@taamvan said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
@axis_roll Russia never falls. It has way too many infantry, cheap tanks are its pat buy, and the pile of UK fighters sitting on its army means the Germans are on the defensive.
The 42 scenario is more balanced because some of that income is already allocated to the Axis
Then that is poor axis play. Germany can cover Japanese advances, Russian income gets too low, and caucasus will eventually fall to combined axis pressure.
This is from our game play experience
@squirecam said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
Give each country $50 extra a turn. There will certainly be more units all over the board. But it doesn’t make the game itself better. Just longer.
More money = more choices for units that a country would not normally buy. Sure, you can be a dork and buy more infantry or experiment with a Naval strategy for Germany, or Japanese thrust on USA…
The lack of income forces choices among the players. Japan must choose navy vs infantry. These strategic choices make the game better. JMHO.
So you probably buy into the marketing theory that:
“LESS is MORE”
Generally, my experience has proven that equation does not add up
@axis_roll
You are being too simplistic.
I am fine with Global NO’s because they add choices and complexity. Does Japan take +10 every turn, or go for attacks right away, but bring in the USA also. AA50 NO’s dont work that way. They simply give the axis alot more money to start with, unbalancing the game.
If there were a purpose to it besides just more income, then it could be fine. But it doesn’t add anything of value.
@squirecam said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
…They simply give the axis alot more money to start with, unbalancing the game.
If there were a purpose to it besides just more income, then it could be fine. But it doesn’t add anything of value.
Your point was MY original point:
“I think the issue with NO’s is that the extra money may benefit one side (axis) more than the other.”
@axis_roll
That’s only part of it. Giving USA +10 for holding Washington isn’t a choice. Even if the NO’s were equal in amount, I would still not like them.
The NO’s should be more like Global, where they offer choices as opposed to just more $. The unequal balance just makes it worse.
NOs slant the game heavily in the Axis’s favor in AA50, I thought this was common knowledge. Removing them makes both scenarios better, as Axis can’t reach economic parity with the Allies on like turn 2.
Personally, I fall more in the camp of favoring lower incomes for all the countries, as it better reflects the reality of war. Typically, countries can’t replace their forces at the same rate they lose them. You shouldn’t be able to wipe out Germany’s deathstack in Ukraine on Russia’s turn only for them to be able to vomit out 14 more INF immediately.
@DoManMacgee Because tanks are so cheap, they’re a yes–even for loading on transports. I see few reasons for Russia to buy anything else because they add punch and threat AND are great defenders (for 5). At 6 then they’re correctly costed for the larger boards and to keep 42.2 competitive.
The Masters Invitational is on the AA50/42 board, which is why im so interested. Unf I was too preoccupied with the other tourney to see how the games actually play out.
@taamvan said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
@DoManMacgee Because tanks are so cheap, they’re a yes–even for loading on transports. I see few reasons for Russia to buy anything else because they add punch and threat AND are great defenders (for 5). At 6 then they’re correctly costed for the larger boards and to keep 42.2 competitive.
The Masters Invitational is on the AA50/42 board, which is why im so interested. Unf I was too preoccupied with the other tourney to see how the games actually play out.
You generally get anywhere from 6-8 rounds in.
Was gonna just say ask squire
@taamvan said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
@DoManMacgee Because tanks are so cheap, they’re a yes–even for loading on transports. I see few reasons for Russia to buy anything else because they add punch and threat AND are great defenders (for 5). At 6 then they’re correctly costed for the larger boards and to keep 42.2 competitive.
The Masters Invitational is on the AA50/42 board, which is why im so interested. Unf I was too preoccupied with the other tourney to see how the games actually play out.
What’s the Master’s Invitational? A TripleA thing?
@DoManMacgee No, its a live tournament Saturday at Gencon. Greg felt like the same old guys were winning the lower brackets over and over so he broke off the best players into a separate AA50/42 tourney. It had 5 boards 10 teams I think, Dave Jensen played in it.
To qualify, you have to earn an invite by winning the lower bracket tournaments of 42.2, AA50 and G42 at one of Greg’s 3 main events, Gencon, Origins or Spring Gathering. At least that was the rules as he was developing them–however it works, Greg invites you, you can go.
I hope that winning the 42.2 2019 trophy also gets me an invite but I’m still waiting to hear.
@DoManMacgee said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
@taamvan said in 1940 vs anniversary balance:
@DoManMacgee Because tanks are so cheap, they’re a yes–even for loading on transports. I see few reasons for Russia to buy anything else because they add punch and threat AND are great defenders (for 5). At 6 then they’re correctly costed for the larger boards and to keep 42.2 competitive.
The Masters Invitational is on the AA50/42 board, which is why im so interested. Unf I was too preoccupied with the other tourney to see how the games actually play out.
What’s the Master’s Invitational? A TripleA thing?
The masters is an 8 team two bracket event made up of the top teams/players. You play every team in your bracket, so you are guaranteed 3 games. The top 2 teams of each bracket advance to single elimination. The top 3 finishers return to the masters, along with the top 3 teams from the AA50 event. Other teams get invited based on strength of play/history/etc.
Yes, it was done both to recognize the top teams, and to give other players a better chance of winning the “mega” tournament which was purely single elimination. This event started in the classic era, and changed to revised in 2005. It now uses AA50, as it should.
That’s a neat target to shoot for, actually. Promotes players who can win consistently at a high level by giving them an opportunity to play at an even higher level that cuts out the more casual/less-skilled players.
Hopefully I can get out to tournaments at some point and try to make it. Doubt I’ll stack up to the rest of you guys, though.
There are several FTF tournaments during the year. Origins in Columbus, Gencon in Indianapolis, three CA tournaments, and many others. You should find good competition at many conventions, though I think the cream of the crop attend Gencon.
@DoManMacgee I don’t know bro, I’ve won twice (2016, 2019)…you can’t win if you dont play! (and bring a team or join one or you risk being assigned an opponent if there are an odd number)
I had planned on making it to Gen Con this year but I wasn’t able to get the time off work on the relatively short notice. Definitely going to try making it to Origins/Gencon next year though. I live on the US East Coast so the CA Tournaments, Young Grasshopper’s Tournaments, etc. are probably out of the question though, just as a logistics thing.
