@krieghund Thanks krieghund…
Axis and Allies 1942 Edition Fact Sheet ( AA42)
-
Because Finland gave him so much trouble, Sweden would have been impossible.
-
The A&A rules regarding neutrals, (AAR&AA50) are not realistic, they’re unhistorical, and it makes the game more “boring”, in the sense that allowing for neutrals to be attacked would make a more interesting and fun game.
In Europe, many countries were neutral in 1939, and before that, but when the war began, they were occupied. This didn’t only happen to Norway, but many other nations as well.
Hitler had many plans, one of them was Operation Tannenbaum. It was one of the plans which didn’t make it from theory to reality. Some countries were invaded and some got away, it was not up to the smaller nations, but the big 5.
If Germany didn’t invade Norway, it could very well be UK instead. Or we could be lucky, and keep our “neutrality”.When Larry Harris explains some of the rules, he often states that “In WW2……during the war…”.
There are many factors that are implemented in A&A which happened in the real war.
So why not keep the neutrality rules from classic, or make some minor changes.
There are no good reasons why we can’t attack “neutral” countries, when it happened in the real WW2! -
He wont do it. Its too problematic to him. The same reason why we get no 1939 game.
But i really don’t know why he does not just make these kind of rules as optional or released as a free gift, kinda like the DVD release that would contain extra scenes not in the movie, he could have posted rules that were close but didnt make it or it was felt didn’t have enough time to gestate before the games publication.
Invading neutrals is what started the war in the first place.
-
Well, Sahara, Gobi desert (Mongolia) and Himalayas should remain impassable for physical reasons. Switzerland also, because it was too costly for germans to invade. Those 4 should remain impassable
The Classic system could work for South America and maybe also for Sweden, but Spain, portuguese colonies and Turkey should have at least a small defense force just to make anyone thing two times invade them :wink:
-
Well, Sahara, Gobi desert (Mongolia) and Himalayas should remain impassable for physical reasons. Switzerland also, because it was too costly for germans to invade. Those 4 should remain impassable
Or…just like the original neutrals…should cost you some (and thus…more then “normal” neutrals) money or units.
It wouldn’t be impossible to cross the Sahara…it just would cost you 25% of your tank force, breaking down to the heat and sand… -
The only reason we get no 1939 game is that there is no US activity until late 41 early 42…
-
Also not italians until mid 40 or soviets until mid 41. Also, they should make something about the french and make a non-broken China (that can hold japs until 1941 at least). That last seems pretty difficult until today for some reason :roll:
-
I agree with Craig, it’s the simplicity of the game that gets skewed when adding politics into the midst. AA is setup for the battle aspect and putting the diplo aspect into it muddies the waters.
if we think that the addition of Italy caused a swelling of debate, or the quality of the pieces, one would have to know that any detailed plan of diplomacy entering the game will be bashed around and need it’s own forum. It’s a headache that Larry probably doesn’t want to bring on.We have Classic rules (too simple) and house rules (spectrum of varieties) but it would be great for Larry to take and give his current view of them to expand on.
-
Why is this thread still in Anniversary forum ?
IL, pay some attention !
-
I can see no way to add France, neutrals, and minor allies especially in a pre Soviet pre US set up with the game design and philosophy of AA. It would really be a boggled down game. Not only that you would have to set up Germany and Japan with either such an amazing head start in terms of equip, and somehow make the Allies strong enough to take it and then have the game even out at some point. Too difficult to do.
Also the game would be set up where France would HAVE TO fall, and probably some really boring other automatic moves for maybe even more than 2 turns. On top of that it could turn to a “special rules” type of game, that is something I would not be a fan of (at least not for AA). That’s my 2 cents
-
There are other WW2 games out there- that include the option to attack neutrals.
It gets to the point that if you have using too many house rules, you have another type of game…
Axis and Allies is not a ‘serious’ wargame - it’s a good fun, solid game with a strong WW2 theme. It’s one of my most played WW2 games, but it just seems easier to play another game with all the rules for neutrals, production, occuption, base industry growth, etc etc…
I’m waiting for the holy grail of a game that sits between Axis and Allies and A World at War - the Europe Engulfed games are pretty good. They would be worth looking at for some ‘house rules’.
-
I’m always excited about new verions of AA coming out, but for only $30?
I hope everyone’s been gathering thier pieces over the years, because you all know the quality of workmanship on units is going to be garbage, like the early releases of Revised :S (Panther tanks were light grey and HALF the size, England was LIME color WTF). Where there are JUST enough units for setup, and the rulebook says “If you run out of units, write down the unit type on a scrap piece of paper, and put it on the board.”
And are they going to stick with classic colors? or have another new shade? Blue Germans perhaps? you never know :S I hope they atleast consider bringing back the RED Japanese pieces, those were awesome!
I would rather pay the $100 and actually have a decent quality product, for the amount of use it gets. Even a mediocre $50-60 would be more reasonable…
-
well as far as pieces go we spent $100 bucks and we got marginal quality. Wait till the pics of these new pieces arrives and reserve the decision to buy till then.
-
I think awhile ago I was supposed to buy some pieces and maps from you, Got sent away with work and totally forgot! I’ll send you a PM…
-
I think awhile ago I was supposed to buy some pieces and maps from you
I know IL, you will never get your money back
-
Larry needs to throw us a bone and give us some more details!!! :-(
-
Larry needs to throw us a bone and give us some more details!!! :-(
More details would be nice. (Though it will be a shame to see each of our perfect AA1942 fantasies destroyed by reality. :wink:)
But overall I really like the idea of a new simpler (than AA50 at least) version of the game to introduce new players to. I thought Revised was a great edition, maintaining the simplicity of the original game while introducing some important nuances and increasing the historical and strategic realism. IMHO they got a little carried away with AA50 and I hope this edition is more Revised than it is Anniversary. It looks like it will be.
-
Presumably the details are set in stone, otherwise the game wouldn’t have been announced.
Still, I would like to see:
Collect money at start of turn; hopefully getting rid of toy notes suggests this may happen.
Neutrals: this can be done simply: give each neutral an appropriate number of units in defence. These need not be placed on the board at set-up, so when the country is attacked it joins the opposing alliance, who take it over. If it survives or is liberated it can be treated as occupied by it’s allies for game purposes.
A simple system of “spheres of influence” decides which neutral is controlled by which ally, who gets its income and any surviving units. This eliminates any need for neutral unit pieces.
There should be no cash penalty; the attacker has to balance the gain of the territory against the cost in units of attacking it.New tank types as well as moulds so we can use new and old types as medium and heavy units, with possibly the same for bombers, fighters (for long-range units) and artillery.
The eastern front drawn correctly, with a more or less straight line from Leningrad - Don instead of that hideous fictional “bulge” jutting into Russia.
Western Europe drawn correctly with north west Germany in Germany, not Western Europe.
Suez canal drawn correctly with the canal wholly within Egypt, not along the Egypt/Levant border.
Moscow in western Russia, with another Soviet IC in the Urals.
Australia and UK Pacific territories controlled by USA is historically correct for 1942 and should enliven the Pacific war, with possibly a limited production IC in Sydney.
Japanese-Soviet pact as at least an option to prevent the dreary JTDTM.
Above all, GET RID OF THE OLD CAPTURE-THE-CAPITOL RULES. Without doing this every game will inevitably revolve around who can cram the most units into the Moscow-Stalingrad area quickly enough.
-
Is it possible to reduce the fact sheet to the facts?
-
so you want your post and the others removed? That is to say you want just ONE post? Please specify.
Suggested Topics
