Generous to fix a mistake…
This is why our economy is failing.
Generous to fix a mistake…
This is why our economy is failing.
Perhaps, but it’s better than leaving it unfixed(I’m talking about the game).
by definition playtesting SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BEFORE WOTC GOT MY $180.
Agreed. In a perfect world, every conceivable angle would have been looked at by the playtesters. However, we don’t live in that world. Mistakes were made, and it is regretable. How long do we have to beat this horse before we move on?
I think its great that Larry and players are willing to fix the setup and I really appreciate the time Larry, Kreig, and everyone else play testing the setup changes has put in so far. I love Axis and Allies games, and this 1940 game is so huge, epic, and full of potential that I’m willing to test a few different set-ups. If the game had been delayed for further playtesting people would’ve complained on here about missing release dates and such. You cant please everyone. Just wanted to add my 2 cents.
I understand that but it is the principal of the matter. A set of games that are as pricey as these are should not have these many issues. When all of the issues were brought up with AAP40, Larry and WotC should have made sure that AAE40 had no issues before being released. I don’t know what has happened with the AA franchise but these kinds of things are really disturbing. I was going to pick up AAE40 next Friday when I get paid but after seeing this thread I am really debating on whether to get it or not. I am being more selective in the games that I buy with the price they are now. Too much money to spend to have to make corrections on the set up boxes and any issues that might come up with the new rule book.
your right,why they cant get it right first time,or get some fans to play test it,im sure some guys here would love to do that,its just not on
Honestly, the balance won’t ever be perfect. As long as there’s no cheese strategy that works every single time, I’m happy to play at a slight disadvantage. I thank Larry for the work on balancing, but until it’s official I think I’ll just start with OOB rules and make a few personal balance tweaks.
And in all honesty, balance wise AA does pretty well when you take into account all the variables.
Revised required a what, 7 IPC bid? A change of perhaps 1% to create perfect balance. AA42 is considered balanced. AA50 is in the same camp as revised to some, balanced to others.
Pacific has such a huge swing factor due to the design to begin with. Not only is it a 1 v 4, but the starting TUV/unit count is massive and extremely mobile. Combine that with all the options of war dec turns, targets to go after, etc, and I’m not surprised at all with the balance issues.
As far as electronic playtesting I only suggest it because TripleA custom maps tend to get pretty well balanced fairly quickly, but that is mainly from the speed in which you can play and test strats with it and lower testing cost. I also know as long as GTO (the true evil one in the entire C&D debacle, and a place I equate with a similar level of distaste right now as ubisoft) has the digital rights this will never happen.
The largest problem that crops up in a ‘revision’ is everyone has there own ideas and preferences. For example when I play pacific I just move the caroline fleet to Iwo and take 8 planes from both sides and the game is fine. But a weak china and struggling ANZAC do not bother me in the least as I see it as Japan vs US and friends. Whereas others would love to see a powered up china and other things. And this is also why the ‘bid’ balance is such a great thing as it allows you to ‘fix’ it yourself.
Lastly, sea-lion is debunked now IMHO and can only work with really good luck with the dice since you can bring 3 units from africa to London. And thats without even going into if loosing the UK at the cost of Germany’s entire income/starting units breaks the game debate.
And in all honesty, balance wise AA does pretty well when you take into account all the variables.
Revised required a what, 7 IPC bid? A change of perhaps 1% to create perfect balance. AA42 is considered balanced. AA50 is in the same camp as revised to some, balanced to others.
Pacific has such a huge swing factor due to the design to begin with. Not only is it a 1 v 4, but the starting TUV/unit count is massive and extremely mobile. Combine that with all the options of war dec turns, targets to go after, etc, and I’m not surprised at all with the balance issues.
As far as electronic playtesting I only suggest it because TripleA custom maps tend to get pretty well balanced fairly quickly, but that is mainly from the speed in which you can play and test strats with it and lower testing cost. I also know as long as GTO (the true evil one in the entire C&D debacle, and a place I equate with a similar level of distaste right now as ubisoft) has the digital rights this will never happen.
The largest problem that crops up in a ‘revision’ is everyone has there own ideas and preferences. For example when I play pacific I just move the caroline fleet to Iwo and take 8 planes from both sides and the game is fine. But a weak china and struggling ANZAC do not bother me in the least as I see it as Japan vs US and friends. Whereas others would love to see a powered up china and other things. And this is also why the ‘bid’ balance is such a great thing as it allows you to ‘fix’ it yourself.
Lastly, sea-lion is debunked now IMHO and can only work with really good luck with the dice since you can bring 3 units from africa to London. And thats without even going into if loosing the UK at the cost of Germany’s entire income/starting units breaks the game debate.
How can Africa troops get to London? can’t the Italian fleet kill the transport on the way?
For the more hardcore fan these things are not as big of an issue. For a more casual fan, that finds the broken things, they can turn them off to the entire franchise.
I put in a vote for the ‘more playtesting’ camp, preferably with an electronic version. Granted that will never happen so oh wells.
I would consider myself a casual player and I was turned off to AAP40 after I got it and saw that there was a shortage of Japanese tactical bombers. Since then WotC corrected the problem and sent out additional pieces which I really appreciated. When I saw that there was a setup change for AAG40 I was turned off all over again. I will play AAP40 with the setup on the nation boxes and faq (hopefully in 2 weeks) until something is official about the changes for AAG40. I still plan on picking up AAE40 next Friday when I get paid and playing each game separately since I do not have the room to set up the full game right now and do not have room to leave a game set up so I will have to resort to writing down what each nation has for pieces on the board and where they are so I can pick it up at a later date.
Has anyone play tested AAP40 only using the AAG40 turn order as a possible fix to the J3IC problem? This would give UK the ability to open the Burma road for China, making them a beast while still losing India….It might hurt Anzac’s ability to load on U.S. transports since they now go before them, but pair this with the OOB set up and I think you have a game.
If you abandon India turn 2 and send your mech force and planes to secure territory for China who could then build in those zones, Japan would still face a shortage of units in mainland Asia until India started producing, but a drive North into the rich territories could reduce Japan’s income to a manageable level while still buying America more time.
Look at the Yunnan attack on J1. Normally China throws away 4-5 units just to get the road, on UK1 or 2, they can liberate it for China, and China could reinforce it, the only draw back to the new turn Order, is that UK could not stack its air on Newly taken Chinese territories.
Just something to think about.
@skinny1:
…do not have room to leave a game set up so I will have to resort to writing down what each nation has for pieces on the board and where they are so I can pick it up at a later date.
Try using a digital camera for this. Much faster and “a picture is worth a thousand words”. I have done this in the past and it worked great.
@skinny1:
…do not have room to leave a game set up so I will have to resort to writing down what each nation has for pieces on the board and where they are so I can pick it up at a later date.
Try using a digital camera for this. Much faster and “a picture is worth a thousand words”. I have done this in the past and it worked great.
Excpet if you have giant stacks that require chips and overflow into surrounding territories
@skinny1:
…do not have room to leave a game set up so I will have to resort to writing down what each nation has for pieces on the board and where they are so I can pick it up at a later date.
Try using a digital camera for this. Much faster and “a picture is worth a thousand words”. I have done this in the past and it worked great.
It might take more time with paper and pencil to write everything down but it would be more accurate. I never thought of taking a picture with a digital camera. I guess a zoom in on crowded areas with lots of chips might work. Thanks for the idea Variable.
@skinny1:
@skinny1:
…do not have room to leave a game set up so I will have to resort to writing down what each nation has for pieces on the board and where they are so I can pick it up at a later date.
Print out your digital photos and then just make notes right on the photos.
Try using a digital camera for this. Much faster and “a picture is worth a thousand words”. I have done this in the past and it worked great.It might take more time with paper and pencil to write everything down but it would be more accurate. I never thought of taking a picture with a digital camera. I guess a zoom in on crowded areas with lots of chips might work. Thanks for the idea Variable.
How can Africa troops get to London? can’t the Italian fleet kill the transport on the way?
Yes and thats why G3 Sealion a game buster unless you don’t sink one of those UK BB’s on G1. Odds of that are like 15%.
If you study Jims plan it really makes it hard for UK.
@skinny1:
@skinny1:
I am uncertain if I am going to buy AAE40 or not now. I have AAP40 and was looking forward to getting AAE40 for the big combined game but after reading about set up changes I am thinking of not spending the $90 + tax to get it. I was disappointed with AAP40 after the first set up and only played 1 round. AAP40 has not seen a table since the first week it was released. Seriously thinking about selling AAP40 now and just playing AA42 which has no errors in set up and only 2 rule clarifications according to the FAQ.
Dude, it’s not that hard to make a few setup changes. They’re well worth it to play an epic game where China is 18 territories instead of 3, Russia is 30 territories instead of 10, and Africa is 20 territories instead of 10
I understand that but it is the principal of the matter. A set of games that are as pricey as these are should not have these many issues. When all of the issues were brought up with AAP40, Larry and WotC should have made sure that AAE40 had no issues before being released. I don’t know what has happened with the AA franchise but these kinds of things are really disturbing. I was going to pick up AAE40 next Friday when I get paid but after seeing this thread I am really debating on whether to get it or not. I am being more selective in the games that I buy with the price they are now. Too much money to spend to have to make corrections on the set up boxes and any issues that might come up with the new rule book.
wow… like the other guy said DUDE its just some simple setup changes. I guess you can’t make everyone happy.
Can somebody tell me the official setup at this moment. I just got thought my first game of E40 and like too play G40 with the good setup. Don’t want too spend 10+ plus hours on an inevitable axis victory.
The official setup is still the one in the FAQ. I don’t think you’ll have any trouble playing a global game with it, as conditions in the global game are different than in the Pacific game. However, if you want to play with Larry’s latest playtest setup, it can be found at the bottom of this thread. If you try it, come on over to Larry’s site and let us know how it went.
@Fearless:
@skinny1:
@skinny1:
I am uncertain if I am going to buy AAE40 or not now. I have AAP40 and was looking forward to getting AAE40 for the big combined game but after reading about set up changes I am thinking of not spending the $90 + tax to get it. I was disappointed with AAP40 after the first set up and only played 1 round. AAP40 has not seen a table since the first week it was released. Seriously thinking about selling AAP40 now and just playing AA42 which has no errors in set up and only 2 rule clarifications according to the FAQ.
Dude, it’s not that hard to make a few setup changes. They’re well worth it to play an epic game where China is 18 territories instead of 3, Russia is 30 territories instead of 10, and Africa is 20 territories instead of 10
I understand that but it is the principal of the matter. A set of games that are as pricey as these are should not have these many issues. When all of the issues were brought up with AAP40, Larry and WotC should have made sure that AAE40 had no issues before being released. I don’t know what has happened with the AA franchise but these kinds of things are really disturbing. I was going to pick up AAE40 next Friday when I get paid but after seeing this thread I am really debating on whether to get it or not. I am being more selective in the games that I buy with the price they are now. Too much money to spend to have to make corrections on the set up boxes and any issues that might come up with the new rule book.
wow… like the other guy said DUDE its just some simple setup changes. I guess you can’t make everyone happy.
Well $90 is a lot of money to me. I am not rich like some people that might not care about just changing the setup. Like I said before, it is the principal of the matter. I will probably pick up AAE40 to have a complete global game since I am not a big fan of the theater specific games. I just don’t like the idea of having to change the setup on a game that is this new. AAP40 does look good set up and I can’t wait to see AAE40 on my table set up but again for the price changing a set up is not good.
EXACTLY! you pay $180 for these games, it should be FINAL, not BETA!
It’s like buying Madden 11 and having EA tell you, ok, there are no passing plays yet, we’ll get them to you in 6 months…maybe…if enough people cry.
