Posts made by zooooma

Cool. Maybe now we can get a FAQ for the Zombie game?

Obviously the Zombies add rules.  The question is, what have they added those rules to?  And the answer is a simplified version of A&A.

Why do you think SBRs, new ICs, AAAs, etc were not included?

1. Because WotC thought this would improve the game for seasoned players?
   Or,
2. because they wanted a more newb friendly product?

You can believe what you want, but I’m going with 2).

As for the complaint that the Pacific theatre is downplayed, that sounds like almost every A&A game I’ve ever played.  It’s almost always KGF.  If you don’t like that, I (again) recommend using your Zombies as a 1942.2 expansion.  The base game was clearly not intended for those of us who want a deeper experience.  I’m surprised anybody here is even playing it, other than to get a feel for the new mechanics.

@Caesar:

You’re going to argue what we’re told at Wizard….

I’m not aware that WotC have denied this being an entry level game.  Where did they say that?

But as a former MTG player, I can assure you that WotC do not publicise design decisions out of a desire to inform us!  It’s all just PR.  I don’t trust anything they say.

Facts speak for themselves, and A&A&Z is significantly simplified compared to any other title (besides 1941).  What does that tell you?

@robert:

What is needed is new ideas/scale/eras to make the continuing of the series viable.

• The name ‘Axis & Allies’ refers specifically to WWII

• I like variety.  When I play Diplomacy, Supremacy 2020, Conquest Of The Empire, Shogun, etc, I actually enjoy that the core rules and mechanics are fundamentally different than A&A.

players

@Caesar:

The problem is that Zombies is NOT an entry game, it IS a reboot to bring life to an IP that has a fanatical fan base.

How is this a reboot when it is an expansion to 1942.2?

A&A&Z has 2 marketing goals:

• To sell s new toy for enfranchised players

• To entice new/millennial gamers with sexy, pop culture

The first group (I expect) will gravitate to the 1942.2 expansion for a deeper game.

The new board will be enjoyed by vets for the fact that it is a new.  But this is an entry level game.

• Fewer areas?  Check.

• Reduced economy?  Check.

• Fewer unit types?  Check.

• Simplified rules/mechanics?  Check.

The base A&A&Z game resembles 1941 more than 1942.2/AA50/G1940.

1941 was clearly meant as an introductory game, but to the uninitiated it is just another A&A title.  Zombies will lure a lot more new players.  AH/Hasbro know this, and have designed the game accordingly.

@Striker:

Other board games of similar or less complexity to A&A (IE: many of the scenarios of memoir 44, catan, etc.) aren’t locked into an optimal strategy…

Other board games with more strategic options typically involve a lot more random and chaotic elements.  A&A is more predictable, and as such optimal strategies are bound to arise.  A&A players are apparently okay with this, as many of us feel A&A is a cut above.

That said, A&A&Z looks like it offers a more tempting Sea Lion than any other edition.  It also should often end with an economic victory (zombie apocalypse), and it does have a strong random/chaotic mechanic that should make strategic play more “touch-and-go”.  You should be very happy with this game.

Note this is an entry level game.  Deeper strategies should arise in A&A&Z: 1942.

@taamvan:

call of duty

My first introduction to WWII/Nazi Zombies was from Heavy Metal: The Movie (1981).

@robert:

The trick now is to get the creators to joke about an A&A Mediterranean game  :-D :mrgreen:

I feel like the Mediterranean is too large for a tactical game (D-Day, BoB, etc), but too small for a “theatre” game.

Welcome back, friend!

https://www.polygon.com/reviews/2018/10/30/18044142/axis-allies-zombies-board-game-review

@DoManMacgee:

Bummer. I don’t see that being very helpful in 42SE’s China then. Aren’t all those territories worth only 1 IPC each? I doubt 1 INF/turn is going to do much in the face of the Japanese onslaught.

Of course Japan will have to kill each infantry twice…

@DoManMacgee:

What are the rules for placing units at a recruitment center? Is it tied to the IPC value of the territory like it is for ICs (haven’t got my copy of AAZ yet or I’d check for myself).

Exactly like regular ICs except they cost 10 IPCs and only spawn infantry.

@smo63:

No if Zombies take a territory where there is nothing but Zombies it retains its IPC value and when the zombies have 25 IPC’s of territories, it is considered a Zombie Apocolypse and they win.

Zombies can’t win.  ZA goes to VPs between players.

@innohub:

Thanks for article sharing!–- It seems the benefit of zombies is:

1.  Break down the original repeated game flow pattern
2.  Activate lands in map that user seldom would go in traditional AA game
3.  Introduce  possibilities of riot/rebellion near each country’s own homeland due to the card events like asian time
4.  A faster paced game (cheaper armor, a new victory condition by zombie victory…)

Also thematic Hallowe’en games and a gateway game for the mainstream.

@crockett36:

my question is could we rope teenagers and Millennials into axis and allies through this quote on quote side door?

The games that are popular with young board gamers are typically short games with less direct player vs player interaction.  Games lime A&A are going to remains Fringe despite the board game boon I think.

@Young:

1940 needs an “all in one” 3rd Edition with a better rule book as well as significant adjustments to unit profiles, victory conditions, and research and development (plus more).

2nd edition without an upgrade kit was a slap in the face to those of us who bought 1st edition.  Luckily between HBG and this community I was able to fill out my set.  Without that, the choice would be to play with sub-par makeshift units, or else shell out $200 USD +tx for a few plastic AAAs.  Not a peasant dilemma.

@DouchemanMacgee:

You all might be missing a more important detail here.

Quote from the same article. It’s the sentence right before the atrocious “zombie” comment:

@Author:

But why, I ask, hasn�t Axis and Allies come to tablet yet?

@WOTC:

�I think we will be correcting that in 12 to 18 months,�

If they’re serious and we’re actually getting an official software release of A&A, that could potentially be huge (or a disaster, if WOTC decides to shut down TripleA),

I caught that.  Just that personally I am more interested in table top gaming than digital gaming.

@Young:

They should fix what they have before adding to the problem.

Do you think A&A needs fixing?

We might throw some fun variants in there as well. I want to to make new games. I want to make variants of existing games. What about Axis and Allies and Zombies?

• Chris Cocks,
  WotC president and CEO

https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/how-the-company-behind-dd-magic-and-avalon-hill-innovate-w514703

Obviously Zombies was a throwaway hypothetical, but be prepared for a total bastardisation.

And I though A&A: WWI was a stretch…

I haven’t played 1942.2, but for me the famed viability of a KJF strategy is a huge draw over AA50 (which I have played).

In the Gamemaster edition, Revised*, AA50**, and 42 1st edition all require a KGF strategy for optimal Allied play.  This makes 1942 2nd edition a very new experience to entice me with.

I have not played G40 2nd edition yet (only 1st edition).  I understand that is also a KJF game, so for those of you who play that, perhaps KJF is less of a lure.  I have also not played A&A: 1941, and have no idea as to the correct strategies there.

• The minor victory scenario (8 cities) entailed a balanced Allied strategy for a strong defense in India.  But I never tried a full blown KJF.  I haven’t looked at that game for as long time, but I would tend to think Germany wins the game if the Allies go KJF in a minor victory setting.

** I have only played the 1941 scenario (with NOs), and cannot attest to the other variations.

Yes please!!

Historical Board Gaming is out of stock - looking to buy 1 or 2 copies.  :)

I’m located in Canada.