Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

A&A Revised Scenarios

House Rules

1.6k

A

ajgundam5 2007 AAR League
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 1:02 AM

Anyone ever found or made any scenarios such as Cold War or 1939 for A&A Revised like they had for A&A Classic.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
I

Imperious Leader '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 5:50 AM

no but im looking at a 1944 scenario for revised. something different
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
T

tekkyy
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 8:27 AM

Not too into scenarios myself but I do recall seeing 1939 at least being discussed. Search the forum and you might find something.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
C

Cobert
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 7:55 PM

Switch made a '41 scenario, if I recall correctly.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
A

ajgundam5 2007 AAR League
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 9:51 PM

Doesn’t the game start in 1941?
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
M

Micoom
last edited by Feb 4, 2007, 10:01 PM

@AJGundam:

Doesn’t the game start in 1941?

A&A starts in 1942…
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
I

Imperious Leader '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10
last edited by Feb 5, 2007, 8:41 PM

I want to make a short game where germany has all the techs and the allies have to kill them both before time runs out… or the allies lose.
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Featured Topics

League rules idea: mulligans for patrons

Guadalcanal Tournament at Strategicon (Los Angeles) Feb. 17, 2024

T-shirts, Hats, and More

global 1940

177

anniversary

1914

1942 2nd ed

tips&tricks

bm3

video

axis & allies

Suggested Topics

P

[Global 1940] A&A Mod with Cross-Domain Concept: Additional Moves in Combat and Non-Combat

House Rules
• global 1940 • Mar 22, 2020, 12:30 AM • phd_angel Mar 25, 2020, 11:00 AM

4

1
Votes

4
Posts

389
Views

G Mar 25, 2020, 11:00 AM

From what I’m reading yes you can move those pieces on your actual turn again.
As midnight said US can make non combat moves to plan.
China have a bit of hope. Lol
Calcutta saved ?
This will give each country some extra planning and moves to think about during turns which was stated to keep players more focused per each countries turn.
Lots of things to check out
B

1941 & 1942 Intro. steps to use TPs, Subs, DDs and planes: simpler interactions

House Rules
• • Jul 2, 2016, 12:14 AM • baron Münchhausen Sep 11, 2017, 12:24 AM

4

0
Votes

4
Posts

1.1k
Views

B Sep 11, 2017, 12:24 AM

Thanks for your honest comment Ozymandiac,
is the opening post easier to read and understand now?
Same information, different order.
I tried as much as possible to be clear in this new edited version.
Even the second post of this thread is just a more formalized way inspired by OOB 1942.2 written rules, which say same things than first opening post but with all words of official rules.
B

Cheapest but still balance warships and planes? Advanced Shipyard & Aircraft HR

House Rules
• • Jan 21, 2015, 12:28 AM • baron Münchhausen Jan 22, 2015, 4:05 AM

13

0
Votes

13
Posts

1.8k
Views

B Jan 22, 2015, 4:05 AM

@barney:

yea I’m a little concerned this would boost the defensive values of fleets even more. I also added DK’s cruiser gets one AA shot which is another defensive bonus.
I wonder how much super subs would counter that? I’m trying not to tweak things price wise at the moment but I may eventually incorporate your entire cost structure.

Good explanation on the destroyers vs EC’s. Having a fighter that hits at 4 could be appealing though.

Good stuff Baron

If I introduced AAA Naval capacity at such low cost (Advanced Shipyard) it would be in a combined arms bonus and not for a single unit.
Maybe just up to 2 AAA preemptive shots against 2 planes when 1 Battleship and 1 Cruiser are protecting a Fleet Carrier, and only this kind of unit, not any Escort Carrier.
Each have their specific mission, Fleet Carrier have a more consistent AA batteries and CAP (Carrier Air Patrol) while Escort Carrier groups were assign Anti-Sub Mission.
So, to get Naval AAA buy all the three warships: Battleship, Cruiser, Aircraft (Fleet) Carrier.
In counterpart, these costlier warships units would still be vulnerable against Subs while Escort Carriers and Destroyers will be vulnerable against planes but much able to defend against Submarines.

@Black_Elk:

@Baron:

I’m more inclined to treat it exactly as an AAA unit: @1 against up to three planes.
After all, it is a known concept in ground combat adapted to Naval Battle and it requires 3 warships type, the number 3 is obviously on the board.
IC’s AAA seems too powerful and unrealistic: a defense @1 against infinite number of planes.
Defending Carriers are already much better than offensive ones. Anti-Air is providing an additional defense.

@Black_Elk:

Well the anti air for battlegroup concept seems cool. I think the hope was that we could find a combined arms that just had units pairing 1:1. That one requires a pairing of 3 different units 1:1:1, but seems like it could encourage Cruiser purchases.

Not only Cruiser but also Battleship buying incentive.
Another reason to not give IC’s AAA capacity: you want to defend against more than 3 planes, buy another Cruiser and BB to join another Carrier.
I’m pretty sure it can change some buying from Destroyers and Subs to Cruiser and Battleship.

It still cost 12+16+20= at least 48 IPCs (68 with 2 Fgs) to get this additional defensive abilities.

Maybe this concept can be simply extended to each combo of BB+Cruiser gives 1 AAA capacity as long as there is a Carrier to protect.

So 2 BBs + 2 Cruisers + 1 Carrrier will provides an AAA against up to 6 planes.

All this! :-D

I think something along these lines could potentially bring both Cruisers and Battleships back into the mix as a purchasing consideration, and is relatively simple.

Of the combined arms proposed thus far, this one doesn’t bust the opening round combats. It would increase the swing on fleet defense making all out air assaults against a stacked battle group more risky. Right now the all air option is pretty powerful vs navies, this would give at least some way to counter that, but only at the cost of more expensive warship units, and somewhat diminished flexibility in other ways, since you have to keep the ships together to get the boost.
I still think a different bombardment bonus or marine concept could work for cruisers and battleships, or a maneuverability bonus for cruisers specifically, but both of those would surely have an influence on the opening balance.
B

Alternate 3 planes CV, more Air oriented A&A for G40 or 1942 with TacBs

House Rules
• • Apr 5, 2014, 9:14 PM • baron Münchhausen May 21, 2014, 4:52 AM

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

3.6k
Views

B May 21, 2014, 4:52 AM

I found a post which say that SBR AAA kill ratio was 10% max:

What Larry says have flaws, and contradict to to base mechanic.

It should be like this:

1. Attacking fighter escorts roll dice, each 1 is hit, and defender move casualties to casualty zone.

2. Defending AA-gun roll dice, each 1 is hit, and then defending fighters roll dice, 2 or less is hit. Attacker choose his casualties.

3. Surviving bombers roll SBR dice against factories.

In real world, the attacking airfleet would first face the intercepting fighters, and then the escort fighters would do dog-fight. Later, the bombers would face AA-fire at the target. This AA-fire killed historically less than 10 % of the aircrafts. Using Larrys rule where AA-guns target bombers, you could be lucky and roll two 1’s and kill both attacking bombers, and get an unhistoric result of thousands bombers killed and no harm to the factories. Since its an abstract game, let the attacker pick a fighter as casualty to represent a % loss, and still have bombers survive to SBR.

http://harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=1706&start=8
He is talking about an older version of SBR (AA50 Anniversary).
A

Would a "Flanking" bonus be appropriate? Does it fit the global scale of A&A?

House Rules
• • Oct 11, 2012, 10:38 PM • AlphaKappa Oct 13, 2012, 7:31 PM

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

961
Views

G Oct 13, 2012, 7:31 PM

Another way to consider this is the BOTB/D-DAY style models, were units can occupy the same territory. With one round of ensuing combat.

If units become totally encircled… they can’t move and operate poorly.
M

Minor Axis & Allied Powers meets AAG40 Map (1941)

House Rules
• • Nov 26, 2010, 3:32 PM • Monroe Dec 4, 2010, 7:55 PM

14

0
Votes

14
Posts

2.8k
Views

M Dec 4, 2010, 7:55 PM

The Factories (As well as some of the Mnor Axis Units) came from “The War Game” (which is a great game).
A

Axis & Allies Global Design Flaws Part 1

House Rules
• • Nov 3, 2010, 5:39 PM • aethervox Nov 4, 2010, 10:51 AM

9

0
Votes

9
Posts

1.9k
Views

P Nov 4, 2010, 10:51 AM

if people want to know, just look in the back of the AAE40 rule book where it distinguishes all types of units
A

AA Europe & AA Pacific Linked Rules

House Rules
• • Jun 3, 2006, 9:25 PM • Admiral_Thrawn Jun 3, 2006, 11:30 PM

2

0
Votes

2
Posts

1.3k
Views

G Jun 3, 2006, 11:30 PM

http://www.wargamer.com/axisandallies/EUROPE/AAE-AAP-combined/aae-aap_combined_MAIN.html

try this…

GG

55

Online

17.6k

Users

40.2k

Topics

1.7m

Posts