Hi @cloud7707 you could try adding an AA Gun to china instead. I know Oztea did it for his Global mods and i thought it worked well fwiw :)
Cmdr Jennifer Hijacks “Enhanced” – How do you really feel about it.
-
Imperious Leader, read the thread again if you think it’s just whining going on here, because you missed the point as much as Cmdr Jennifer.
How can you see this as a joke thread, when myself and others have continuously requested information that would validate Cmdr Jennifer’s claim that she has fully tested her rule-set? I, for one, don’t have as much time as some of the rest of you. When I get a chance to play it’s a treat. I can’t spend half my time arguing with my opponent(s) about what a rule was “suppose” to mean (that should be found out in the testing). Or for that matter, what version of the rule-set we’re using. What I’m looking for is confirmation that the rule-set will not be constantly changing. You can call that a joke if you want to, but I call it due diligence.
Look at if from a business point of view. Cmdr Jennifer is a manufacturer selling her version of the rule-set. She wants us to use them, enjoy them, and assist with minor improvements. That would make us her customers. Right now her customers have no confidence in her product, yet she refuses to give us the information we request that would help re-instill it. Instead she attacks everyone that questions her rule-making process, causing confidence to drop even lower. (The first post I read that got flamed by her for asking for the details made me think. “Why won’t she answer it? What is she trying to hide?”)
I’m not “buying” something that is potentially full of bugs and will require constant patches, updates, or service bulletins. I don’t have the time or energy to deal with it. Again, that’s why there’s testing.
How about a real world example: Microsoft Vista. Microsoft has launched a huge campaign to trick people into thinking that it’s another OS, so they’ll try it. That’s how little confidence people have in it. And when people don’t have confidence in a product, they don’t even want to try it.
AARe has set a standard for expectations when it comes to released versions of Enhanced rule-sets. I expect nothing less from a version for AA50. If Cmdr Jennifer is up to the challenge, then let her prove it with documentation. I’m a big enough person to congratulate her on a job well done…if indeed she has accomplished what she says. But I won’t take just her word on it, and apparently I’m not alone. You can call me stubborn, pig-headed or whatever you want. However, when I get an afternoon off to play, that’s all the time I have; win, lose, or not finished.
-
@Cmdr:
Every idea, every concept, every pre-conceived notion in the AA50e official rules comes from the AARe official rules. Virtually nothing was changed except as a way to adapt to the new pieces and territories in Anniversary that did not exist in Revised. The goal of creating AA50e was to make the absolute minimum amount of changes from AARe so as to play the AARe rules in Anniversary without violating the rules of Anniversary. Considering there are only 10, very minor, changes, I think this was accomplished splendidly by the community of gamers who collaborated on this effort.
The model for creating AARe was this; start with LHTR and modify from there.
Notice this small sample of AARe from the early stages.
–-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL ADVANTAGES:1. Method of Deployment
-At the start of each country’s first turn, they will select 1 NA to be used for the game
-The NA does not come into effect until it is declared at the start of that country’s first turn
-Once declared, the NA comes into effect immediately.
-The Axis also get one additional NA, for either Germany or Japan (Giving Axis and Allies 3 each in total), which they do not declare until the start of their second turn.RUSSIA
1. Nonagression Treaty - as in LHTR
2. Lend-Lease - as in LHTR
3. Russian Winter - as in LHTR
4. Mobile Industry - as in LHTRGERMANY
1. Panzerblitz - as in LHTR
2. Atlantic Wall - as in LHTR
3. Wolf Packs - as in LHTR
4. Luftwaffe Dive-Bombers - as in LHTR but modified to include Land Combat only. FTRs attack normally in Sea Combat.
5. Afrika Corps - Place 1 free INF in SEur, and 1 free TRN in SZ 14 during the Mobilize Units phase of this turn. This can only be used once per game. Note: you’ll likely need a capital ship to protect the TRN.
6. Convoy Raids - On the Russia, UK, and US Collect Income Phases, for every German SUB within 1 SZ of (ie. directly adjacent to) an IC owned by that respective country (eg. Cau,UK,EUS), subtract 2IPC from their collected income. For every German SUB within 2 SZ of an IC, subtract 1IPC. One SUB may affect multiple IC’s in a ROUND, but only a single IC in a TURN (SUB owner chooses)See how the method to create AARe is referring back to Larry Harris Tournament rules as much as possible, and not to some other game.
Notice the basic start and workings to what it is today.
Cmdr Jennifer, your rule-set does not follow this model.
The goal of AA50e is to follow this model, not to copy and paste.
AA50 is different. Different map, prices, rules, naval interaction = a different puzzle.
BadSpeller
-
The ‘council’ of players would discuss and make suggestions, do the game play testing with a final recommendation for a rule. Cousin_Joe did have final say, basically to avoid a ‘mutiny’ type of situation from ever happening.
yeah I know what you mean
though I would use the word ‘mutiny’ to refer to the main testers/supporters not happy with cousin_joe’s decision and thus withdraw their support/endorsement for the rules
under a council there is no such thing as a mutiny, but simply a proposed change that did not pass
to keep the set of house rules clean, its better controverisal changes don’t go through rather than letting them creep in and see what happens
so the naming issue aside, I would hope Jennifer go forward rather than backward in the formation of the rules
-
Actually, Bad Speller, it does follow that model.
It starts with AARe and makes 10, very small, very minor, changes to account for changes in the board, changes in the pieces and the addition of two new nations as released by WOTC.
Everything starts from AARe, though. Every concept, every idea. It’s all just adapted to fit into Anniversary Edition.
Also, it is the “final version” but it might have Errata just like Anniversary, AARe, LHTR, AAR all had.
-
I’m new to this conversation but if I were asked, I would say that unless it came from Larry Harris himself, they are all unofficial house rules. Almost every enthusiastic A&A player at one time or anouther changed the rules because they believed that they could make the game better…… its only natural. That being said, anything can get published but was it under the game labels that have owned the rights to Larry Harris’s design in the past? Thats the question… so whats the answer?
-
@Cmdr:
Actually, Bad Speller, it does follow that model.
NO, your rule-set does not follow that model.
To follow that model, one MUST start with the AA50 rules.For example; in the AA50 rulebook, on page 2, Larry Harris writes;
“One important aspect of the game that I wanted to address was the ahistorical tendency for the Japanese to attack Russia. I did not mind if this attack occurred late in the game–-who knows, if things had gone differently during the actual war, perhaps the Japanese would have attacked Russia. The solution I settled on was to add additional territories and units between the Japanese forces and Moscow. The real-world translation or these additional territories is the seemingly endless miles that exist between Asia and Moscow.”By Larry adding territories and changing the map (in AA50) the Bilateral Non-Aggression Treaty (that Cmdr Jennifer has copy-pasted to her rules) is not there and not needed.
This is just one example.
The true developers of AARe would start with AA50 and work form there.
-
Everything starts from AARe, though.
But this is exactly the wrong way to approach things. AARe =/= AA50.
-
I know it doesn’t equal AA50. AARe does not equal AAR either, nor does it equal LHTR.
What AA50:Enhanced does do is build off of AARe in a way to apply the rules of AARe to AA50 without ruining the balance and without making huge and drastic changes to AA50 or AARe.
-
Now would you please answer some of the issues from the first post? :-)
-
Thought I did already, in my first response.
-
@Cmdr:
1) They felt left out. Even though everyone was invited, the invitation was only on this game forum or by direct invite.
I never was invited or asked. I guess the player who has held the A&ARe title the longest doesn’t warrant a personal invite. Shame on me for not responding to 1 of 30,000 posts Jenn has made.
@Cmdr:
People like axis_roll determinedly and, in my opinion, pig-headedly refused to participate in the adaption of the rules to Anniversary.
@Cmdr:
Hello Pot. it’s the kettle over here…
Yes, axis_roll is the pig-headed one in these discussions…… :roll:
@Cmdr:
They felt that if they did not participate, that the entire world would come to a screeching halt and they could exist with their heads firmly implanted in the sand. They were wrong.
Where do you get this stuff? You are so deluded… what reality are you living in?
All I asked was to call your rules set something different. A brand name comes with certain expectations, good or bad. A name has a reputation. This version of Enhanced was not made in the same fashion, does not have the same goals, and does not have the quality of game playout as the original AARe.
@Cmdr:
2) Some think there were too many changes. Well, sorry, but it is impossible to adapt Enhanced rules from Revised to function at all in Anniversary without at least some changes. They were asked for their input no less than three times before the official final version was released. No specific rules were challenged at those times.
Ah yes, your post 25,278. sure I recall that one.
@Cmdr:
3) Even though Cousin_Joe and other creators of Revised Enhanced never questioned the creation of Anniversary Enhanced and were appraised at each and every step along the procedure (their non-challenging of the creation could be taken as tacit approval of the new version)
We’ve gone from “I have only gotten praise from C_J”:
@Cmdr:
I do have responses from him and NONE OF THE RESPONSES say not to use the “enhanced” tag. They are all congratulatory and thankful for the hard work put in. Not a single response contains a critique.
To “They never responded, so I take that as their approval”
BTW, even though I asked for proof of these alleged email interchanges with Cousin_Joe, I never saw one email from you that came from Cousin_Joe, not one.
@Cmdr:
some people have taken it upon themselves to complain about the name being used. It’s akin to someone complaining that you named your dog “Buddy” because someone else named their dog “Buddy” one time and you “stole” the name. It’s silly. It would have more merit if they had named their dog “Buddy” but it wouldn’t be much more merit.
Your analogy is so lame. “BUDDY” is not something I can use, you do not share “BUDDY”
Keeping with your dog analogy, however I will prove the point of what is implied in a ‘name’. A Labrador is a kind of dog, similiar to how AARe is a kind of rule set. Now a Labrador is different from other dogs. No one expects a Shitzu to be an outdoor hunting dog. A Labrador is a hunting dog. Most people who know about dogs, know this. A&A players in the know (read: have played AAR and then played AARe) have a certain level of expectation from the ‘labrador’ of house rules: Enhanced.
It is this mislabelling of the Shitzu you are pushing as a Labrador that people are finding they have a problem with.
@Cmdr:
So, instead of saying “Hey thanks. Cousin_Joe and company did not want to make an enhanced version of Anniversary and we missed a lot of the enhanced rules from Revised when we converted to Anniversary. So it’s great that you and a team of players adapted the enhanced rules from Revised so that they would work in Anniversary and saving us the trouble of having to do it ourselves.”
Lastly, and this one is my personal opinion: It is too early for rules sets that ‘fix’ the problems in AA50. The game has not even been out 6 months yet!
I did have some time to read through the rules, I posted what I would consider to be major flaws (omissions, etc) that I found not only in the ‘official’ rules, but in my observations of what the game playout might be.
The “Shitzu” is not even a quality dog!
Your response was to dismiss out of hand my comments. Not even a ‘hmm, perhaps someone should game play test the flaw axis_roll pointed out’
I asked for a listing of the team of players who helped develop and play test your Shitzu of rules…. no response.
have you ever heard of the expression:
“You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar”
Consider this before responding, Jenn.
Several posters have expressed concerns over ruining the ‘Labrador’ of house rules. You could continue to post and defend the work you have done. Or these ‘rules’ should go back to square one and determine the true goal of the rules set. Throwing together ideas (rules) from another game does not necessarily mean the end product will be the same.
I know you were not around as the original AARe went thru initial creation and several revision versions. These rules were not made over night. There are several threads on the old avalon hill message board that demonstrate the group mentality of rule creation and game play testing built into AARe. If an Enhanced version of AA50 is ever created, it should use this model. At least browse through the 20+ pages of threads there are look at the thread titles. Open discussions on the rules.
As posted many times before, and again here: Taking house rules written for Revised do not mean that they will be equally effective in AA50. That may be a good start, but that’s all it should be at this time.
-
@Cmdr:
Thought I did already, in my first response.
Let’s take this step-by-step. This is the first question. Please, what is your direct answer to this question? (not your thoughts in general, but your direct answer).
Why use the “Enhanced” term. There are a variety of terms that mean relatively the same thing. Modified, adapted, personalized, and custom are some possibilities. Why pick enhanced, specifically?
Why utilize an established name?
-
This is AA50J which is being called AA50E because what, Jen’s got a patent lawyer on speed dial? Or so we are to believe. Ya know it should be painfully obvious to anyone who’s been here a while that the real game Jen wants to play with her faux AA50E ruleset has little to do with A&A. You do realize that to continue threads like this one is exactly the game she’s after at this point, don’t you?
Ya know if Jen’s the only one on the planet that truly believes she’s developed “the official” AA50E ruleset then she loses at the little power trip game she seems so fond of playing. She can call herself queen of the universe too and that doesn’t make it so. So if you care about and respect the work of Cousin Joe and the Enhanced team don’t post anything in these silly AA50J related threads. Realize you’re only lending creedance to this absurdity by it’s debate!
-
This is AA50J which is being called AA50E because what, Jen’s got a patent lawyer on speed dial? Or so we are to believe. Ya know it should be painfully obvious to anyone who’s been here a while that the real game Jen wants to play with her faux AA50E ruleset has little to do with A&A. You do realize that to continue threads like this one is exactly the game she’s after at this point, don’t you?
Ya know if Jen’s the only one on the planet that truly believes she’s developed “the official” AA50E ruleset then she loses at the little power trip game she seems so fond of playing. She can call herself queen of the universe too and that doesn’t make it so. So if you care about and respect the work of Cousin Joe and the Enhanced team don’t post anything in these silly AA50J related threads. Realize you’re only lending creedance to this absurdity by it’s debate!
It’s not so much those “in the know” I am worried about. It’s those new to the site, who come here through a search engine, find the AA50J rules set tagged as “Enhanced”, trying these rules and then discovering that these rules do not have the same level of quality game play as the AARe we’ve grown to love.
I believe to just look the other way at someone’s highjacking a name under false pretenses is the easy way out.
-
BadSpeller:
In response to the question asked again, and answered again in the same fashion as the first time:
The name AA50:Enhanced (AKA Anniversary Enhanced, AA50:e, AA50e) was used because it is a direct result from Revised Enhanced. Since all the same concepts are brought over from Revised Enhanced, the same balance, the same rules and the same ideas, it makes no sense what-so-ever to invent a new name.
You might as well ask why AARe is still called AARe and not something else like Axis and Allies: axis_roll.
AA50e is AARe on the Anniversary Map.
Axis, I asked the community numerous times for volunteers, you even responded in the thread, but never once volunteered. On numerous occasions drafts of the rules were posted and I begged and pleaded for you guys to review them and toss out questions and comments, but the only response I got from you, and I am paraphrasing, was “too many changes.” Never made a specific comment on what change was too much, not that you could since the changes are extremely minor, bordering on virtually non-existent.
Just because you have a selective memory does not make it my problem.
Personally, I hope people find the AA50e rules, try them out, and realize that they’re just as good, if not better, than the AARe rules. They’re up to the same standard (if not higher, since they’re more recent and thus, take into consideration more experience than was available at the time AARe was created.)
Zero Pilot:
AA50e has been play tested, it’s been developed by numerous people, it’s been copyrighted and it is the official version. If someone wants to make a similar game, they’ll just have to use a different name. If they attempt to use Anniversary Enhanced or any derivative thereof, they’ll be criminally liable for copyright infringement.
Sorry, I just got sick of axis_roll (primarily) and a few others pissing and moaning because they thought they could kill AA50 Enhanced by refusing to participate in it’s creation and by responding with a stock reply “too many changes” to every request for assistance in its creation.
-
Still waiting for that list of numerous people who have play tested these rules.
Your failure to list these people and from the lack of quaility in the Rules, I can TELL that list is small.Still waiting on those Emails from Cousin_joe that he’s proud you’re working on AA50 “Jen”
Still waiting on your response to the game breaking strategic decision that BREAKS these rules:
INSTANT GUARENTEED TARGETTED TECHNOLOGY.
This BREAKS the game. I do not even need to game play test. Hell you might as well hand out light sabers to the guys who can buy them.
I keep waiting and waiting but all we get are more posts on how wrong we are, without responses to our questions/inquries.
@Cmdr:
You might as well ask why AARe is still called AARe and not something else like Axis and Allies: axis_roll.
Because I helped mold the rules thru discussion and game testing, I was not the originator of the rules nor did I try to high jack any rules or someone elses work and try to call it my own.
@Cmdr:
AA50e is AARe on the Anniversary Map.
This is where you are wrong, but yet you do not seem to be able to see the error of your ways even though it is just not me saying this. You can not compile a set of rules from one game and mix them into another game and think those old rules will be just fine. Sure, you made a few tweaks here or there (naming conventions or other similiar things like Chinese territory names, etc).
There’s a context that all rules must work within. The ONLY way to decide if something works is to play many games with those rules. We learned this in developing the original AARe. This has not happened yet for AA50, let alone this version of the rules.
Top AA50 players need to be brought into the development of these rules.
-
Thank you for your answer.
Now for Questions #2-6 (or maybe part B #1-5)TESTERS:
- Who are they?
- What are their playing levels?
- How many games of AARe and AA50 have they played? (Because you are incorporating both sets of rules)
- Who have they beaten?
- What side(s) do they play (Axis, Allies, both)?
Again, direct answers please
-
Since we are back on the name topic, here are my thoughts. While it may be mere semantics, to me the AA50e is misleading from the standpoint that it truly isn’t AA50 enhanced. AA50 was not the foundation for the enhanced rules. AARe was. So, really, wouldn’t the rules being called something like AARe:Anniversary be more appropriate? It is closer to how they were created.
Again, just my 2 cents.
@Cmdr:
What AA50:Enhanced does do is build off of AARe in a way to apply the rules of AARe to AA50 without ruining the balance and without making huge and drastic changes to AA50 or AARe.
@Cmdr:
The name AA50:Enhanced (AKA Anniversary Enhanced, AA50:e, AA50e) was used because it is a direct result from Revised Enhanced. Since all the same concepts are brought over from Revised Enhanced, the same balance, the same rules and the same ideas, it makes no sense what-so-ever to invent a new name.
AA50e is AARe on the Anniversary Map.
-
Jennifer, I think I see what you mean
its mostly AARe so you didn’t call it AA50J
but AARe crowd would be happier you simply call it Jennifier’s adaptation of AARe@Cmdr:
Sorry, I just got sick of axis_roll (primarily) and a few others pissing and moaning because they thought they could kill AA50 Enhanced by refusing to participate in it’s creation and by responding with a stock reply “too many changes” to every request for assistance in its creation.
are you actually looking for feedback anymore?
you were saying its the “final version” already with only erratas plannedas for responses of “too many changes”, it happens in discussions
ask yourself what is the very most important change and talk about that first
its easier for the audience to take in -
are you actually looking for feedback anymore?
you were saying its the “final version” already with only erratas plannedas for responses of “too many changes”, it happens in discussions
ask yourself what is the very most important change and talk about that first
its easier for the audience to take inI already gave you one game breaker:
Instant guarenteed tech. Breaks the game.
Suggested Topics
