@Yoper:
Krieg,
My comments were based on your first post, which in my opinion, you didn’t properly distinguish the following entry as being the computer version:
A&A, MB Version, 3rd Edition (“A&A Classic, 3rd Edition” or “AAC3”*)
I thought that you were making a connection to the 1991 FAQ/Clarification sheet. When I see MB, I think the boardgame, not the computer version by Hasbro or the Iron Blitz add-on by MicroProse.
It is, however, the same game. You could just as easily print out the computer version rules and play the game on an MB board. The fact that’s implemented on a computer doesn’t make it a different game.
@Yoper:
As for the comments of your about the whole numbering system, it is what it is. The players need something to help them keep the versions straight. Just because Larry doesn’t like the “Revised” moniker being used for the 2004 edition doesn’t mean it isn’t useful. Or the LHTR only being a set of “tournament” rules in the sense that it helped clarify the games in the pbem/pbf games of the various club sites. The accepted labels may not always be the official labels, but they end up being the ones that the majority use.
I was just pointing out that I would wouldn’t use your exact set of edition labels. Or I would try to give all the different versions of each of the versions so that everyone would know where I am coming from. There are always going to be people who have certain names that they call the game or came into the game series mid-stream. That name may not be what you call it.
Just like in other threads where people talk about the abbreviations for the different units in the game. Different people use different abbreviations.
That is precisely my point. When someone says “3rd Edition”, I have no idea of their frame of reference. They could be talking about the CD-ROM version rules, or they could be completely unaware of them and be talking about Revised. They could also be talking about 1942 because they’ve never seen Revised, either. This what makes revision numbers useless. You may cite a frame of reference, but not everyone else will. You can’t cite what you’re not aware of. At least if people use an abbreviation, I have some idea of what they’re talking about.
I also don’t think that it’s too much to ask that everyone use at least close to the same abbreviations, or at least abbreviations that don’t resemble other abbreviations. For example, I don’t like “AAAE” for Anniversary for two reasons. First, it’s too close to “AAE”, the accepted abbreviation for A&A Europe, so such a reference could easily be a typo. Second, it’s possible that there could be other anniversary editions in the future. That’s why I supported “AA50” as the abbreviation for Anniversary. This abbreviation has caught on for the most part, so I see no reason why most people can’t be on the same page, abbreviation-wise. It just makes life easier for everyone when we all speak the same language.
