Thanks for your reply. Makes perfect sense.
Please throw us a bone!!!
-
I suspect that bonuses are necessary for the economy of all the Axis nations and maybe they are strictly connected with the balancing of the game as a sort of bid that you have to gain.
So I think that it could be not possible to avoid their use.
My thought exactly.
Many have already drawn the conclusion that many changes from between Revised -> AA50 , does benefit the Allies. And Revised already had an in-built Allied Advantage.
AA50 seems to handle that via the bonus system.
Fair enough for me. It will be exciting to explore that system!
My concern, though, was that a bonus system , which the Axis NEED to follow, in order to win, MIGHT lead to scripted games.Wheter or not that will be the case, is obviously up for discussion…
I think your points are valid. There are so many buffs to the Allies and nerfs to the Axis that without bonuses, it might be game over very early… I am pretty sure a country HAS to go for its bonuses if it plans on winning, from the sound of it. If claiming its bonuses takes up most of a country’s resources, the game will definitely be scripted.
I do agree that something I liked about revised is that really, all that mattered was taking a capital. VCs were there but more of a measure of victory, not something that especially mattered, especially for the Axis who couldn’t win a 9 VC game without capping a capital. Hence, many possible strategies. However, I think the main reason Japan Tank Rush to Moscow happened was because the US could completely ignore Japan. Japan’s focus in revised should have been beating down US forces in the Pacific, so that US was drained from fighting the war in Europe. The problem is, USA could ignore Japan completely, giving Japan nothing better to do than go after Russia (Japan going after Russia is, I believe, the direct effect of a US player not spending effort on Japan, giving them nothing better to do obviously). In AA50, thanks to objectives and new VC, it seems that America will have to devote some effort to Japan.
(Personally, as the US, I prefer to do some minor island hopping to keep Japan out of Russia… giving Russia some freedom is very useful)
-
My big beef with the new VC’s is Ottawa is one of them.
How many N. American VC’s do we need? I think S Africa should have been considered. Historically it may not even of had a role but it would have made Africa an even more sought after place.
LT
-
@LT04:
My big beef with the new VC’s is Ottawa is one of them.
How many N. American VC’s do we need? I think S Africa should have been considered. Historically it may not even of had a role but it would have made Africa an even more sought after place.
LT
True, but remember this…
If Japan cannot really drive on USSR, it has nothing better to do then take allied VC. These include the north american ones.
The “forced” pacific war will prevent the KGF people usually do.
-
With the “bonus” concept, isn’t there a risk that the AA50 will be very Scripted?
Yes but this is a good thing really, because now the team concept in gameplay is less important and gets this tug from national aspirations for taking only the territories they historically were interested in and rewarding them for it.
The Soviets wont always do what the US/UK player tells them, because it sees its own independent goals running and not always flowing the same way as what the allies do. The Russians most likely will leave Japan alone much to the chagrin of the American player, because her goals are in eastern Europe, While Germany is focused in Russia, Italy in Africa, UK probably will be hard to play because her goals would be located far from her ability to control. America must commit to a realistic 2 front war. All this introduces totally new strategies and revitalizes the game for a totally new experience.
Scripted is what the game calls for. All historical games basically follow what was possible given the capabilities of the period. Revised was scripted too in a way, but scripted in a way that was sometimes ridiculously impossible to occur, and this game ropes in a bit of that behavior it seems.
-
I am not, but if a nation has kept its bonus for a number of turns… then the game can be won by the economic weight.
Its a mechanism in the game thats most vital to help it promote battles and secondly to promote a rapid conclusion in the event one side has held its bonus for a period of time.
-
@Craig:
No one is forced to go after their bonuses, but I understand your concern about being channeled into playing the game along certain lines.
I would think that changes to the map, especially in Asia, will automatically make it much more difficult for Japan to go inland. As such, they will naturally want to work in the Pacific.
Whether that is go or bad is up to the individual tastes of the gamer.
Craig
Right, but where in Revised there are no Allied VC besides India, there are several now in the Pacific. The allies (i.e. the US) cannot afford to just let Japan be. Making it harder for Japan on the mainland is balanced by making the USA work in the pacific.
-
So a Pacific war will divert American money towards Japan every game. This will lead to less pressure on Germany and this is what leads to Germany having a “weak” economy(30 IPCs). This will lead to more balanced game than if you were given 40 IPCs as Germany.
Looks as if they have gone more historical. Except for the bonus stuff.
Is there a list of the bonus objectives? What do people know from memory.
-
Is there a list of the bonus objectives? What do people know from memory.
It was posted that Germany receives a bonus for two different groups of territories.
one group is core territories in central Europe
The other represents spaces in Russia west of Moscow ( say summer of 1942 historical start line)
Yes the bonus is making the direction of conquest and liberation follow a historical footpath.
-
Re: Play balance in AA50 / Bids
« Reply #16 on: Today at 06:03:05 pm »
Quote
From the GEN CON Anniversary Game thread at the swamp:
Quote
Also, there are bonuses that are for optional play. These will need to be tested as well. Bonuses such as if Germany holds X amount of territories, they get a bonus of 5 IPC at the end of the turn. All countries have these bonuses but we did not play with them at GEN CON…
http://aaswampform.forumandco.com/gen-con-anniversary-game-f23/gen-con-anniversary-game-t15.htmThat sounds kinda like the same bonuses everyone’s been talking about. So, if they’re optional Italy’s back down to 10 production w/o optional rules, lol? end Quote.
This kinda sounds like the bonus’s ARE optional…
-
So, let’s list the bonuses, and please feel free to edit as I’m only quoting and adding up:
Germany
Poland+Czech-Hungary+Bulgaria-Roumania= 5 IPCs
Baltic States+Belorussia+East Ukraine+Ukraine= 5 IPCsSoviet Union
Archangelsk + no Allied units on red areas= 5 IPCs
Japan
Netherlands East Indies+Borneo+Phillipines+no start area lost= 5 IPCs
UK
?
Italy
No enemy ships in Med sea zones= 5 IPCs
Libya+Egypt+Italian Africa=10 IPCsUS/China
?
-
I think it is interesting they added this concept from Risk. Granted its not the entire continent but that wouldn’t work in this game.
LT
-
So, let’s list the bonuses, and please feel free to edit as I’m only quoting and adding up:
I wish I’d spent more time memorizing these, but I’m pretty sure Russia also receives bonuses similar to Germany’s in Eastern Europe (possibly Finland, Baltic States, Ukraine).
The US has 4 (maybe even 5) small bonus conditions, one of which involves controlling France. I forget the others.
The UK receives at least one bonus for controlling key sea zones, but I forget which ones.
Sorry I can’t be of more help.
-
Ok, Herr Arnulfe, perfect! It doesn’t matter if we get everything right, at this point we just need something approximate to discuss preliminary strategies before we get the game. So:
Germany
Poland+Czech-Hungary+Bulgaria-Roumania= 5 IPCs
Baltic States+Belorussia+East Ukraine+Ukraine= 5 IPCsSoviet Union
Archangelsk + no Allied units on red areas= 5 IPCs
Finland+Baltic States+East Poland+Ukraine = 5 IPCsJapan
Netherlands East Indies+Borneo+Phillipines+no start area lost= 5 IPCs
UK
?
Italy
No enemy ships in Med sea zones= 5 IPCs
Libya+Egypt+Italian Africa=10 IPCsUS/China
France = 5 IPCs
XX
XX
XX -
Germany
Poland+Czech-Hungary+Bulgaria-Roumania= 5 IPCs
Baltic States+Belorussia+East Ukraine+Ukraine= 5 IPCsI believe at least one of these is worth 10 bonus IPC (possibly both).
-
I see some pattern. I think each nation has only 2 bonus options: a 5 and 10 IPC bonus for each nation.
-
@Imperious:
I see some pattern. I think each nation has only 2 bonus options: a 5 and 10 IPC bonus for each nation.
That would be cool… :-)
-
@Imperious:
I see some pattern. I think each nation has only 2 bonus options: a 5 and 10 IPC bonus for each nation.
I can say with confidence that the average number of conditions per country is around 3, with the US having 5 smaller ones.
-
Poland+Czech-Hungary+Bulgaria-Roumania= 5 IPCs
No enemy ships in Med sea zones= 5 IPCs
I think it would be cool, if the bonus territories was connectet by a railroad printet on the map, and the bonus sea-zones was connectet by a ship-lane printet on the map. Then the enemy could denie you the bonus if he placed a plane on the railroad or the shipping lane.
-
Do you get these bonuses if you control the territories at the beginning of your turn or at the end?
-
What you occupy is collected for at the end of your turn, so it does not need to be held…which presents double collection problem. Should have used AARHE rules: collection of IPC done near start of turn, so your only collecting what you hold on too.
Suggested Topics
