guild”.

crazy.  I love long games, but they’re so taxing.  Alas, if only we were immortals.

Perhaps there needs to be new strategies developed for an Italian fleet.  Anyone consider invading Brazil?

@ogrebait:

@Trisdin:

WOW…. Almost 100 views and no comments! come on members, tell me what you think.

Well, I can’t speak for the others, but here’s what I think.

You have obviously put a lot of thought and effort into this alternative set-up, and I wouldn’t mind trying it out. In the absence of a lot of playtesting, however, it would be hard for me to render an opinion on what works and what doesn’t work in this modified rule set. That could also be said for some of the other A&A variants being circulated, and therein lies the rub….

I have been in and out of the gaming world for decades, and I am a relative newcomer to A&A. Over the years, one of the biggest obstacles I have found to pursuing this pastime is finding both a game I enjoy and a critical mass of other gamers to play with. It is of marginal benefit to invest a lot of time, energy and occasionally money into acquiring and learning a game which only a handful of people in the world are willing to play. I currently own four “official” A&A variants, but the only one that I regularly play is AA50, in part, because of the difficulty in finding people interested in the other games.

I certainly don’t mind experimentation, and I’ve suggested a few changes myself. However, without some clearinghouse to determine what rule sets should become the defacto standard, then all these “house rules” have the tendency to further fragment a relatively small population of players. My humble suggestion (which would admittedly be difficult to implement) is to first establish a method to propose, test, and semi-formally “bless” modified rules so that there is some standard that the A&A community can rely on. The closest thing we have to that right now is either the folks at WOTC or Larry Harris’s Game Design site, and both have their limitations.

That being said, if you or someone else would like to have a go at giving your rule set a test drive, let me know. Due to the demands of my life outside of gaming, I’m generally not a fast player. However, if you don’t mind a leisurely match, I can accommodate a trial run and give you some feedback.

What, you mean like an Axis and Allies think tank?  A guild, or a league?  By the term “bless”, I’d say you wanted to establish a Church of Axis and Allies.

Yes, it certainly might be a good idea to form a free association of game testers which may endorse certain optional rules, and I’ve thought of the idea myself.  Still, I think the danger lies in this being too successful.

Things are very libertarian right now in terms of House Rules.  So what if small groups form exclusive social domains for certain house rules?  If someone comes up with a stupid or sucky rule, it only effects those who play it the one time.  And if they like the rule, so what?  I certainly wouldn’t want to impose defacto house rules on anyone.  It only stifles creativity.

And besides, House Rules are named so because they apply only in your house, and they change from house to house.  By definition, rules endorsed by an A&A Guild wouldn’t be House Rules, they’d be Guild Rules.   Just as the home is sacred, the rules of the home are sacred, even rules pertaining to games; especially rules pertaining to games.  That’s why, in some way, all House Rules are sacred, precisely because there is no one authority, and there are so many which contradict each other.

I think Larry Harris, Imperious Leader, and their associates all have the right idea.  They make their own games, then sell them for money.   :-)

@Trisdin:

WOW…. Almost 100 views and no comments! come on members, tell me what you think.

I know how you feel.  No one comments on my house rules either.

I’m new to the game, so I like to stick with the basics and not modify the game so much.  My house rules tend to be simple things, like letting destroyers bombard, since I think it’s stupid if a battleship and cruiser can, but a destroyer can’t.  The most complicated thing I’ve come up with is my nuke rules.

Players like Imperious Leader have been playing for what must be a hundred years.  :-D They have websites dedicated to countless Advanced Axis and Allies games with Larry Harris himself, with battle sequences involving 10 and 12 sided dice, weather, terrain, you name it.  When Imperious Leader posts something, it gets a lot of attention and respect.

Me?  Even A&A miniatures looks a bit too complicated for me.  Besides, I can’t afford all those games…yet.  I’m just a simple turtle.  You’d think with our low center of gravity we’d be able to stay upright more often.

Comments:

I think you meant to spell “Zubov” Zhukov.

I don’t like the National Advancement chart. It’s partially because I’m very comfortable with the AA50 tech rules, so much so I’ve come up with several variants of a 3rd Breakthrough Chart.

In terms of play testing, I know from experience the Nuke advancement for US won’t work.  I tried one game where nukes were on a 3rd breakthrough chart.  All the US did was turtle and do tech roles, then game over.

I like the supply tokes idea and how you can move them, but only if you can attack them, thus disrupting supply.  Certainly, it can help in terms of stacking limits.

Nice. Very creative.  I dig alternate universes.

Medieval: Total War Tiberia
Ace Combat

good times…

Yup, here it is.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/aam/NorthAfrica

China wasn’t even that powerful in the Korean War.  Remember the Sino-Vietnamese War in 1979?  Vietnam was invading Cambodia when China invaded from the North, and Vietnam won!  They held off the Chinese, and held Cambodia.  This Mod China seems like it could invade Japan by itself!

Is it really that great of an ability?  Personally, I think it could help Italy and Germany a bit for fleet protection.  That way, you don’t have to buy a carrier.

Wow!  sounds pretty cool.  thanks

Tee-hee…subtlety.  :-D  Brilliant!

@dinosaur:

Well if we’re talking Tigers, then I suppose we are comparing apples to Honey Dew Mellons.

That’s melons, not “mellons”.  :roll: