Easiest way to counter Japanese Subs is to have Karl Stromberg tour the Pacific…then the answer becomes how do you counter Stromberg subs?
Ok…so nobody picked up or cared enough on “The Spy that Loved Me” reference…boo… :-P
If it makes you feel better, I nearly commented on it the first time you posted it.
Damn you rock! What happen to Spock? And per the rules, you can use fire, but only once in your life…(Friends)
Spock may disintegrate Rock, but Paper covers Rock AND disproves Spock!
Here is a 1941 setup for A&A Global: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=6834
I have it set up on my table right now, and it looks pretty sweet. It’s set up for Barbarossa & Pearl Harbor, which lets you get right into the action.
…Or, if this seems to unlikely to you, imagine a “Battle for Paris” A&A game where the French and British need to hold out against a German assault for a set number of turns (which exceeds their historical performance) to win. That might also be playable, and would require a more representative set of French sculpts as a sale point.
The Battle of France would make a great A&A game. Because of the facts of history and how they translate to A&A games, you might be able to have a game that was more accurate AND more balanced than any previous A&A game. This would probably translate into more fun for more players.
With a May 10, 1940 starting date, the forces could be historically accurate and very well balanced. Both sides had between 3.3-3.4 million troops. The Allies had advantages in artillery, 2:1, and armored units, 3:2, but the Germans had the advantage in aircraft, 2:1.
I envision the map showng all of France, Belgium, Netherlands, and Switzerland; western Germany, including Frankfurt; northwestern Italy; the northwestern Mediterranean; the English Channel; and Southern England, including London. The Germans win if they take Paris or London. The Allies win if they take Frankfurt or if they hold Paris and London for some length of time.
It would be cool to show Berlin because in the actual war the British & French would have had to take it to win in 1940, but I don’t think you get enough game play value to extend the map that far east.
A balanced game is even harder to pull off (global I guess would be different story)…I can try to keep one at bay, but one of the axis is going to become a monster because if you go that route, I would make Japan bloom and Germany would just go all defensive and control the Atlantic…that’s why a balanced game can’t be pulled off. US can’t half a$s the Japanese, and you certainly will never get into Europe if you half-a$s the atlantic… Trust me, I would love to do that with the US (I guess a way to do that is make the US like UK/India in Global. Give the EUS like 33 spend and WUS 21…just random numbers, don’t anyone strike it down in fury). You get money to spend for both sides, and you limit the effect of a KJF/KGF strat (granted, you could still go through the canal and beef up the other side, so I don’t have a great answer for it).
Interesting idea. I think you could get away with giving US just a moderate bump, maybe 5 extra IPCs total, and requiring that they spend no more than half +1/2 IPC on either side. Tho if they lose WUS, they’d have to be allowed to spend all on EUS.
And you can create a house rule quite easily to add Italy: switch all German units on Libya, Italy and Southern Europe by Italian ones. German/Italy’s turn is now combined (they receive and purchase separately but the combat moves and combat are made together).
I put some thought into this idea a few days ago. But one thing I didn’t think about was the fact that it would work as a balancing factor, making Germany’s production less efficient. Also, I think you would switch the BB and AP to Italian.
Say i park 15 Japanese subs in SZ56 (assume the US pacific fleet is gone), what can US do about it?
Also, US could mass FTRs on Western United States, save for 1-2 turns, fly the FTRs to Sz 56 and drop multiple DD, SS, and CV. But I prefer Hobbes’s idea of going KGF.
Assuming Japan was trying to go for India and had bought 5 subs then I’d focus really on keeping the Pacific fleet distracting Japan, reinforce India and start building an Atlantic fleet with the US. If India falls on J2 then the UK will have to switch to Europe as well and with a 2nd buy of 5 subs then Japan just wasted 60 IPC on naval units that can’t be used against Russia while the Allies start going after Germany.
I agree. If Japan wants to buy 5 subs, then I’m going KGF.
I think to make a WWII game that is realistic, balanced, and fun to play and has a historical starting point you need to give it an earlier start and more vibrant political rules and victory conditions. You could start the game something like 1938 and have a buildup & influence period of a couple of rounds. Each major power should have its own victory conditions. For example, if USSR wound up conquering all of mainland Europe, that would be a total victory for the Soviet player, a total defeat for Germany and France, and a defeat for UK and USA.
we have an interdimensional shift
If I had a nickel for every time I’d been through an interdimensional shift… Actually, another me probably does.
@Xavier:
4. A more direct gameplay question: can infantry take out tanks/aircraft? I hope so, because that’s how we’ve started it. Made for some very hilarious first encounters. If it isn’t possible, we’d also love to know that as well.
I know it’s funny to think of one guy with a rifle shooting down a B-17. One infantry piece represents a variable number of units, typically multiple divisions, which would include some anti-tank and anti-air capabilities.
@Xavier:
2. Is the game fair enough for both sides being controlled by absolute newbies? I’ve read that the Axis have the advantage, which makes sense given the whole 1941 scenario. I’m playing as the Axis and am already getting beaten, but that’s not necessarily the point ;) We’d like to be able to give this game a decent lifespan without it getting boring.
If you get to the point where you feel like one side or the other has too much of an advantage, then you can balance the game by bidding. One player offers to take a side and issues a positive, nonzero, bid. The other player may issue a lower bid for the same side. This continues until one player declines to issue a lower bid. At that point the player who declined takes the other side, and the player who bid gets to place up to the bid amount in IPCs worth of units on the board at the start of the game. Unspent IPCs from the bid are lost. Units may only be placed on spaces with units from that same power.
For example, your girlfriend starts the bidding and says Allies, 9. You say Allies, 6. She declines to beat the bid. You get the Allies and place up to 6 IPCs worth of units immediately. You could place 1 Armor (ARM), 1 Submarine (SS), 2 Infantry (INF) or 1 INF (you would lose the other 3 IPCs).
I’d much rather spend $100 instead of $60 and get a complete game instead of one that feels like it’s been cut down to the bare minimums.
They’ve clearly tried to do some production line management with the newer A&A games. They’ve tried to determine which parts of the game their average customer considers worth paying for and which items he doesn’t. If you’re reading this, then you’re a lot more hardcore about A&A than the average customer they’re trying to reach, and you’d probably rather have the more expensive but more complete game. I know I would.@Sean.C:
Make two versions of the game, the normal $60 version, and a “deluxe” one for more that gives things like molded plastic IC’s, paper money, more dice, marshaling cards, and maybe a cleaner looking map with separate production card.
I do like the idea of having a deluxe/collector’s edition. Even if it had to be $120 or a little higher.
Isn’t the Spring 1942 map basically identical to Revised? I looked at the two and didn’t see any major differences.
Ah oh ye of having too little time or a life outside of games! There’s a HUGE difference! Just look at the connectivity of Central United States!!!
The new Russian ART looks pretty neat. The new AP looks cool, too. Too bad it won’t get much action.
I got my brother who hadn’t played A&A in years to play, and I got my 10 year old nephew to play for the first time ever since 1941 came out. Neither of them would have been interested in 1942 2ed. straight out of the gate. My brother actually did play 42 2ed. after a few games of 1941.
did anyone show?
Superflypimp and I played with one random guy there. 4-5 other guys walked up during the game and expressed varying degrees of interest in playing with us in the future.@Johnson73:
I was wanting to stop by and introduce myself, but couldn’t find a way to get out of the house.
I usually take the front door, side door, or back door. Or if it’s an emergency, I might go out the window.
As of right now I’m still planning to be at tabletop. I’ll bring 1942 2ed, 1941, Pac 40, and Europe 40. I’m hoping to be there by 5:00 PM.
