I did watch it, thanks Wolf. Also the lego war movie you posted earlier, which lead to me watching some of the others - they are very well done. Am considering selling all my A&A and using the money to start a lego war collection ….
AA 1941 or AA Original?
-
Now that we have seen the map, units and setup it is clear that this version will be a very dumbed-down version of 1942. That said it still might be fun, and will present new and different challenges. (3 British ICs?)
Also, it appears to me, with the lack of artillery, cruisers and the much simplified European theatre, that this game is in many ways a throwback to the original MB edition (ie after nova games). That we all played and loved to death.
My simple question is: Do you think this version will be more or less complex and fun than the original 1980s edition?
-
Less.
-
no SBR, no Offshore Bombardment, no Nation make more than 17, LESS
-
-
Its more like MB edition. The sea zones the same as well as most land areas. The rules are probably more like 1942, but with similar strategy’s as MB edition
-
I’m only hoping that my 10 year old will get into it through this. The rules seem more along the lines of 42 and thus it will be a good gateway drug to Global for him in a few years.
-
@Imperious:
Its more like MB edition. The sea zones the same as well as most land areas. The rules are probably more like 1942, but with similar strategy’s as MB edition
The map is definitely not like MB, both in territories and SZs.
Besides the territory changes, on MB you could transport units from Eastern US to Western Europe on a single round. Here you need 2 rounds to reach W. Europe (like Revised/Spring 1942) AND 2 rounds to reach the UK from Eastern US, just like AAG40. Plus, from the Solomon SZ you can now hit all of Asia/India with the US.
-
Did you compare the sea zones between both versions?
-
-
But i am talking about comparing with Milton Bradley 2nd edition, not AA42… :-D
The sea zones are the same and the land areas are mostly similar.
-
@Imperious:
But i am talking about comparing with Milton Bradley 2nd edition, not AA42… :-D
The sea zones are the same…
Imperious your statement is, quite frankly, factually inaccurate at best. Some of the land territories are similar, however there are many many changes to the sea zones. Just compare the images below.
-
Look at the similarities in the Pacific, Japan can employ almost the same exact naval movements because the distances are the same. Japan to Hawaii, then to Australia, then to India…just like the typical movement from MB edition. Distance to Moscow from both sides is also the same.
IN Europe Medd is basically the same, the only major difference is USA to UK is two turns, rather than one.
If you compare the sea zones and ask which map is most close to AA41, you would concur that MB edition is closest.
for Sea zones in Europe it’s more like Revised, while in Pacific it’s more like MB edition.
The distances to move across the map are very similar again allowing some of the same strategies as before in MB edition.
-
I wasn’t commenting on tactics, strategy, or total movement. I was simply pointing out that they aren’t “the same”.
Like you I agree that the game will have a very Classic feel and will likely employ many of the same strategies. However to claim the sea zones are “the same” is grossly inaccurate.
-
The biggest thing i see different from a strategy point of view is EUSA is one turn from attacking anywhere from FWA to Norway except Western Europe. There’s no way anyone could convince me this wasn’t done on purpose. Classic was dominated by two strategies inf. push and shuck (i think that was the name i’m not 100% sure.) The 2 turns to get to Western Europe is to combat shuck. Reduced income and reduced production IMO is to combat inf. push.
Russia also has 4 front line territories compared to 2 in classic. Germany has 4 now compared to 3 before. So the face of the eastern front is alot different.
-
@Imperious:
If you compare the sea zones and ask which map is most close to AA41, you would concur that MB edition is closest.
for Sea zones in Europe it’s more like Revised, while in Pacific it’s more like MB edition.
I completely disagree, comparing the number of SZ, the disposition of key SZs and the general disposition of the map.
Number of SZs (Atlantic) (excluding Baltic and Med):
- Classic - 15 SZs
- Revised/Spring42 - 19 SZs
- 1941 - 17 SZs (SZs 18/22 and SZs24/25 from Revised/Spring1942 joined together)
SZ bordering the UK:
- Classic - 1 (US can land on UK and W. Europe in 1 round)
- Revised/Spring1942 - 5 (US can land on UK in 1 round and on W. Europe in 2 rounds )
- 1941 - 4 (US can land on UK and W. Europe in 2 rounds)
Number of SZ (Pacific)
- Classic - 25 SZs
- Revised/Classic - 28 SZs
- 1941- 18 SZs
Asian territories that can be reached from the Solomon Islands SZ
- Classic - Japan and Manchuria
- Revised/Spring1942 - Japan and Buryatia
- 1941 - Japan, Manchuria, Coastal China, Southeast Asia and Szechwan (almost everything that matters on Asia)
Finally, on the 1941 map it takes less time to reinforce Russia with US armor through W.EUS/SOLOMON/SZECHWAN (3 rounds) than through the UK (4 rounds). On Classic took you 2 rounds for US troops to reach Moscow through Norway and 4 through Asia. On Revised/Spring 1942 3 through Europe and 4 through Asia. This is the first map on the series (not counting Global or AA50) where it takes less time for the US to reach Moscow through Asia than Europe.
And for the territories my judgement is also the same. On Europe it’s Spring1942 without Balkans and Belorussia while Asia just had a radical departure from everything.
So, to me the idea that this map is Classic rehashed has no standing. It is the result of an evolution that started with Classic but the gameplay is completely different from Classic or even Spring 1942. :)
-
Obviously it will be very different and is a product of evolution. But take into account the units (no cruisers or artillery) and I think it starts to look more like classic.
-
Obviously it will be very different and is a product of evolution. But take into account the units (no cruisers or artillery) and I think it starts to look more like classic.
So far no one has pointed 1 relevant aspect unique to Classic that is shared with 1941.
The number of types of units is the same as Classic (plus destroyers, minus AA), but the stats are completely different. A Battleship on Classic cost 24, here 16, you get even reduced prices for the rest of the naval/air costs. Armor costs 6, so the price had been already upgraded for Global. -
So far no one has pointed 1 relevant aspect unique to Classic that is shared with 1941.
Both classic and 1941 have no artillery.
Other than that 1941 is closer to Original AA, then any other version.
-
@Imperious:
So far no one has pointed 1 relevant aspect unique to Classic that is shared with 1941.
Both classic and 1941 have no artillery.
Other than that 1941 is closer to Original AA, then any other version.
Point taken on artillery. Still, I think it’s a mistake calling it closer to Classic… way too many differences between both.
-
But the game IS closer to Milton Bradley than AA42. It is not a true statement that its closer to AA42.
Suggested Topics
