@LT04:
CAP stands for Civil Air Patrol (If I remember correctly) FTR’s still only have a limit of 4 spaces but I think this rule let them “patrol” empty SZ’s without a carrier.
Basicly they can be placed on SZ’s on the non-combat phase without needing to land on a carrier.
I don’t know if they could move 4 spaces out on say US1 and then move back 4 spaces on US2 or if they had to move 2 and 2.
I think that’s how it went but you may want to double check.
LT
I do not want to be pedant but CAP means Combat Air Patrol.
The Escort rule allows to defend from a SBR using fighters in the territory to intercep the incoming bombers. At same time the attacker may send units to escort the bomber in order to fend off the screen of the defending fighters.
I do not want to be pedant but CAP means Combat Air Patrol.
That’s right Civil Air Patrol are those ROTC wanna-be’s the US Air Force has. They are like glorified boy scouts… Well realistically they are more like explorer scouts.
LT
Yup, CAP allowed fighters to chill in sea zones adjacent to islands, in case any baddies popped up.
The only thing that looks good for the Axis is the Japanese fleet. However, from the looks of it, the game is very ally-favored. All of them were, but in Revised, the bid for Axis was 4-8 IPC it seemed. In Classic, wasn’t it like 15-20? I can see bids being quite high in this game, and all of it going to Italy :wink:
@Rakeman:
Yup, CAP allowed fighters to chill in sea zones adjacent to islands, in case any baddies popped up.
The only thing that looks good for the Axis is the Japanese fleet. However, from the looks of it, the game is very ally-favored. All of them were, but in Revised, the bid for Axis was 4-8 IPC it seemed. In Classic, wasn’t it like 15-20? I can see bids being quite high in this game, and all of it going to Italy :wink:
Yeah that would make sence. In revised normally bid units went to Africa. Italy is along those lines of play.
LT
@Craig:
@LT04:
I do not want to be pedant but CAP means Combat Air Patrol.
That’s right Civil Air Patrol are those ROTC wanna-be’s the US Air Force has. They are like glorified boy scouts… Well realistically they are more like explorer scouts.
LT
Civil Air Patrol is not an actual part of the Air Force ROTC program, but there is some affiliation:
CAP as part of A&A vernacular is Combat Air Patrol.
What actually applies to this discussion- SBRs- is the Escort and Interception Rules from AAP and AAE. I don’t think that they have been included in the Anniversary Edition.
Craig
CAP is not only A&A vernacular, is a term usually used in naval aircraft for indicating the fighters used to patrol on the fleet to intercept the enemy.
I think that having the escort rule may be interesting.
I personally think Germany needs to be at least 35 IPCs and Japan needs bumped up to 35 as well. Though I would like to see Germany keep its 40 IPCs and simply count Italy as extra. I would have originally liked Italy to be 15-16 IPCs, but that isn’t happening from the looks of it.
Italy should go towards balancing the sides instead of just hurting the Axis. For example, why doesn’t Italy have a transport? Also, why aren’t most of those units in Africa Italy’s?
Where is Italy going to get any more IPCs to fix the fact that they are gimped at 10 IPCs? There is going to be a very long delay in the capture of Africa simply because it will take a turn for Italy to build a transport and another to ship over anything to begin taking provinces. What bright mind thought of this setup?
I hope a company produces silicone friction stickers (they don’t really stick and don’t leave residue) that would allow us to put them on the board to change values of provinces and even add provinces (such as Sicily). It would go a long way in letting us customize the game.
For example, why doesn’t Italy have a transport?
I think it was determined that Italy DOES have a transport. I think it was mistakenly considered a destroyer, but it is actually a tranny.
Therefore, Italy starts the game with a BB, 2 CR, and a TRN.
Thanks.
yes correct its a transport!
@Craig:
@LT04:
I do not want to be pedant but CAP means Combat Air Patrol.
That’s right Civil Air Patrol are those ROTC wanna-be’s the US Air Force has. They are like glorified boy scouts… Well realistically they are more like explorer scouts.
LT
Civil Air Patrol is not an actual part of the Air Force ROTC program, but there is some affiliation:
CAP as part of A&A vernacular is Combat Air Patrol.
What actually applies to this discussion- SBRs- is the Escort and Interception Rules from AAP and AAE. I don’t think that they have been included in the Anniversary Edition.
Craig
That’s why I called the CAP’s ROTC wanna be’s.
LT
Looks like all the Chinese territories are worth 1 ipc apiece. This is different than AAP where there were only a couple territories worth anything. I guess this will boost the weak economy of Japan. It won’t be a complete waste of time to swat the Chinese off their back. All this income is going to the USA at the start or what?
Another thing I noticed was that Africa didn’t change. I think i see 1 new territory in Egypt. I was hoping for a few more to simulate the vastness of the continent and make a few of them worth 0 ipcs to also simulate how undeveloped it is. Still seems a little to easy to get to S. Africa
I said this before, alot of people look at the setup and it seems the Axis is screwed. Old germany divided in half, unable to use the full force of a 40 ipc economy that is now down to 30. But we have to remember The (smart)USA player will not be playing a KGF ever again with the new VCs in Pacific. I wish we knew exact IPC value of each country. USA and UK is unclear from what I have read.
I can’t see the name of the territory to the north of France. But now Germany must stockpile to defend Normandy and Belgium now. Not sure I like that. It will be very hard to defend DDay when your forces are divided on the coast like that. I would have rather seen the entire coastline of Western Europe be 1 territory then another territory between that and Germany.
@Flying:
I can’t see the name of the territory to the north of France.
North-Western Europe (representing BEL, NED, Northwest Germany & DAN)
When discussing IPC and balance, you should take into account the IPC-bonuses you apparently get with some combination of territories. They didn’t use this rule in the GENCON game, but it means that the aggressive player gets extra IPCs each turn, i.e. the Axis at the start of the game. This will probably give the game a good historical feel and also a swing effect, one major victory will give way to more, i.e. signifying morale of your nation that was very important in the war. I assume these bonuses represents more morale than resources which are well represented by territory values!
Confirmed bonuses:
No enemy ships in Med- Italy 5 IPCs
Probable:
Control all islands in Pacific exc. Hawaii, NZ and AUS and still keeping all at-start areas- Japan X IPCs?
Control of major part of Africa/middle east? - Italy X IPCs
Control of major part of European Russia ? - Germany X IPCs
Probable IPCs values in -41 scenario:
Germany 30 (+5 bonus? + 4 IPC worth of Russia taken turn 1)
Soviet Union 30 (- 4 IPC worth lost on turn 1)
Japan 17 (+5 bonus, plus 13 IPCs taken turn 1)
UK 42 (minus Hong-kong, Burma, NEI, Borneo 11 IPCs lost on turn 1)
Italy 10 (+5/10 bonus?)
US/China 45 (minus Phillippines 2 IPCs lost on turn 1)
You will quickly reach AAR values, the only difference being Germany has slightly less, Soviet Union slightly more, Italy added at least at 15 and then around 3 free China inf/turn. What does it add up to? My five cents is that it’s similar to AAR in balance, but much more enjoyable and complex and rewarding playing!
i am really looking forward to this game…
From what it looks not tooo much territories were added , but i admit I never played revised - I used to “combine” pacific and Europe for one big game map…
10 points for Italy seems not much, but considering that it has a decent fleet and the "only thing it has to do early in the game is taking Egypt (with German help) and then spread to Arica and Asia (if all goes well) should allow Italy to do its part.
UK could be in trouble if it looses to much on one front (Africa Asia Europe)
If Italy and Japan can link up Early in the game Russia is probably doomed and Italy can focus on fleet builds to harrass the Aliies in the Atlantic
That are of course a few ifs… - HAve I already said that I really look forward to get this game…
I assume these bonuses represents more morale than resources which are well represented by territory values!
They could also represent control of vital shipping/transport lanes.
/Herr Arnulfe
So, Larry, that old sneaky guy, first said “no convoy zones” making all of us a bit annoyed and then got it back as well as Lend-lease in another way with the Archangelsk bonus, smart… :wink:
So, Larry, that old sneaky guy, first said “no convoy zones” making all of us a bit annoyed and then got it back as well as Lend-lease in another way with the Archangelsk bonus, smart… :wink:
Yes, it seems like the bonus conditions achieve several goals more elegantly than before. I really like the incentive to not stack up Allied troops in Russia.
The only thing I worry about is the effective requirement for players to know their opponents’ bonus conditions, in addition to their own. This might steepen the learning curve for new players. But I’m sure after two games, us A&A veterans will have every condition burned indellibly into our memories.
The bonus conditions are just going to railroad the game. Every game will end up being played exactly the same way.
The bonus conditions are just going to railroad the game. Every game will end up being played exactly the same way.
Classic was simply JTDTM.
Revised has more strategies, but alot of people still KGF.
This new edition changes that. Yes, you are now “forced” to attack in the Pacific.
I find that prospect much better than a game that allows USA to completely ignore Japan.
The bonus conditions are just going to railroad the game. Every game will end up being played exactly the same way.
I think it’s too early to tell. Presumably players will have to make decisions between which bonus to secure (e.g. does Italy use his planes to secure the Med, or to support the land war in Africa?). There should also be a conflict between securing your own bonus objectives, and denying your opponent his (e.g. does Germany reinforce Finland to block Russia’s bonus, or focus on capturing the Baltic States for his own bonus?).
I see the potential for lots of variety, in theory.
