@Rakeman:
I do have to say… does anybody ACTUALLY consider heavy bombers a game seller? I can almost guarantee that nobody would buy the game just because you have the opportunity to get heavy bombers and bomb someone to oblivion. When newcomers read the back of the box, it doesn’t say something like:
-Exciting realistic WWII strategy!
-600 plastic miniatures!
-Bomb your opponents into submission using technologies!In order for them to include something broken in order to improve sales, it would have to be something that the public would be excited by. I can’t imagine any potential buyer would even consider looking at the technologies and examining whether or not heavy bombers was powerful enough for them, and letting that influence their decision… unless they were loyal fans of the series, in which case they clearly want the LHTR solution for heavy bombers!
(Sigh) I proposed earlier that the idea of including something in the game to “jazz it up” might conceivably be the thought of someone (most likely in marketing) with the intention of increasing sales. This was my opinion. No one knows what drives the decisions that AH actually makes. I’m sorry I ever brought it up!
As I’ve said before, whether or not Heavy Bombers are “broken” in AA50 isn’t a conclusion that can be made at this point. It depends both on how the game plays and your definition of “broken”, only one of which can be determined right now.
Can we please end this discussion???
@Rakeman:
Also, techs aren’t “optional rules” as some have been saying. Yes, you can agree not to use them, but that’s using house rules. Techs are a standard part of the game, as optional as playing without non-combat movement. :-)
In Anniversary, they are optional.
Ok ok, sorry for beating a dead horse apparently.
Sorry, Rakeman. I didn’t mean to take my frustration out on you. I apologize.
And to everyone else, as well.
Well if technology is optional, then the Heavy Bomber thing has no impact as a ‘game breaker’
but also remember the thread is about technology for AA50 and thats it.
Personally Mechanized infantry technology is a joke. That should have been a new unit included in the game. To motorize your infantry is a matter of economics rather than technology. Trucks and armored cars were invented in WW1. It should be a new unit built at the choice of any player
Also, the artillery technology is like a contrived ‘filler’ technology. Where does the idea that your Artillery got better, so they boost 2 Infantry rather than one? What/Where was this pulled out from?
I have a bad feeling about this Anniversary Edition… in some way AH is managing to ruine what could have been a milestone in A&A series.
This disappoint me. I believe that Craig A Yope and Kreighund are even more disappointed than me.
I am wondering how Larry Harris felt all this, I suppose that also him is disappointed.
This disappoint me. I believe that Craig A Yope and Kreighund are even more disappointed than me.
I am most assuredly not disappointed in this game. What have I said that would give you that idea? There are certain minor aspects that disappoint me, such as the Italian minis, but overall I’m quite pleased.
I am wondering how Larry Harris felt all this, I suppose that also him is disappointed.
From Larry’s site:
I will tell you this … although I did not get everything I wanted in this game (due to the simple realities of cost, etc) I’m one happy camper when it comes to the final results of AA50.
In Anniversary, they are optional.
Just a question on this point.
In classic and the cd, tech was in unless both agreed not to use it. Same in revised. All the clubs/tournaments play this way.
Are you saying for AAAv that tech is out unless both sides agree to use it. Would this be the official club position? tournament position. AAAv LHTR position?
Yea come on Romulus you gotta be kidding? This game is the best game they ever put out. No more micro map and cheap cardboard tokens, and lots of stuff. How can anybody possible complain?
The rules have the most historical feel of any of the other games. Some of the bugs like transports blowing up battleships and taken as combat loses AS IF they are human shields is now over.
The only thing they left out of major importance was defender retreats.
This disappoint me. I believe that Craig A Yope and Kreighund are even more disappointed than me.
I am most assuredly not disappointed in this game. What have I said that would give you that idea? There are certain minor aspects that disappoint me, such as the Italian minis, but overall I’m quite pleased.
I am wondering how Larry Harris felt all this, I suppose that also him is disappointed.
From Larry’s site:
I will tell you this … although I did not get everything I wanted in this game (due to the simple realities of cost, etc) I’m one happy camper when it comes to the final results of AA50.
Count me in as well. :-D
@Imperious:
The only thing they left out of major importance was defender retreats.
That would really change the game play mechanics and involve more changes to A&A then I think they were ready to make.
@Imperious:
Well if technology is optional, then the Heavy Bomber thing has no impact as a ‘game breaker’
but also remember the thread is about technology for AA50 and thats it.
Personally Mechanized infantry technology is a joke. That should have been a new unit included in the game. To motorize your infantry is a matter of economics rather than technology. Trucks and armored cars were invented in WW1. It should be a new unit built at the choice of any player
Also, the artillery technology is like a contrived ‘filler’ technology. Where does the idea that your Artillery got better, so they boost 2 Infantry rather than one? What/Where was this pulled out from?
I like alot of the new techs. Not overpowering, but provides a nice bonus for developing it. The advanced art being a favorite.
This disappoint me. I believe that Craig A Yope and Kreighund are even more disappointed than me.
I am most assuredly not disappointed in this game. What have I said that would give you that idea? There are certain minor aspects that disappoint me, such as the Italian minis, but overall I’m quite pleased.
Same things that also disappoint me but I am not involved in the LHTR process. I supposed that you could have been more disappointed than me. Excuse me, I apologize for the wrong supposition.
I am not only a customer of AH (I own all the A&A Games) I am a supporter of A&A. A fan.
I have pre-ordered the game. I am eagerly awaiting for it. I am greedly reading everywhere trying to collect as more info is possible. A lot of things I have read are interesting and I like. Few things I not like.
@Imperious:
Yea come on Romulus you gotta be kidding? This game is the best game they ever put out. No more micro map and cheap cardboard tokens, and lots of stuff. How can anybody possible complain?
The rules have the most historical feel of any of the other games. Some of the bugs like transports blowing up battleships and taken as combat loses AS IF they are human shields is now over.
The only thing they left out of major importance was defender retreats.
Yes IL, those things are really great! The map I like very much. The addiction of Italy. The bonus objectives. The teo setup. The great number of miniatures.
I am only doubtful on some minor aspects, as I said. Maybe I am too much interested in the details and I am no looking at the big picture. Maybe I have to calm down and wait!
I apologize, I do not want to create problems but I am like a man that is waiting for is wife giving birth to his son!
In Anniversary, they are optional.
Just a question on this point.
In classic and the cd, tech was in unless both agreed not to use it. Same in revised. All the clubs/tournaments play this way.
Are you saying for AAAv that yech is out unless both sides agree to use it. Would this be the official club position? tournament position. AAAv LHTR position?
In the Classic and Revised (including LHTR) rules, tech was not optional. Playing without it would fall into the realm of house rules. This would explain the stance of tournament and clubs.
In Anniversary, the tech rules are stated to be optional. There is no indication of whether the “default” position is to include them or exclude them, only that “players should decide”. This leaves anyone the option of declaring the default to be either way, though I would tend to lean toward exclusion, simply on the meaning of “optional”.
In Anniversary, they are optional.
Just a question on this point.
In classic and the cd, tech was in unless both agreed not to use it. Same in revised. All the clubs/tournaments play this way.
Are you saying for AAAv that yech is out unless both sides agree to use it. Would this be the official club position? tournament position. AAAv LHTR position?
In the Classic and Revised (including LHTR) rules, tech was not optional. Playing without it would fall into the realm of house rules. This would explain the stance of tournament and clubs.
In Anniversary, the tech rules are stated to be optional. There is no indication of whether the “default” position is to include them or exclude them, only that “players should decide”. This leaves anyone the option of declaring the default to be either way, though I would tend to lean toward exclusion, simply on the meaning of “optional”.
This helps. Although I’d hate to lose some of the great new techs just because of one.
As to this “color” thing, the pieces never bothered me, nor the sculpts. For me, how the game playes is the thing. Whether 2 countries share the same plastic tank model… really I could care less.
The discussions about tech amazes me…
In both classic and AAR, tech was always excluded in all Club, PBEM and Tournaments games I’ve played. In AA50 it is stated an optional rule.
Still, the thread concerning this optional rule, sees the most posts of them all :-)
Sorry, Rakeman. I didn’t mean to take my frustration out on you. I apologize.
And to everyone else, as well.
It’s cool man, I wasn’t really involved with the conversation over the last few pages, so I just skimmed through it… actually, I didn’t even know you were the one who first suggested that idea :-D No apologies necessary IMO.
In both classic and AAR, tech was always excluded in all Club, PBEM and Tournaments games I’ve played. In AA50 it is stated an optional rule.
That’s one of the reasons I prefer face to face matchs with my 3 pals. Go instant tech! :-D
Heavy Bombers may have been slightly overpowered and it might still be. But on the other hand, in my games it was only HB and Rockets which seemed worth to buy. Thats 4 out of 6 technologies which never got used. Thats a shame cuz the 4 unused technologies might have been realy fun to play with. Except for Jet fighters which is boooring.
The new system of buying and getting a technology is great. Almost all nations may find in advantius to invest atleast 5pt into a scientist, and all technologies will be used.
The technology ‘mech. inf’ may not be the most powerfull, but worth 5pt, definitivly.
On the other hand, I can understand some of the frustration. Lets take jet-planes technology. Anyone could see its totaly stupid. Take AA naval miniatures: maybe a good game, but it is completly destroyed by the totaly imbalance of the battleships. Lets take AA miniatures: the old SS-PG was completly inbalanced. And what I read, totaly destroied all turnament plays. (normal persons will ofcourse maybe get 1 SS-pg unit cuz they did not buy enough boxes, but turney players had 5 of them) And you could spot the inbalance right away. Lets take Tide of iron: a great game with balanced units, but a lot of the senarios are completly unbalanced. Hopefully tide of iron becomes a great game with better senarioes.
AA has been around for 50years. If they still dont know how to make a balanced game, i will be extremly unsatisfied. However I hope that the bonus IPC would balance the game.
But over to something completly different: I’m very curious to see what technology on the first main list is WRONG. I have no clue. Some hints please?
AA has been around for 50years.
what? its been around since like 1981. I wish it was around for 50. Id like to see the 1950’s version of the game. It probably had the A-bomb for sure.
@Imperious:
AA has been around for 50years.
what? its been around since like 1981. I wish it was around for 50. Id like to see the 1950’s version of the game. It probably had the A-bomb for sure.
I wonder why the A-bomb isn’t a technological development. It would be so effective as a defense (Russia could turn the game in one turn if they used it against Germany.). Have any idea why, IL?
Politically incorrect weapon. How would it sell in Japan if Japan could be bombed into oblivion yet again in a family game?
I have a thread on revised techs. Its in them. more to follow.
The war was the war. you cant sugarcoat the thing and make it into digestible popcorn, or you make a mockery of the people who struggled and died.
