Yes, it should, but since the game has been obsoleted by a 2nd edition, it probably will not be. However, in cases like this where a rule is clarified in the 2nd edition which also exists in the 1st edition, it’s safe to apply the clarification retroactively to the 1st edition as well.
What are the difference between 1942 and Revised?
-
If they do what again?
-
Does that make the Nova version the Zeroth Edition?
-
In Revised, the sea zone (63) that touches Alaska also touches Western Canada, In 1942 it doesn’t touch western Canada.
There are also some minor changes to north america, such as western canada does not touch central america, etc. There are all completely unimportant.Not true, those changes are very important: both make Polar Express (japanese assault against american mainland as counter to KGF) much more difficult
Also, trannies not defending makes a balanced approach almost impossible (allied need that fodder in Atlantic ocean if they are going to buy a Pacific navy)
In resume, you will have 100% of KGF & JTDTM in AA42, while in Revised you had more choices
-
In Revised, the sea zone (63) that touches Alaska also touches Western Canada, In 1942 it doesn’t touch western Canada.
There are also some minor changes to north america, such as western canada does not touch central america, etc. There are all completely unimportant.Not true, those changes are very important: both make Polar Express (japanese assault against american mainland as counter to KGF) much more difficult
Also, trannies not defending makes a balanced approach almost impossible (allied need that fodder in Atlantic ocean if they are going to buy a Pacific navy)
In resume, you will have 100% of KGF & JTDTM in AA42, while in Revised you had more choices
Thinking out loud, I wonder if the transport change might make it possible for the Allies to try different strats in the Pacific. For example, USA could spend all of their cash on air, and then attack the Jap fleet in SZ 60. With the USA popping out highly mobile 12$ bombers, the Japs could be forced to spend hard cash on useless destroyers and aircraft carriers and/or keep their fleets clustered up.
If this kind of strategy is viable, then perhaps in aa42 the Japs will be forced to buy mainland factories right off the bat which could slow down their growth.
I’m eager to play this game and see how it goes. I hope it isn’t true that KJF is less viable as I think the ability to pursue KJF is one of the strongest aspects of Revised–in AA41, for example, the map dynamics are way too favorable towards KGF.
-
Thinking out loud, I wonder if the transport change might make it possible for the Allies to try different strats in the Pacific. For example, USA could spend all of their cash on air, and then attack the Jap fleet in SZ 60. With the USA popping out highly mobile 12$ bombers, the Japs could be forced to spend hard cash on useless destroyers and aircraft carriers and/or keep their fleets clustered up.
If this kind of strategy is viable, then perhaps in aa42 the Japs will be forced to buy mainland factories right off the bat which could slow down their growth.
I’m eager to play this game and see how it goes. I hope it isn’t true that KJF is less viable as I think the ability to pursue KJF is one of the strongest aspects of Revised–in AA41, for example, the map dynamics are way too favorable towards KGF.
Yep, Japs will have their own problems as well. As interesting side note, trannie weakness of Japan also damage Polar Express so I guess you are right and they are forced to escort their trannies with starting fleet. That is not going to hurt JTDTM too much anyway (not more than allied KJF and allied sucks in KGF)
As for AA41, map dynamics + crappy setup + corpse China are way too favorable towards axis victories. Try 1942 scenario instead :-)
-
Um, the game is a bit too young to determine if there will be a viable pacific strategy. I can see one possibility where the US builds up many a merry bomber to land on Yakut and SBR/deadzone Japan’s sea zones while the UK assaults from the south.
And aa41 does kill any allied movement in the pacific, but China is not the problem. The real problem is there is absolutely no method for the allies to get units into the pacific fast enough before Japan’s income sky rockets. The other problem is the can opener tactic forces the Russians to play much more defensively allowing Germany to steam-roll them without allied aid, and there is also the fact that Africa has become much more expensive for the allies to contest than in any other AA game (which is the only part of that I agree with) forcing the allies to ignore at least one theater of the war to have any effect in another.
-
Another diference between revised and the new one(1942) is the sweet looking map! seriously its a step up.
-
sweet looking tiny map that is :mrgreen:
-
yeah, it is smaller. but it looks sooo much better than revised.
-
And aa41 does kill any allied movement in the pacific, but China is not the problem. The real problem is there is absolutely no method for the allies to get units into the pacific fast enough before Japan’s income sky rockets.
In fact, one of the reasons of skyrocketing Japan is China killed J1. The other is 5 starting jap trannies. What were thinking the testers? Too much beer? :mrgreen:
-
Eh, the only part of china I hate is the invisible wall. I have in games ignored china, as they take until turn 4ish to take the territory for your NOs back and at that point you earn enough anyway.
Yes, the easiest ways to fix Japan would be to take away 1 or 2 transports, place a factory in India or Austraila at the start of the game, grant the UK/US transports a bit more protection or distance so J1 cannot smash them, or any other number of things. But the true problem is no one can effect japan until turn 3 at the earliest and at that point it is too late. Also, the UK cannot afford to send much at all to the pacific without russia dying and africa being overrun. I feel the largest failure of the AA games is how much stronger than Russia Germany is. I hope in the new games Russia has a massive income convoy route to represent the massive quanities of materials the US sent her, and to represent the fact that Russia started pushing the Germans back before we even landed in France. Not saying I want the axis to always loose, I just want a Russia that can survive past turn 4 without allied help. Without that, the allies cannot afford to fight in the other theaters much. Strengthen Russia and Italy to balance it out.
Would anyone be willing to try out a game where both Italy and Russia make 10 more IPCs each in AA50 just to see if it makes for a more global game? I think it would, esp if the extra income was in other theaters.
-
maybe give Italy five more…idk about ten
-
Eh, the only part of china I hate is the invisible wall. I have in games ignored china, as they take until turn 4ish to take the territory for your NOs back and at that point you earn enough anyway.
I see no reason to ignore China when you can puppet (conquer) it J1. However i agree with the hate against the invisible wall in the cases when Japan makes the ignore move or not do the J1 exploit or even worst, the 42 scenario. I prefer calling it “ACME” wall because chinamen are Willie E. Coyotes that cannot pass the wall and japaneses are Roadrunners that can merrily pass the wall with a magic “Beep, beep!” :mrgreen:
-
And just remember how much we all wanted poor Coyote catch the Roadrunner :-D
-
Lastly, neither Revised or 1942 have National Advantages, the poster above must be thinking of AA50.
Revised had National Advantages - U-Boat Interdiction, Super Fortresses, Soviet Patriot War, etc. Not to be confused with National Objectives from AA50 and the upcoming AAP40 & AAE40.
Does that make the Nova version the Zeroth Edition?
Shhh.
-
How do aa guns work in this version? Do aas not shoot at planes flying over to and from combat (like aa50) or do they shoot them (like revised)?
-
They work the same way that they do in AA50.
-
yeah, it is smaller. but it looks sooo much better than revised.
If you compare both map area looks to be the same more or less: some territories/SZs are bigger on Revised or 1942. 1942 map looks better visually but concerning playability it is worse that Revised because of the borders. On Anniversary there’s larger territories and the borders are less harder to spot but on 1942 it gets impossible to see the borders in some areas (Europe and Atlantic SZs) specially when a territory is overstacked with pieces. And since this version is meant for new players the playability issue is even worse because they will not be accostumed to the territory connections like a veteran revised player.
Suggested Topics
