@Panther
Thank you very much !
North-West Europe
-
Right Hawaii was our main focal point for our Pacific War. Losing it should be reflected in something more than 1 IPC.
They did get Borneo and Dutch indies correct however.
France should be at a lower IPC value, perhaps two territories with 5 total ( 3 and 2)
-
actually thats how i play collect at the start of a turn so that way you are fightings ina battle field and it keepsswitching sides until somone holds it for your next turn then noone will ever get the income i love those wars!
-
I still don’t see how this could be playable with Germany swapping territories constantly and USA not. Germany would be too weak to defend itself by round 3-4.
-
As far as the Northwest Europe question…. This is bad news for Germany. Two territories to defend against D-Day with constant Russian pressure could be devestating. We will not know until a few games are played but maybe it was setup that way because 1 landing zone gave the Germans an advantage. When you factor in Italy(Germany can forget about africa and let Italy worry about it freeing up a full Russian assault)
and factoring in National objectives (may give a unfair income advantage to Germany early in the game, this extra income almost a requirement to shore up NWE and France?)
and factoring in that the Allies will surely focus on 1 territory only and that Germany will PROBABLY have a counter attack force in place in the other territory may not make it a Huge deal.All I know is that it will be interesting.
Anyone know what the playtesters thought?
-
Anyone know what the playtesters thought?
What did they think when they played Axis and Allies Europe? Thye must have liked the idea of Germany buying all tanks and overrunning Moscow and the poor Soviets had not way to counter it.
The playtesters didnt say anything about the really thin national tokens from Revised
They didn’t say anything about miscolored cruisers from Guadalcanal or being short two infantry from Axis and Allies Bulge.
i just figure the allies are gonna land every turn and waste time rolling out pathetic battles that are nagging foot blisters every turn with back and forth trading and using shore shots to kill the defending infantry. Cheap naval units will make it possible for this type of thing.
-
@Imperious:
Anyone know what the playtesters thought?
What did they think when they played Axis and Allies Europe? Thye must have liked the idea of Germany buying all tanks and overrunning Moscow and the poor Soviets had not way to counter it.
The playtesters didnt say anything about the really thin national tokens from Revised
They didn’t say anything about miscolored cruisers from Guadalcanal or being short two infantry from Axis and Allies Bulge.
i just figure the allies are gonna land every turn and waste time rolling out pathetic battles that are nagging foot blisters every turn with back and forth trading and using shore shots to kill the defending infantry. Cheap naval units will make it possible for this type of thing.
Agreed, but about Europe, is there really absolutely no counter for the German tank stacks? No way to exploit the fact that tanks defend on 2? Because theoretically, the infantry push mechanic should be present in this game.
-
Yea the 3-2 tanks still mess up this game. If AAE had 3-3 tanks it would be worse because the Soviets cant really buy them. Germany invades Leningrad plus normal attacks, builds all infantry, then G2-G4 its a bunch of tanks and shuck to Moscow. Try it and see.
The playtesters are never Hardcore AA fans. just goobers from AH fantasy game department.
sad/.
-
@Imperious:
Yea the 3-2 tanks still mess up this game. If AAE had 3-3 tanks it would be worse because the Soviets cant really buy them. Germany invades Leningrad plus normal attacks, builds all infantry, then G2-G4 its a bunch of tanks and shuck to Moscow. Try it and see.
The playtesters are never Hardcore AA fans. just goobers from AH fantasy game department.
sad/.
They need hardcore A&A fans. They would play the new game at a higher level than the goobers could
-
Well, the playtesters from AAE were Don Rae and his playgroup. I can hardly call that goobers.
Apart from who is testing, I think it is difficult to spot things like that. Playtesters get a limited amount of time, and most of the time the rules get changed after that and the game is published without extensive testing of those new rules.
Especially when AAE came out there was only one game to referer to. People were so used to defend two fronts, that noone came up with the idea of throwing everything at the Russians. At least not at playtest time.
-
Well, the playtesters from AAE were Don Rae and his playgroup. I can hardly call that goobers.
I dont know about his playgroup, but Don himself really was a funny guy that easily would exceed your imagination. Now after finished playtesting A&AE, Don closed down his own A&A Message Board and deleted everything, because he belived that the US Government had set-up 9/11, and let CIA blow up the Twin Towers, so they got an excuse to start war against the muslim world of terrorists. Yes, Don wrote all this on Larry’s message board, but Larry deleted that thread very soon, because folks startet bashing each others. I was there man, I know.
-
Well, the playtesters from AAE were Don Rae and his playgroup. I can hardly call that goobers.
I dont know about his playgroup, but Don himself really was a funny guy that easily would exceed your imagination. Now after finished playtesting A&AE, Don closed down his own A&A Message Board and deleted everything, because he belived that the US Government had set-up 9/11, and let CIA blow up the Twin Towers, so they got an excuse to start war against the muslim world of terrorists. Yes, Don wrote all this on Larry’s message board, but Larry deleted that thread very soon, because folks startet bashing each others. I was there man, I know.
Sorry for staying off topic.
I agree with you Adler. Don simply went nuts. I was there too.But a madman can be a good tactician. Just take a look at the German Leaders in WWII and you know the answer to that.
Don’s contribution was the way he approached the game, in a very scientific orderly way. His essays were very well written. And therefore he is a potential good playtester.
As a player he is average I think. I played him once online and beat him (before that I thought very highly of him). But also don’t forget the other playtesters. Kevin Shaw was a very decent player. I played with and against him a couple of times online. -
@Craig:
Other game companies are better at having ‘living rules’ for their games that are amended along the way because of player feedback.
Ugh … I suppose you are not suggesting ‘living rules’ as Warhammer or Magic the Gathering. We don’t need a new confusing faq or game expansion each 2-3 months, that is a world of pain :|
-
I would rather have updates/upgrades maybe once each year, and patches for rules like LHTR, 2, 3, 4th ed. but not too often.
And the 9/11 attacks, I guess that was kamikaze attacks not intended by “game designers”… :|
-
Back on topic ilike the idea of 2 spots in eastern europe looks a lot nicer and shows how much fights are in that small patch p.s. make canada a small player giggles… we helped
-
@Craig:
No. I am talking about companies like GMT, MMP, etc., which have the game designer taking input/feedback from the hardcore gamers online and at the game conventions that they frequent. This way the errata that is gathered over time is put into the rules and is easily accessible to all.
Craig
So, they correct the rules in another prints, true? If so, and the rules only change as much one time a year, it’s OK :-)
-
@Imperious:
Anyone know what the playtesters thought?
The playtesters didnt say anything about the really thin national tokens from Revised
They didn’t say anything about miscolored cruisers from Guadalcanal or being short two infantry from Axis and Allies Bulge.
Playtesters have no say in what the final physical components of the game will look like. They never even see them before the game comes out.
-
playtesters if they asked us to do the playing we wouldnt be talking"
-
Playtesters have no say in what the final physical components of the game will look like. They never even see them before the game comes out.
Thats not the case for all playtesters. They comment on the map artwork and components along the way, but during playtesting a final version of the game may not be available. WOTC does everything ass backwards so its entirely believable to assume the opposite of what should be done in all aspects of production.
WOTC track record for proofing things is horrible.
-
@Imperious:
Anyone know what the playtesters thought?
The playtesters didnt say anything about the really thin national tokens from Revised
They didn’t say anything about miscolored cruisers from Guadalcanal or being short two infantry from Axis and Allies Bulge.
Playtesters have no say in what the final physical components of the game will look like. They never even see them before the game comes out.
Totally these play testers maybe could get to play a few more times this would make the game even better!
-
We need to make the computer game first, then playtest the rules under the new format, before committing them to the physical gameboard.
It will save time and money in the long run, and the games will be much easier to playtest. Doing it the other way around makes no sense to me. You’ll always get in way more games playing on the computer than you ever could face to face. Most of the people using tripleA and abattlemap were able to break the Revised game within just a few months of its release. People on these boards and others (Joe et al) were able to spot problems with the set up almost immediately.
The best way to improve the design and create the strongest game possible, is to have open Beta Tests. And the only way you can do that is with an online game. I think this is the most important step for the A&A community to make. We need a PC or Console game to organize around, and then playtesting would be a breeze. Larry could set up the conditions, run it through a test, and then consider the feedback all before a single mold has to be cast. You could take pre-orders through the site, much like we have set up here. I think it would be the best thing for the franchise, but you have to open it up a little. Give players more control, set things up like they do over at the Vault http://nwvault.ign.com/ or similar sites for games like Total War, or AoE. No reason why we shouldn’t be able to set up something similar for Axis and Allies.
Suggested Topics
