Are we sure about the -41 setup?

[Funcioneta]

Krieg said in that reply:

It would certainly benefit Japan to remove the Chinese fighter as quickly as possible. As with any other benefit, it will by nature have a cost associated with it.

Krieg don’t confirm the setup there. He only says that killing the fig would be good. Japan could kill it on J1 “setup” or simply in round 2 or 3 sending all her aircraft against 2-3 inf and the fighter in a non-frontier place, at heavy cost of fighters. That would be costly, sure.

[Bluestroke]

@Lynxes:

The setup is there. They played the game at GENCON, didn’t they? There’s a thread over at BGG where they discuss China and then Krieghund admits that the Chinese fighter is vulnerable and instead says that Japan has a reason not to go all-out vs. China (India, Russia, presumably). This is the thread:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/342710

On the other hand, we might have an explanation for the delay of the game in that they decided to change the set-up a bit, presumably to boost China and maybe India? I realize that I never heard of how sweeping the sub-rule changes were until a few weeks ago, when Krieghund dropped the bomb that subs can now submerge BEFORE combat if no destroyers are present! So it might be WOTC and Larry and his playtesters are actually listening to our talk here and making some changes. So much for the “game is locked and ready, no changes will be made”. Or am I only the victim of delusions of forum-grandeur…  :wink:

item:I am axious as anyone, for the game to come out.  I  like the work we completed here so far, on the Rules, maps.  It will be fun to see how close we come. 
I am 90% sure of information we gathered. 
Indeed by Larry, Krieghund, Yoper and others we have confirmations, Techs and IPC Bonus, dice.  Thru pictures we have a map.  One game play, provided game mechanics.

item:I can not deny someone like Perry or Funcioneta the truth of possible error.
I have challenged them to deduce, as a group, an alternative 1941 setup. 
Somewhere, Perry indicated, he"s somewhat conservative and this speculation, may be distasteful.

item:This game only lives the life we give it.  We are its lifeblood.  A game is merely a stack of plastic and cardboard. If we dont play it, it dies.  Larry designed the stage, wrote the opening lines, we take it from there, delighted or cursed…. 
we do the happy dance or mime the sad face. 
From the maddogs to the pumpkins, we are bringing it.
" Oh game where art Thou "

[Funcioneta]

@Bluestroke:

item:I can not deny someone like Perry or Funcioneta the truth of possible error.
I have challenged them to deduce, as a group, an alternative 1941 setup. 
Somewhere, Perry indicated, he"s somewhat conservative and this speculation, may be distasteful.

Interesting. I’d say a chinese fig not in the frontier and enough chinese inf to launch a slim counterstrike in China 1. Zero bombers for USA (it’s ridiculous having 2 in 1941), less Pacific fleet for USA, and less troops at saf and aus. You would have a decent China but less allied forces to counter it

Anyway, China unable of attack FIC means they cannot suport India as well as in Revised. They should cancel that rule, it’s too buggy anyway. And if they don’t want Kuomingtan at Stalingrad round 2, well, I don’t mind playing as Japan if allies make a such poor move as utterly ignoring Japan.

[Bluestroke]

@Funcioneta:

@Bluestroke:

item:I can not deny someone like Perry or Funcioneta the truth of possible error.
I have challenged them to deduce, as a group, an alternative 1941 setup. 
Somewhere, Perry indicated, he"s somewhat conservative and this speculation, may be distasteful.

Interesting. I’d say a chinese fig not in the frontier and enough chinese inf to launch a slim counterstrike in China 1. Zero bombers for USA (it’s ridiculous having 2 in 1941), less Pacific fleet for USA, and less troops at saf and aus. You would have a decent China but less allied forces to counter it

Anyway, China unable of attack FIC means they cannot suport India as well as in Revised. They should cancel that rule, it’s too buggy anyway. And if they don’t want Kuomingtan at Stalingrad round 2, well, I don’t mind playing as Japan if allies make a such poor move as utterly ignoring Japan.

Ok, I have updated the first map with a partial change.  There are Two maps noted here the base 1941Speculation- setup for reference, then map with your changes 1941SpeculationCHG
It would help, if you gave me specific units numbers and locations,
instead of " less Pacific Fleet "
Item:CHG ADDED qty(5) for total qty(9)Chinese INF and FTR moved off Frontier.
item:CHG Removed qty(2)USA BMB.
was this what you had in mind for china?

[Funcioneta]

Some possible changes:

*** China ***

• Chinese fig to Sikang instead of Yunnan
• 1 more inf to Yunnan
• 2 inf to Sikang
• 1 inf to nim, 1 inf to chi

*** USA ***

• Add 1 AC, 2 fig to z56
• Delete all aircraf in mainland USA
• Delete z44 fleet
• Change art inf EUSA for inf

*** Japan ***

• Move fleet z47 to z62
• Maybe add 1 inf to Manchuria (soviets can stack near, maybe Japan need this)

*** UK ***

• Delete 1 inf in saf
• Delete 1 art, 1 aa gun in aus
• Add 1 inf to nzel

Not sure about Europe, maybe don’t need changes, maybe yes

[Bluestroke]

@Funcioneta:

Some possible changes:

*** China ***

• Chinese fig to Sikang instead of Yunnan
• 1 more inf to Yunnan
• 2 inf to Sikang
• 1 inf to nim, 1 inf to chi

*** USA ***

• Add 1 AC, 2 fig to z56
• Delete all aircraf in mainland USA
• Delete z44 fleet
• Change art inf EUSA for inf

*** Japan ***

• Move fleet z47 to z62
• Maybe add 1 inf to Manchuria (soviets can stack near, maybe Japan need this)

*** UK ***

• Delete 1 inf in saf
• Delete 1 art, 1 aa gun in aus
• Add 1 inf to nzel

Not sure about Europe, maybe don’t need changes, maybe yes

Ok, updated map with your changes you noted, except Japan,
don’t have Fleet unit in Sea Zone 47.  I speculate-LOL, you meant Sea Zone 51?
also, noted updated maps to R12 version as noted at map Link.
the CHG map has your name as editoral Asst. since you are presently driving the thread.

[Funcioneta]

No, I meant z57, my mistake, but number could been wrong. Let’s say Midway sz. That one is for Japan not being able of killing California fleet, that would be very ahistorical

Anyway, thanks for including my name, you got a karma +1  :-)

[Bluestroke]

@Funcioneta:

No, I meant z57, my mistake, but number could been wrong. Let’s say Midway sz. That one is for Japan not being able of killing California fleet, that would be very ahistorical

Anyway, thanks for including my name, you got a karma +1  :-)

Thank you kindly,

Updated 1941CHG Map. 
item:I have moved the Japanese midway Task Force, to Japan’s Sea Zone.
After your review, let me know, if their are additional Changes or are satisfied with your speculation of how the 1941 setup should look.

[Funcioneta]

Yes, you made a good job. Of course, this setup could be not balanced still (would need testing), but seems more logical than BGG setup. China deployed for war and USA undeployed it’s historical, not the opposite.

By the way, I noticed you called Spain “España”. The “ñ” is important. Very good job!  :-)

[Bluestroke]

@Funcioneta:

Yes, you made a good job. Of course, this setup could be not balanced still (would need testing), but seems more logical than BGG setup. China deployed for war and USA undeployed it’s historical, not the opposite.

By the way, I noticed you called Spain “España”. The “ñ” is important. Very good job!  :-)

Thank you kindly,

Item:You are the first one to complete an alternative possible 1941setup, congradulations.
item:I have updated the Map and renamed it, AA50Funcioneta1941CHG.
Now someone has the setup they can test it.
Item:I also added your last comments to the map, as editoral, above its title.
item:the map is now posted at the map Link.
Item:Does anyone else out there, have an Alternative 1941setup?
You either disagree with what has been posted from Gen Con or
Believe it to be unbalanced and have an alternative,
you believe is closer to what Larry has really completed.

[Lucifer]

Whats teh real AA50-41 setup???

I’m thinking I’m thinking… :lol:

If the BGG setup is the correct AA50 setup, I’ll be really suprised  :-o

[Driel310]

Apart from the two bombers in the USA there is not much that is really strange… I know that functioneta disagrees about China, but to be honest a J1 where you attack every territory of China is not the best J1 I think you can play.
In the end (let’s say 5 turns) China is usually buried alive yes, but that’s part of the game, it was the same in the old A&A…

Personally I believe the current setup is a nice one, it seems reasonably good balanced. It’s very normal that the axis win the early games, cuz their strategies are the easiest to discover. Germany/Italy walk to Moscow (I mean Sea Lion is a real dead horse in this game) and Japan tries to expand to as much IPC as she can grab, after which she puts pressure on Moscow as well. Fighting in the Pacific means only 5 IPC for Japan, why put in so much effort since you can’t take Western USA anyway.

The USA can’t take Tokio either, so why bother going there, Berlin is easier.

[Bluestroke]

@Subotai:

Whats teh real AA50-41 setup???

I’m thinking I’m thinking… :lol:

If the BGG setup is the correct AA50 setup, I’ll be really suprised   :-o

Do you care to enlighten us, challenge-point out the incorrect/unlikely 1941 placements, from the BGG setup?  We will build a Subotai 1941speculation map,
others can help or like Funcioneta place your own distinctions. 
We can then compare, when the game arrives of who had the closest 1941 setup.
If your wrong, you will have a record of what you thought the 1941Setup should have been-LOL.

[Bluestroke]

@Driel310:

Apart from the two bombers in the USA there is not much that is really strange… I know that functioneta disagrees about China, but to be honest a J1 where you attack every territory of China is not the best J1 I think you can play.
In the end (let’s say 5 turns) China is usually buried alive yes, but that’s part of the game, it was the same in the old A&A…

Personally I believe the current setup is a nice one, it seems reasonably good balanced. It’s very normal that the axis win the early games, cuz their strategies are the easiest to discover. Germany/Italy walk to Moscow (I mean Sea Lion is a real dead horse in this game) and Japan tries to expand to as much IPC as she can grab, after which she puts pressure on Moscow as well. Fighting in the Pacific means only 5 IPC for Japan, why put in so much effort since you can’t take Western USA anyway.

The USA can’t take Tokio either, so why bother going there, Berlin is easier.

I agree with most of your points.  I like japans odds in the Pacific.
Again, our 3 games, Japan was a Samauri, cut deep into USA strength.
USA has to pay attention w Qty 2 carriers and 4 FTRs spear head in their waters, on J1-ouch. 
You almost feel the anxiety USA must have felt in 1941.   
Italy, makes Germany stronger, at least in our 3 games it has. 
Italy keeps Axis Africa and the Med clear.
better surface Navy then Kriegsmarine, Allowing Germany to focus more on USSR.
We have our 4th 4 player AA50 game today.
I am puzzled though, other players are having Allied sucess, Axis seem strong for our play.
I like the 1941setup, though, thought it was going to be different. 
I will post my own speculation soon.

[Perry]

These are the thing that I find highly irregular, with the current AA50-41 setup:

US

• 2 bmbs for US (a nation has never started with 2 bmbs in the history of AA)
• WUS got 1 inf, 1 ftr, 1 bmb only… Seems strange with so few landtroops in WUS…

UK

• 1 AA in Aus (that would also be a first…)

Japan

• In ECH (East China Sea), Japan starts w/1 inf, 1 rtl on board a trn. That would be a first, also, AFAIK
• 3 starting carriers for Japan, just feels plain wrong…
• Iwo Jima got 0 inf, Caroline Islands 3 inf and Formosa 1 ftr… We’re used to see 1 inf/territory on those Jap Islands… Strange…

China

• China: Well, what can you say  :roll:

The setup of just about everything else, feels rather straightforward. Even Russias lack of offensive pieces are fine, I think.

[Bluestroke]

@Perry:

These are the thing that I find highly irregular, with the current AA50-41 setup:

US

• 2 bmbs for US (a nation has never started with 2 bmbs in the history of AA)
• WUS got 1 inf, 1 ftr, 1 bmb only… Seems strange with so few landtroops in WUS…

UK

• 1 AA in Aus (that would also be a first…)

Japan

• In ECH (East China Sea), Japan starts w/1 inf, 1 rtl on board a trn. That would be a first, also, AFAIK
• 3 starting carriers for Japan, just feels plain wrong…
• Iwo Jima got 0 inf, Caroline Islands 3 inf and Formosa 1 ftr… We’re used to see 1 inf/territory on those Jap Islands… Strange…

China

• China: Well, what can you say  :roll:

The setup of just about everything else, feels rather straightforward. Even Russias lack of offensive pieces are fine, I think.

Ok, started a 1941PerryChg2 map, now online at the above map Link.
item:removed USA WUS 1 bomber.
item:removed Japanese 1 CV and 2 FTRS from Midway SeaZone.
item:removed japanese loaded CT now empty CT, placed INF on Formosa and Iwo Jima.
item:removed UK AA gun Australia.
included addtional info from your post on the other thread;
item:added USSR FTR to Russia territory(per noted missing Chg other thread?)
item:added USA 1 ARM to EUS.
item:added 5 INF to China.
item:added USA 1 CA to US west coast SeaZone.
ok, Perry anything else, map with your editoral above title now running.

[Imperious Leader]

is this the same link as the aa50 fact sheet?

[italiansarecoming]

I think that is strange to bombers cut that down and add a tank to wes usa.

Also (seeing japan  split into 2 spots would look a bit better)

[Bluestroke]

@Imperious:

is this the same link as the aa50 fact sheet?

Yes IL, same Link, but inside the folder labeled Speculation. 
You should be able to open it, I made it public.  Or go to the Link in this thread, which inside that speculation folder.

[italiansarecoming]

Well many things are changing about the 41 setup (the 1st pic’s i saw were the 41 setup)  all that everyone is sure of is that the map is set.  (japan with big navy and 2 bombers for usa) this stuff is questionable and will make it very interesting all we can do is guess work…

I am sad we could have bought a&a 50 wah i  :cry: ok i am srry its so sad