Posts made by Zero Pilot

Set-up charts:

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=17222181#post17222181

Yes, and yes. ~ZP

That typo in the Russian set-up card is amazing. And by amazing I mean a real embarrassment. Not that a mistake was made but that it got out (and if it’s posted on the parent company’s website representing a finished piece… it’s out.) Who proofreads this stuff? As a person who has designed for print runs over a million… this is really bad. A board game is not text intensive!

WizO Mike says: “They have been corrected for the printed product.” But if we speculated why the game was delayed before I think this is a clue. Picture 3 shifts of Chinese workers frantically unwrapping AA50 boxes, pulling something or other out and stuffing something else in. It could be the Russian set-up card, it could be something else.

With AA50 subs now having a first strike capability in each round of combat (if no enemy destroyer is present) at only 6 IPCs I think they do have a purpose. This sub will absolutely declaw the 2-hit battleship. And the bomber/sub combination can lay waste to capitol ships at a relatively low cost (assuming you always retreat when your subs are gone). ~ZP

Edit: err, nevermind ~ZP

I think the A&A board map is centered the way it is because board edge where the map wraps around end to end is most conveniently placed through the USA and North America. ~ZP

I haven’t seen any vector versions of Revised. There are PDFs around though and you can do a fair amount of editing to a PDF in AI. Depends what you want to do. The easiest thing might be to take an existing mod map in .ai format and change it to Revised specs. ~ZP

If you imbed direct links to the full size images they should appear at 100%. ~ZP

Pineapple pizza is a very surprising first round purchase. ~ZP

They included Iceland in AA50 to bolster sales in Iceland. ~ZP

@Imperious:

If the game is delayed another month or so they will need to call it AA51

:-D

This sux. :x Shame on you AH. This is an embarrassment, and if it’s any sign of things to come with this release…

It could be a delay in manufacturing. But I think it’s also just as likely that someone in AH marketing simply said “Wait a minute… we’re releasing this game a month ahead of the ‘holiday shopping season’… WHY?” ~ZP

Actually Elk is simply pointing out that the computer version makes it extremely easy to prototype alternative setups and things. Instead of a half-hour just to set up the board to try something different or off-the-wall (be it rules, set-up or gameplay) it’s like type-type-type click and you’re trying it. Post your best file on a forum and you’ll have dozens of people trying it and providing feedback. So then you apply what you learned in the computer version to help you define the “definitive” board set-up (if there is such a thing.)

Then, (and this is big) you include the computer version in the box!

I had this exact same thought too when AA50 was announced. Why would you not do it that way? It sure wouldn’t take long to see the consequences of the 12 IPC bomber and the 6 IPC sub. (!) If I were LH and AH I would have done some serious prototyping in well… I guess their Gleemax thing. But I’m sure they didn’t. I have no doubt we’ll see an AA50LHTR. ~ZP

P51D with RR Merlin engine. ~ZP

If you’re a regular here you know there was a lot more leading up to this than an off call in a tournament game. But apparently that was the proverbial last straw. Let’s just leave it at that.

I’m gonna miss the guy. ~ZP

@Subotai:

By all means, I’m happy about the reduced cost of bmrs, but what’s missing in AA50 is the possibillity to buy more AA guns, and each AA guns fires one shot each. Most players would not buy AA guns if not needed, tanks+inf+art+ftrs is much more useful. So what seems broken in AA50 is not SBR rules regarding bmrs+damage, but that the rules constrict players from using approriate countermeasures if faced by massive SBR attacks.

Absolutely agree. I’ve been saying this for years. Even to LH himself when he happened to frequent this very forum a month or so before Revised was released. I said when you face a SBR specific “ploy” (won’t use the term strategy, because it truly isn’t) you aren’t truly outplayed as much as you are out-purchased. On a tactical level currently the only possible counter to SBR would be to get yourself some bombers too and give as good as you get. But the fundamental problem is that not all nations can take advantage of SBR because some can’t ever afford to buy bombers. It’s almost always going to be an American bombing campaign. It will never be a Russian bombing campaign. And that’s where the whole thing kinda becomes unbalanced.

A nation that can’t afford bombers can manage an extra 5 IPC for an AA and at least have some means to stop a player bent on doing nothing more interesting than buying bombers for the rest of the game. I said to LH you should have multiple AA guns that can fire to achieve a balance here. The general reply consensus in that thread was  “yes, but AA fires at each aircraft see”. True, but with each successive bomber & corresponding AA shot the risk to each bomber doesn’t ever change. So a player that will risk/send 1 bomber against AA will just as easily send 5. There should be some recourse to a dedicated SBR ploy other than to simply hang on for favorable dice. ~ZP

I’ll hit up your thread on the dev site… ~ZP

p.s. Please don’t misspell Afghanistan to match Larry’s map. :-D

I’m sure what he was showing at GenCon was a one-off proof of the board. If a typo like that makes in into the production piece many heads should roll. ~ZP

@Black_Elk:

Unit graphics will come next, probably about 50x50 pixels relative the current size of the map, maybe a little/larger or smaller depending. I think the zones should be large enough to handle this with minimal spill over.

These maps really are an excellent cartographic projection. But this is the one thing I’m not sure about. The VC graphic I did is 35x36 and it looks kinda big in places. The actual gameboards have the territories hideously out of proportion. But there’s a reason for it. Territories will have up to 7 different units occupying the space. And that’s before any attacking units are added. ~ZP

I agree with Corbeau Blanc’s angle. In my gaming group the rationale for the G1 carrier been boiled down to one argument: “because we know what happens when you don’t.” ~ZP