Best posts made by vodot

@cloud7707
First, thanks for the encouragement, and I’m glad you’re using the project as a baseline for your own ideas! Keep going! :)

Second, RE: this quote from your post:

…giving Italy 7 more IPCs is a bit too much and almost doubles their IPC count.

+7 IPC for Italy would be a lot - But even my “Kitchen Sink” version only intentionally adds +4 IPC to Italy:

• +1 for splitting the Balkans (was 3) into Balkans (2) + Greece (2)
• +1 for Sicily
• +1 for Sardinia
• +1 for Italian East Africa (assuming it starts the game under Italian ownership rather than British)

I think these bumps for Italy are not only needed in general to make Italy more fun to play (particularly if Cairo is sitting there as a VC), but are also offset by increases to Italy’s great adversary the UK in Malaya, Australia, Ceylon, and the like; and also by the fact that Sicily’s territory is carved out from and adjacent to the Italian mainland, making Italy much more vulnerable to a protracted [historical] amphibious invasion.

Regarding your other changes I mostly agree with @Argothair. While I’m personally in favor of the SZ62 split we see in AA42.2, I do feel very strongly about making Australia in particular (and the money islands by extension) a much more interesting part of the game. Splitting AUS into two 1 IPC territories is a step in the wrong direction, as Argothair says, making them impossible to build from and inconsequential to attack - the exact opposite of both history and, more importantly, fun Pacific games!

EDIT 1: I should clarify that I cordially dislike National Objectives, both philosophically (don’t force my strategy, bro!) and mechanically (they’re a balance crutch and they add a whole meta-layer of complexity). I almost never play with them, so that does have an impact on how I think about espeically Italy’s pathetic income without her NOs. I mostly teach and play with groups that include newbies, so things need to be as WYSIWYG and straightforward as possible.

EDIT 2: In that vein I think the “minimalist” board changes from OOB to instantly improve Italy and the AUS/Pacific game without NOs or any fuss would be:

• Increase AUS to 3 (+1 UK), no split
• Add Sardinia and make Italian Africa… Italian (+2 Italy), no Sicily
• Add Singapore and Cairo as VCs

You can make the above changes to an OOB board in about 10 minutes with some sharpies - use blue tape to make it reversible - and I think you’ve instantly made AA50 more interesting and fun :)

aaaaaand one more: the great, the impossible, the terrifyingly and impractically over-gunned Project Kostromitinov! These pieces were included in AA41, and are largest A&A sculpts in any edition of the game, ever. Let’s get one on the table!

Time for another goofy house rule.

Проект Костромитинов
If the copy of the game being played includes the Kostromitinov sculpt as the Soviet Aircraft Carrier, and if Karelia is USSR-controlled, then after each COLLECT INCOME phase of the USSR turn that player may set aside 6 IPCs. If he does, place one Kostromitinov Heavy Carrier on its side (under construction) in Karelia (not in the adjacent Sea Zone). Only one such carrier may be under construction at a time. As long as it is under construction, this piece remains on the board in Karelia (even if captured) and has no effect on the game.

Each turn that ends with Karelia under USSR control the USSR player may set aside a further 6 IPCs. When 18 IPCs have been set aside in this way, immediately launch the completed Kostromitinov from Karelia into the adjacent Sea Zone.

The Kostromitinov Heavy Carrier has the following stats: A2/D3/M2. Requires 2 Hits to Destroy. May carry up to 3 fighters/tactical bombers in any combination.

Full File, with Kostromitinov:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/lk7jy06dbm0uiw6/carrier_decals_HumorlessFrench_Aquila_Kostromitinov.pdf/file

Here’s my promised photo with a full set, complete and magnitized:

@Titus said

…The Hokkaido landing zone is a great threat for Japan as they actually need to keep navy near japan instead of running away south.

Really glad it’s working well for you guys!

The Aluetians should present a corresponding (and historical!) problem for the US as well, should they go KGF crazy- a couple transports with light cover can shuck a pretty large Japanese force into Canada by turn 4-5 if the US doesn’t maintain west-coast assets to scare them off…

@Argothair, put me down for helping in general with playtesting, naming territories, and GIMP/art stuff. What help do you need right now?

• I just want to make sure that you know that Inkscape (free/open-source illustrator clone) can quickly and awesomely vectorize raster images- I’ve attached your map, vectorized as a pdf below (this took literally 5 minutes; you can endlessly tweak/refine the process, exclude text, etc…). You’re probably already aware- I just want to make sure. This obviously doesn’t instantly solve your 1-pixel-wide problems.

• I think the Azores in the Atlantic has an expansive effect on Axis mental health (and strategic bombing strategies); what about in one of the two spots shown below?

argo_draft_map.pdf

@Black_Elk playing the POS map with the islands between SZs was just a massive eye-opener. I modified community maps and printed big physical POS & POS+C maps, and I taped your islands to my revised board- my group played 10 or 20 in-person games between 2006-2009 on those setups! So much crunchier tactically, especially in the Mediterranean and PTO, and the initial unit placements were so refreshing.

Hi @Swishtail, there are no rules changes or improvements other than those mentioned on Renegade’s website:

1. Four more German infantry units
2. Two more British infantry units
3. 30 more plastic chips
4. Rulebook updated with latest errata

Here’s another press release with similar info.

Here is the official errata from Wizards, which is what I assume they intend to incorporate… that and any other salient info from Krieghund’s epic 1914 Q&A thread here on the forums.

Use code WELCOME20 for 20% off your pre-order!

@axis_roll to continue this variant discussion, since I just mentioned it in @Argothair’s Balanced Mod thread- where I also took the liberty of naming it- what if when the “Colonial Outpost” (the TT that gets the pre-game boost) is captured, the IC there is destroyed (not captured) and the TT value reverts to OOB?

Colonial Outpost
Instead of a bid, before the start of the game the Allies may designate any Allied territory as the “Colonial Outpost” for that game. Add an Industrial Complex + Anti-Aircraft Artillery to that territory and increase it’s IPC value by +1 (but not over 3) as long as it remains under the control of its original owner. If the “Colonial Outpost” is ever captured by the Axis Powers, the Industrial Complex there is destroyed (not captured) and the value of the territory permanently reverts back to the value printed on the board.

This addition to the rule would accomplish two major things:

1. It solidifies the dramatic pro-Allied swing that the Outpost represents, because it eliminates the potential Axis savings if they capture the Outpost on a TT where they stand to benefit significantly from having an IC anyways (like India)
2. It removes a major disincentive for adventurous or decoy Outpost placements- they are are net-zero for the Allies at worst.

Since the Colonial Outpost is designed to replace outright the bid, my thought is that it should never hurt the Allies even if they just drop it to distract the Axis and never build a single unit there. To weaken the variant while keeping the spirit, you could always leave either the boosted IPC value (but still destroy the IC) or let the Axis keep the IC but revert the TT value to make it less valuable to them.

I would personally much rather play a game with a whole new opportunity or angle of attack than get another couple Russian artillery and some British infantry in Egypt… not because it would be fairer but just because it would be more fun.

@Midnight_Reaper said in Custom 3D Miniatures: Major & Minor Industrial Complexes, Recruitment Center, Airbase, and Naval Base:

You’ve got some really great pieces here. Thanks for taking feedback and turning it into awesome pieces. You rock!

-Midnight_Reaper

Thanks!

Here’s everything so far:

@FranceNeedsMorePower Hey, looking into this variant for my son and I’s next North Africa game! Any sign of that rulebook yet, other changes from the version above?

@Meles I’ve had good luck monitoring Facebook Marketplace and eBay and waiting until the $15 mark or so. I think AA41 is a great source of ‘variant’ pieces you can dot with a paint marker for Early/Late, Heavy/Light, or just mix-in variety versions of the standard units. Others are game-readable and useful right out of the box e.g. Japanese carriers & TBD/DDLs, Russian IS-2s, German Tigers, and US P-40s (finally get that P-38 out of China!). In my experience, the color match over the years is no worse than any other edition-to-edition variation.

Hi @8d88 - if by “viable” you mean “potentially game-winning at a high level of competitive play” then I believe the short answer is “no” and the long answer is “nope.” :)

Much longer and un-asked-for answer: It depends on your definition of “viable.” I like playing the US with a two-ocean strategy— particularly when I’m teaching the game—becuase it gives me the most control over the balance/fun ‘knobs’ of the game experience for the other players. If one player is dominating (or struggling), I can most effectively reach out and smack (or help) them with the US, and to do so requires two-ocean logistics (or some kind of “Green Skies” strat) to immediately get material where needed. My A1 purchase in these teaching games is definitely going to be two-ocean; enough carriers and transports to make up for any G1/J1 losses and to (lightly) defend and escort two oceans’ worth of shipping. My A2 purchase and moves will be more transports and escorts as needed, and the start of flowing material in whichever direction.

In many cases the two-ocean A1 purchase evolves into a normal one-ocean US strategy becuase it becomes quickly and painfully obvious which of the oceans is going to require the smacking (or helping) given dice, player skill, and other factors. This also depends on the kind and quantity of communication that is allowed/happening between the Allies.

While the two-ocean US strategy is mechanically very suboptimal for a dozen reasons which others here can explain better than me, the Allies will still often “win” teaching games where I play the US as a two-ocean power. In that regard, if winning = viable then I would say potentially yes—if you’re playing with new/poor players, particularly new/poor Axis players, and you want them to have a good time and come back next time—when you can crush them with an all-in Thorpe Thump, KGF, or whatever you like :)

Hi all, here’s some artwork to add two versions of the Tiger Tank (one with header, one without) and two versions of ANZAC Infantry (OOB + variant) to the Reference Charts. The four ANZAC Infantry divisions kicked ass in North Africa, so I thought a little stat boost would be a small but fun way to reflect that.

For the ANZAC Infantry, as I mentioned there are two versions.

The original Optional RAW is:

ANZAC Reinforcements
The United Kingdom player may deploy one UK infantry
each turn from the Reinforcements Zone directly to the
Indian Ocean convoy sea zone.

Version one just puts a visual on the reference chart to remind the Allied player of this optional rule.

If you use the “variant” version of the ANZAC Infantry (A3/D4, not supported by artillery) then there is FINALLY a reason for those larger ANZAC Infantry sculpts in AAP40.2… turns out they’re just better! Verbose rules for the variant version below.

I printed these out at 5.3" wide on some vinyl sticker paper and voila.

ANZAC Reinforcements (variant version)
The United Kingdom player may purchase and deploy one
ANZAC infantry each turn from the Reinforcements
Zone directly to the Indian Ocean convoy sea zone. If you
own a copy of Axis and Allies: 1940 Pacific use the ANZAC
Infantry pieces from that game; otherwise you may denote
these units in whatever way you choose.

ANZAC Infantry always attack at 3 (they are not further
boosted by Artillery) and defend at 4. A maximum of 4* of them
may be present on the board at any given time, and they may
not be represented or multiplied by chips. They are otherwise
identical to regular UK infantry in every way.

*One for each of the four prominent ANZAC divisions in North Africa: the Australian 9th, 6th, and 7th, and the 2nd New Zealand.

As a note, for anyone else looking to modify the Reference Charts or Map, it appears that the new font for Territories, Cities, and Unit Type is Barcelona (either ICS or EF), headers are Impact, and most other text appears to be Times New Roman.

Enjoy!

@Tjoek
I’m working on Honolulu as a tribute to all of this work you’ve done. I actually went and carefully isolated the dot, text and shadows out of the background before I realized you can probably just drop it all wholesale, land and sea bits and all, on the correct island.

Iwo Jima is done already, assuming the rotation is all that was wrong with that one.

The real winner, here, is fricking GIMP. Seriously, I cannot believe something like GIMP exists.

@Stuka80 @newenr85 Welcome to the site, guys! This is a great community to hash ideas, find opponents, info, strategies, and customizations for your favorite A&A games.

@Stuka80, you asked about posting - go to the “categories” button at the top of this page:

…then scroll down to find your game, and fire away with the “New Topic” button. If it’s a house rule or customization, you can post your ideas in those two forums and then “tag” it with the game(s) you’re houseruling or customizing. Feel free to fire me or @Panther a DM if you have any more specific questions, and looking forward to chatting with you!

Hi all, here’s a map fix for the Sardinia misspelling*. Printing this at 400DPI should give a perfect match to the board. Cutout the parts you want to keep/remove.

@Tjoek Some pics below. They’ve been through Google photos compression and aren’t the raws, but the map still looks great. It is virtually impossible to overstate how clean it is in person. I decided to kill two birds with one stone and also demo some of my custom 3D printed pieces on the map as well- please forgive the shameless cross-promotion :) As I mentioned above, I did this on a 36" HP T850 plotter on heavyweight satin photo paper, on maximum quality, at a feed speed of about 3"/min.

@rickygraham as @DouchemanMacgee points out, the issue isn’t just the interfering Cruiser, but also the mandatory simultaneity of all combat moves. You can’t clear SZ 12 and then move the transport to SZ 7, because you have to make all combat moves simultaneously. Only combat resolution (rolling dice) happens sequentially, after all combat moves have been completed. Once the dice start rolling the combat move phase of your turn is over.

So, the mediterranean transport cannot pass through SZ 12 on its way to SZ 7 until Germany’s non-combat move, at which time it is too late to conduct an amphibious invasion there.

Your analysis is absolutely correct in that, were this possible, it would be game-breaking.

Hi all, here are the latest additions to the ever-growing “Affordable Armory” :)

In addition to beginning to print in Gray and Black as well as the original White, I’ve also newly designed an Anti-Aircraft Gun (similar to OOB), a Kriegsmarine Escort Ship (Type 39 Torpedo Boat), and I’m printing the Royal Navy Hunt-Class light Destroyers (original model by AntarcticFox on thingiverse) for the Allied side as well.

While I work on a few bigger things (Light Tanks, Escort Carriers, Rail Depots, Coastal Artillery…) there are also some new miscellaneous bits as well: Oil Drums, Naval/Landmines, “Czech Hedgehog” anti-tank obstacles, and Metal Bars/Ingots. Come take a look at www.Etsy.com/shop/NathanDetr0itDesigns!

@general-6-stars
Following. Looks awesome!

You inspired me:

@the-captain I’m trying to think across the whole gamut of A&A games, but I would be most interested in rules for G40, AA50, and the various other custom maps and rulesets of similar complexity.