You could be right about the mixing of old and new pieces. I have the original 50th anniversary edition, and have got to say that some of the pieces were miss formed and not of great quality. I have switched those out with other pieces. Since I own every edition except for 1940 Pacific, I can say that the older game pieces were of much better quality…but you need the newer games to get those newer sculpts, so it is a challenge to have it both ways. Anyway good luck, and hope you enjoy “anniversary “. It, and along with the original “Pacific 2000” are my favorite editions
Plastic Playing Pieces
-
i agree with Strabala. the quality of the pieces for this game should be corrected before moving on to the next. this is supposed to be the special version to remember, right?
make some swish new pieces, get everyone to send a copy of their purchase invoice, then send them new pieces. the amount of thankful players would be abundant!
-
I love the game, the pcs are ok with me. My only disappointment was the lack of Italian pcs… re the cruisers etc.
Everyone here will have to admit, despite a few deficiencies… the game is AWESOME.
If you are reading this Larry… Thank you! Keep it up!
-
I agree the game is awsome. My complaint, as well as other’s is just the quality and quantity of some of the components. It’s cool to have nation spacific pieces, but if it means poor quality I think it’s appropriate to complain about it. If all of the parties involved with the production of this game had decided to use even cardboard counters I’d have been happy. At 100.00 on average in retail stores people are going to get a little upset.
I shouldn’t have to canibalize my other A&A editions to make a proper game.
I did have an AC that was curved (AAR esp.) and cast poorly and wouldn’t sit flat on the board until I heated and bent it straight. I also have little white flecks in alot of the other pieces. Some ships have the super-structures half missing. I still am going to enjoy this game alot and am looking forward to playing but for money someone pays for this game I genuinely feel a little jipped.
This has been my experience with both AAR and AA50.
-
Basically we need to send a chain-mail letter to every Wizards employee with what Toblerone just said.
-
I agree the game is awsome. My complaint, as well as other’s is just the quality and quantity of some of the components. It’s cool to have nation spacific pieces, but if it means poor quality I think it’s appropriate to complain about it. If all of the parties involved with the production of this game had decided to use even cardboard counters I’d have been happy. At 100.00 on average in retail stores people are going to get a little upset.
I shouldn’t have to canibalize my other A&A editions to make a proper game.
I did have an AC that was curved (AAR esp.) and cast poorly and wouldn’t sit flat on the board until I heated and bent it straight. I also have little white flecks in alot of the other pieces. Some ships have the super-structures half missing. I still am going to enjoy this game alot and am looking forward to playing but for money someone pays for this game I genuinely feel a little jipped.
This has been my experience with both AAR and AA50.
Well said, +1.
LT
-
Does anyone know if you can order extra playing pieces from Avalon Hill? The supplied number of Italian Navy units is kind of a joke…If they have any success in Africa, they need to be able to send men and materiel over. Using the chips to designate mulitiple transports is very cumbersome. And if you lose 1 cruiser piece, you’ve just lost half of the supplied cruisers.
I am quite interested in ordering extra pieces for all the nations, so does anyone know if this is possible?
-
Nope, tried. Avalon Hill won’t be supplying replacement pieces to the customer. :|
-
@TG:
Nope, tried. Avalon Hill won’t be supplying replacement pieces to the customer. :|
Any idea why? That makes no sense whatsoever. How can they expect that no AA player will lose some pieces and want some extras to replace them??Am I seriously going to have buy a AA Revised just to get some pieces?
-
i’m seriously contemplating just buying another copy of AA50A. for the extra pieces, and as they may stop printing it
-
i’m seriously contemplating just buying another copy of AA50A. for the extra pieces, and as they may stop printing it
LOL….This is pathetic. I was just consider that tonight at work! I’ve also thought of getting a second copy of AAR for the same reason. :evil:
-
i’m seriously contemplating just buying another copy of AA50A. for the extra pieces, and as they may stop printing it
Just get yourself a fabber (aka 3d printer):
-
Hell I won’t live long enough to retire any way I’ll take two. :mrgreen:
-
I personally don’t mind the pieces the way they came in my box. Some of the BBs had a ‘keel’ that I needed to remove in order for them to sit flat, but that is my only real gripe (other than the colors).
You get what you pay for, though. $100 may seem like quite a bit for a board game, but a lot of work went into AA50 to make it what it is. If we had received everything we had asked for, the game would have been much more expensive. I think what we actually received was worth it, especially if you only paid $70 for it.
-
Crazy question, why are the only unique Italian units their tanks & infantry? Why counldn’t Hasbro/Avalon Hill/Wizards Of The Coast come up with at least a few new units instead of recycling German & Japanese units? Second, what is the British tank in this game?
-
it could be a cromwell or churchhill?
VV apparently not haha
-
It’s a Matilda.
-
so it is. poor choice of tank :lol:
-
Really? The Matilda tank was a powerful tank that packed a wallop and was largely immune to the German anti-tank had at the time. If I remember, they had a large impact in the North African war.
-
The Matilda was an infantry tank. While it did have good armor protection, it lacked both speed & firepower. It could only do about 15 mph & was armed with a little 2pdr gun that wouldn’t penetrate German armor.
-
The Matilda was an infantry tank. While it did have good armor protection, it lacked both speed & firepower. It could only do about 15 mph & was armed with a little 2pdr gun that wouldn’t penetrate German armor.
Incorrect.
“Both the Panzer III and IV had difficulty in penetrating the British Matilda II’s thick armor, while the Matilda armed with a 40 mm QF 2 pdr gun could knock out either German tank…”
- Ormeño, Javier (1 January 2007). “Panzerkampfwagen III: El pequeño veterano de la Werhmacht”.
However, like you said, it was a slow vehicle.
Suggested Topics
