The Victories & Defeats has been updated with the 2024 gaming season results.
This is most likely the last update in 2024, since all Axis & Allies games for this year are over.
See the top of this page.
Captain
@Brain:
I’ve heard Hearts of Iron is a huge time investment.
It is. It’s not for everyone but if you really like in depth micromanagement and strategic warfare. The game itself technically takes place real time, but it’s real time in that every second real time is an HOUR game time. Granted this can be sped up and paused, but if you want to do well you basically need to sit through 2.5 hours per year, and each game usually takes at least 5 years. I got it but it’s a bit too much for me. You can play as literally any nation though, ANY, including Luxembourg. It’s not fun, believe me I tried it haha (That is playing as Luxembourg I mean, not the game itself)
Hmmm. Might check that out :-)
@WILD:
I think I would like a game that tracked some of the logistics/supplies. You can’t build mech inf/aircraft, unless you have rubber. Can’t move your navy/tanks unless you have fuel etc… Certain tt would offer such supplies, that each power would fight for, and you have to transport them to your factories (would require a supply ship).
I would also like more terrain like mountains/swamps slowing/stopping movement, and weather/seasons to have an impact to slow or stop movement. Allow for a Russian winter, or random hurricanes at sea etc…
I would like a computer high bread game that you could track these things, along w/normal movement and attacks. I would like to make my moves w/a mouse, but roll my own dice, enter the results to the computer then have it played out. You could play over the internet w/a camera over looking a dice box, so your opponent knows your on the up n up.
Well again I would suggest Hearts of Iron, those games basically track everything. The only bad thing is that those games are true micromanagement games. Everything is in real time so to play the game you really have to be dedicated and a spazz about complexity. The game is fun but only in short stints for me, it is draining to the point it almost feels like work, almost……
A game that feels like work :?
I’ll pass.
Sounds like my kind of game. And it’s dirt cheap. I might try it out. Quick question… I just told a friend about it and he thinks he’ll buy it too. Is it multiplayer? B/c that would be epic.
Some things I’d like to see:
1. Terrain effects on movement and combat. Maybe print a movement cost on each territory, to represent: 1.) the difficulty of movement through mountains, jungles, forests, or undeveloped areas with few roads; 2.) the difficulty of keeping units supplied in rough terrain; and 3.) the vastness of the area represented by some territories. If the Japanese really want to send their tank armies to Moscow, or the Italians want to drive overland to South Africa, it should take a while.
2. Rail movement. Allow each country to send 2-4 land units per turn by rail, which gives them unlimited movement, as long as all territories through which they pass were freindly controlled at the beginning of that country’s turn, and all are connected by land. Each country would have its own rail allowance. For instance:
Russia: 3 units
Germany: 4 units
Italy: 2 units
USA: 3 units
Britain: 3 units
Japan: 2 units
ANZAC: 2 units
China: 1 unit
3.) More realistic starting forces. This would involve a larger set of playing pieces. But the more units on the map, the lower the likelihood of one or two bad die rolls deciding the game. The more dice you roll, the closer the results will be to their statistical probability. The Royal Navy should not be wiped out by 3 subs and 5-6 aircraft.
we need mines!!!
if there is gona be a game with flags as ncp’s than we need mine pieces. we also need to have a texeured board.(ie. a few riples in sea zones, raised/elavated mountians, elavated land that is higher than the sea zones) and for the sake of all humanity CANDADA PLEASE!
Table Tactics makes mines:
-every concievable power ever
-slightly more realistic combat rules (Bombers hitting fighters on a 4?), especially in regards to surface combat vs. air
-politics sounds pretty interesting
-individual victory conditions so that even if one side is winning, the winning player is yet to be determined
-national advantages + disadvantages so that each power looks and feels “unique”
-really big tech tree
-more scenarios
-no cardboard pieces (maybe even little flags for occupation markers)
-more territories
-active battlefields
-some sort of AI for neutrals
-more in-depth American neutrality
-totally unique moulds for each power (unless some historical reason). NEED UNIQUE ANZAC INF!
-actual kamikaze attacks with your aircraftTo sum that up, more stuff in general.
I’ve addressed some of the above things in my rules set.
:-o
The utter and complete perfection of those rules astounds me.
I like most of those ideas.
I think they are a bit too much. Kinda takes the fun out of it?
:-o
The utter and complete perfection of those rules astounds me.
Thanks! :) I’ve been working on these rules, off and on, for two to three years now, and they’ve come a long way from my initial ideas!
I have to admit that I will just stay with the basic rules, my games hinge more on fun than perfecting realism. Now if they include those as a standard rule I might like it, I might not too.
My dream game is at the scale of the new global game except be 1939. All Germany would own is Germany, Austria and Ckeukleslovakia. Every Power would have it’s own pieces and rules. Eg. Belgium would have for dark brown infantry, is neutral, and joins the Allies if France and Britain join the war. Belgium can’t build more units and moves and attacks if at war with France.
I would like to see a deluxe version of AA42 that has all the goodies in it like Revised. :)