News flash: AXIS & ALLIES ANNIVERSARY EDITION due out oct 23 08

[Romulus]

@Imperious:

goto Boardgame geek.com and look for axis and allies bulge.

Wonderful! I like very much the BotB panzers!

[addicted]

@LT04:

:-D I just ordered my copy.  :-D I also bought A&A Pacific so I wouldn’t have to pay for shipping.  (I hope that will hold me over till the big dog comes out in October.)

I used the link provided by Imperious Leader.  It was the cheapest place I have found it for.

LT

Where do i go to pre order for the anniversary edition?  I have the pacific and european theaters plus 2nd edition and classic.

Is 2nd edition the same as classic? i cant remember.

[Imperious Leader]

http://www.coolstuffinc.com/main_boardGame.php?viewType=view board games&fp=Acc-BGAHAandAAnniversary

This is nothing like any other game before it. But its a new global version of Axis and Allies , much like Revised was to Classic

Nova 1st ed
MB 2nd edition
Hasbro 98 CD 3rd edition
Revised 4th edition
Anniversary  5th edition

[Krieghund]

I prefer to think of it this way:

Nova version
Milton Bradley version - editions 1 through 3
Avalon Hill version - Revised and Anniversary editions

[Imperious Leader]

how can nova be ‘zero’ edition… if people want to know whats the first version of AA, Nova is it. It must count as the first AA game.

If you look at MB it says its 2nd edition

and officially people call the 2 hit BB and Russia restricted the 3rd edition which was capitalized by the CD rom game in 1998

[Krieghund]

Nova isn’t a “zero edition”.  It’s simply the first version of the game that was printed.

Yes, the Milton Bradley version says “2nd Edition” - now.  Before 1986, it didn’t.  The original MB version was quite a bit different.  Among other things, it included Commander-in-Chief rules that allowed you to combine armies of different nationalities so one nation could control them and attack together with them.  This was quite broken, as the Axis didn’t have much of a chance.  It was the major impetus for the publication of the 2nd Edition rules.

[Romulus]

I have to agree with IL here. Nova edition is usually known as 1st edition, while MB is the second or “Classic” edition.
Revised is notoriously known as 4th edition so the CD ROM one have to be the 3rd!!!

[Imperious Leader]

it included Commander-in-Chief rules that allowed you to combine armies of different nationalities

your talking about that 4 page supplement from General M. Bradley? That was not in the original game. That showed up latter.

[ABWorsham4]

Since I’ve got married a hundred dollars is much more difficult justify for a game. If only i had people the play the game with!

[Krieghund]

@Imperious:

it included Commander-in-Chief rules that allowed you to combine armies of different nationalities

your talking about that 4 page supplement from General M. Bradley? That was not in the original game. That showed up latter.

No, I am talking about the 1st Edition of the Milton Bradley A&A rules that was first printed in 1984, which is currently on my desk in front of me.  I can’t seem to find a copy on-line anywhere, though.  Everyplace I can find only has the 2nd Edition rules, which I can only assume is because no one has played by the 1st Edition rules since 1986.

If you look at the Avalon Hill Rules Download page, you will see that it lists the 2nd Edition rules as “Axis & Allies, 1991 edition”.  This is because the 2nd Edition rules were first published in 1986, and a supplement to them was added in 1991.  The 1st Edition MB rules were first published when the game was in 1984.

[Krieghund]

@Romulus:

I have to agree with IL here. Nova edition is usually known as 1st edition, while MB is the second or “Classic” edition.
Revised is notoriously known as 4th edition so the CD ROM one have to be the 3rd!!!

I understand that people tend to think of this as the case, but there are two problems with this approach.

Firstly, there are three distinct editions of the MB version of the game - 1984, 1986 and 1997 (CD Edition).  Given that, in order to call Revised “4th Edition” and remain consistent with “edition numbers”, the Nova version would need to be called (as Imperious alluded to earlier) “Edition Zero”.  If you’re going to acknowledge the 1997 MB 3rd Edition, ignoring the existence of the 1984 MB 1st Edition is simply inconsistent and inaccurate.

Secondly, the Milton Bradley editions were all changes to the rules only, not to any of the game components (except for a small map change in 3rd Edition).  This makes all three MB editions basically tweaks to the rules of the same game.  However, it can be argued that the Nova and AH versions of A&A are completely different games from the MB version, since the maps and the rules themselves are significantly different.  I have heard this argument made many times.

Given all that, it just makes sense (at least to me) that the different publishers’ incarnations of A&A should be called “versions” and the separate releases of the games within each publisher be called “editions”, as I outlined above.  This precendent has, in effect, already been established by Milton Bradley.  Of course, everyone is free to draw his or her own conclusion from the facts at hand.

[Imperious Leader]

1984 and 1991 are essentially the same version. The only thing different is that clarifications sheet from General M. Bradley in 1991.

I have the 1984 rules and they don’t have anything about combining allies with commander in chief idea.

You have to credit the Nova Games edition as the first edition.

The only change thats tangible that arrived was the 98 Hasborg CD rom which had major changes regarding Russian restricted movement, Naval occupation, and 2 hit BB among other ideas. And since this was actually a product ( even if its not an actual board game) it too must be an edition to the game based also on its influence that carried over to Revised.

Before Revised came out, people were referring it as the 4th edition, but this moniker was not attributed to the title probably because that bum Mike S. didn’t want people to think he was helping larry make a new edition, but rather something totally new so he can gain more accolades as the new Axis and Allies guru. People knew better.

So basicially every new version of the global game that contains substantial new ideas should be credited as a new edition, making Anniversary edition the 5th incarnation of the global game. As i said before the handout of 1991 does not qualify as an independent game and was just a clarification sheet.

[Imperious Leader]

http://www.dantiques.com/abgd/gamerules.mv?pag_num=1

under 1984 rules ( 2nd edition) it says: commander in chief rules are deleted.

But NOVA game does not have it….

we need to get to the bottom of this “commander in chief thing”

[Krieghund]

@Imperious:

1984 and 1991 are essentially the same version. The only thing different is that clarifications sheet from General M. Bradley in 1991.

They are not the same.  The rules that you have linked above are the 1986 rules (2nd Edition), despite the fact that the website claims they are the 1984 rules.  The 1984 rules do not say “2nd Edition” at the bottom of the first page.  I know this, because I have them right here in front of me, from when I bought the game in 1984.

@Imperious:

I have the 1984 rules and they don’t have anything about combining allies with commander in chief idea.

If your rules don’t have the Commander-In-Chief rules on page 16, then they aren’t the original 1984 rules.  If your rules say “2nd Edition” at the bottom of the first page, then they aren’t the original 1984 rules.

@Imperious:

You have to credit the Nova Games edition as the first edition.

I do credit it as the first version.  Milton Bradley did not credit it as the “1st Edition”.

@Imperious:

The only change thats tangible that arrived was the 98 Hasborg CD rom which had major changes regarding Russian restricted movement, Naval occupation, and 2 hit BB among other ideas.

Incorrect, as I have already pointed out.  The Rules Update section on page 3 of the 2nd Edition rules outlines the changes between the 1st and 2nd Milton Bradley Editions.

@Imperious:

And since this was actually a product ( even if its not an actual board game) it too must be an edition to the game based also on its influence that carried over to Revised.

No argument here.

@Imperious:

Before Revised came out, people were referring it as the 4th edition, but this moniker was not attributed to the title probably because that bum Mike S. didn’t want people to think he was helping larry make a new edition, but rather something totally new so he can gain more accolades as the new Axis and Allies guru. People knew better.

So basicially every new version of the global game that contains substantial new ideas should be credited as a new edition, making Anniversry edition the 5th incarnation of the global game. As i said before the hand out does not qualify as an independent game and was just a clarification sheet.

You may call it anything you like.  However, as I pointed out in my last post, including the MB 3rd Edition in this progression while ignoring the 1st is inconsistent.

Edit: I’ve just realized that the correct publication date for the MB 2nd Edition rules is 1986, not 1991.  That’s what I get for not double-checking a source!  1991 is the date that the 2nd Edition Rules Clarifications supplement was published.  I’ve edited my above posts with the correction.  Sorry for any confusion caused by this error.

[Imperious Leader]

Well then post these elusive rules. scan and post these I don’t think anybody has ever discussed them before and plus they may have other ideas that never seen the light of day.

[Romulus]

@Krieghund:

@Romulus:

I have to agree with IL here. Nova edition is usually known as 1st edition, while MB is the second or “Classic” edition.
Revised is notoriously known as 4th edition so the CD ROM one have to be the 3rd!!!

I understand that people tend to think of this as the case, but there are two problems with this approach.

Firstly, there are three distinct editions of the MB version of the game - 1984, 1986 and 1997 (CD Edition).  Given that, in order to call Revised “4th Edition” and remain consistent with “edition numbers”, the Nova version would need to be called (as Imperious alluded to earlier) “Edition Zero”.  If you’re going to acknowledge the 1997 MB 3rd Edition, ignoring the existence of the 1984 MB 1st Edition is simply inconsistent and inaccurate.

Secondly, the Milton Bradley editions were all changes to the rules only, not to any of the game components (except for a small map change in 3rd Edition).  This makes all three MB editions basically tweaks to the rules of the same game.  However, it can be argued that the Nova and AH versions of A&A are completely different games from the MB version, since the maps and the rules themselves are significantly different.  I have heard this argument made many times.

Given all that, it just makes sense (at least to me) that the different publishers’ incarnations of A&A should be called “versions” and the separate releases of the games within each publisher be called “editions”, as I outlined above.  This precendent has, in effect, already been established by Milton Bradley.  Of course, everyone is free to draw his or her own conclusion from the facts at hand.

Thanks for the clarification Krieghund.

My idea was based on the options menu available in the CD-ROM edition.
In the game it is possible to select the 2nd edition rules (the same of the MB Board game) or the 3rd edition rules (introduced with the CD-ROM edition). So I was erroneously considering both the MB edition (1984 and 1986) as the same.

Maybe the use of “version” and “edition” terms, as you suggest, may help in being more clear.

[Krieghund]

@Imperious:

Well then post these elusive rules. scan and post these I don’t think anybody has ever discussed them before and plus they may have other ideas that never seen the light of day.

I’m kind of surprised that I couldn’t find them anywhere on-line, but I guess it makes sense.  The internet wasn’t that big in 1986, and the 2nd Edition rules really pretty much expunged the 1st.  It’s a bit of “history” that’s been lost.  I will post them as soon as I’m able.  Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to get my scanner to work since I “upgraded” my PC to Vista, so it may be several days before I get a chance to either fix the problem or buy a new scanner.  This at least gives me a good excuse to take the time and/or money necessary to resolve the problem.  I’ll let you know when and where I’ve got them posted.

[Lynxes]

I can’t find any information on the actual changes except the addition of cruisers, Italy and a “minor” China, and the addition of some extra terrítories, presumably around Italy and China.

As “no convoy zones” have been announced by Larry himself, I do hope that they add something to the Subs special abilities. The 2 hit rule for battleships was perfect and made it a good buy when it wasn’t in the earlier game.

Subs: blockade of IPCs if situated next to enemy ICs (“interdiction NA”) ?

Cruisers: I’m at a loss here, maybe a “blitz” function at sea ?

[Imperious Leader]

I think cruisers are gonna be the key to naval purchases. They are the best all around gunship and should have some special attribute

[losttribe04]

After revised came out I thought that the next world version of A&A that came out would have country specific units.  This idea was ferther reinforced by A&A D-Day with the German tanks.

But that doesn’t seem to be the case here.  Next time we will have to put a request in for something like the US light carrier that moves 3 spaces, the supperior German ARM, the hooah Russian infantrymen, the bad a** Japanese FTR, maybe a bigger transport capacity for the UK and let Italy and China keep the same old stuff I don’t know.

Maybe next time.

LT