This is probably imposed on Larry and his chums by WOTC; the culture of secrecy precludes a wider testing group due to paranoid fears of copying.
I’m sure eveyone here would be very happy to help test the game before initial release, but that isn’t how it works.
Nevertheless I still find it hard to believe nobody thought the German/Austrian movement to the front would be a problem; I could see this before playing the game at all. Perhaps the test group all being well known to each other means they sometimes overlook flaws obvious to fresh eyes.
awfull rules: as in the real war, all fighting takes place in allied controlled territory (except in middle-east and africa…)
So the Central Powers are punished for being successful; they have to fight much further away from their supply centres than the Allies, a handicap that modern transport had neutralised from the American Civil War onwards.
At least we no longer have the absurdity of being able to build units in captured complexes, but this actually exaggerates the transport problem, so the two issues needed to be addressed together.
Hey Krieg the last thing I am doing is taking any kind of shot at you or Larry. This game has meant a lot to me and the many people I have introduced to. My 4 favorite things (family,sports teams(Jets,Blues,Notre dame),fishing and Axis and Allies). I only wish to open the game like I did with say AA europe the first version and be captivated by the pieces and board and how they work with the great set of rules that Larry and you built. I am not unlike you or Larry in the fact that I want these games to be the best they can be so that I am playing them and passing them on to my son in the years to come. My friends and I wore out the board on the original and played the first expansions a lot. I want these latest versions to be like that. I offered to help playtest in the future with my group not to insult you but to help.(Also thought it would be pretty cool). I plan on using these tournament rules as the permanent rules for the game. Thanks for your efforts to this game and this community.
Krieghund
Are you actually saying there was enough playtesting in 1914?
I’d really like to know your opinion on this.
Unfortunate, since I’m not going to offer it.
Especially after we all indeed, we all “had to go through” the contentious months long
Alpha version 1, Alpha version 2, Alpha version 3; no wait this is the real Alpha set of rules process of redoing the rules for AA 1940.
Really? I seem to remember your personal contribution consisting of little more than complaining and rabble-rousing.
Come on Krieg, don’t defend the indefensible especially not having enough pieces in 1914!
I have never commented on this issue, so don’t put words in my mouth.
Hey Krieg the last thing I am doing is taking any kind of shot at you or Larry. This game has meant a lot to me and the many people I have introduced to. My 4 favorite things (family,sports teams(Jets,Blues,Notre dame),fishing and Axis and Allies). I only wish to open the game like I did with say AA europe the first version and be captivated by the pieces and board and how they work with the great set of rules that Larry and you built. I am not unlike you or Larry in the fact that I want these games to be the best they can be so that I am playing them and passing them on to my son in the years to come. My friends and I wore out the board on the original and played the first expansions a lot. I want these latest versions to be like that. I offered to help playtest in the future with my group not to insult you but to help.(Also thought it would be pretty cool). I plan on using these tournament rules as the permanent rules for the game. Thanks for your efforts to this game and this community.
Thanks for this. I didn’t mean to imply that I was taking offense, but was simply pointing out that this isn’t an “alpha” version of the game, so it shouldn’t be viewed in that light.
Hey Krieg, always keep in mind that people critiquing A&A means that they love A&A. If they didn’t they wouldn’t play it and they wouldn’t care.
I always do. Criticism is always welcome; berating, not so much.
I always do. Criticism is always welcome; berating, not so much.
+1
The following question will not be used as a follow-up critique: I’m just wondering, cause I’m curious by nature, how the game gets play-tested. You guys have a small or big team; do you play a game or two a day; does that cause headaches (literally. if i play 10 hours i have a guaranteed headache; how long is the creation/ play-testing time frame; how fun or tedious is it; what the correction process is; how do you start play testing initially (what map do you use, units, etc.) etc…
Kreig
I complained about the various Alpha’s becz I thought the whole Alpha process was a joke.
You and Larry “fixed” 1940 with a sledgehammer rather than some simple elegant adjustments.
You still did not address the questions I asked about the 1914 playtesting about the number of units and about Africa.
And why not address the question I had about wether or not you believe there was enough playtesting for 1914?
I mean come on and try to be accountable. You like the the “Official Answers” aspect of your association with Axis Allies,
But you don’t want to accept responsibility.
Your answers seem to indicate you have much in common with the IRS and The AG’s office and the State Dept.
Where no one knows nothing, like Sgt Shultz; and no one has any accountability.
Well, maybe I’m alone in liking the Alpha process for 1940… It allowed extensive playtesting by A&A lovers everywhere to come up with a fairly balanced 2nd edition. My only gripe is there’s no ‘upgrade’ or ‘expansion’ pack to buy for those that had the 1st edition instead of buying all new games.
Kreig
I complained about the various Alpha’s becz I thought the whole Alpha process was a joke.
You and Larry “fixed” 1940 with a sledgehammer rather than some simple elegant adjustments.You still did not address the questions I asked about the 1914 playtesting about the number of units and about Africa.
And why not address the question I had about wether or not you believe there was enough playtesting for 1914?
I mean come on and try to be accountable. You like the the “Official Answers” aspect of your association with Axis Allies,
But you don’t want to accept responsibility.Your answers seem to indicate you have much in common with the IRS and The AG’s office and the State Dept.
Where no one knows nothing, like Sgt Shultz; and no one has any accountability.
This is not the complain to Krieg about 1940/1914 playtesting thread, its the potential 1914 Tournament Rules thread… lol…
I don’t see the problem with the multiple Alphas anyway. The way I see it, there are now multiple set ups and rules to play by, even if some may be considered “unbalanced.” I found it pretty fun to run into a new set up and rules to play with my group.
Anyway, I should have a game at the end of this month. I’ll post a report on HGD afterward.
I’m pretty excited about the collapse rules, but I think the check for collapse phase going first in a player’s turn is harsh. I think it should happen at the end of their turn, so they at least have a chance to prevent it from happening… But, oh well. I guess I’ll have to see how my group can try to avoid collapse, even with it being the first phase of a player’s turn.
This is not the complain to Krieg about 1940/1914 playtesting thread, its the potential 1914 Tournament Rules thread… lol…
Good point. This thread has strayed far off topic.
Atease, if you’d like to post your question in a new thread, I’ll answer as best I can without violating confidentiality agreements.
“I’m pretty excited about the collapse rules, but I think the check for collapse phase going first in a player’s turn is harsh. I think it should happen at the end of their turn, so they at least have a chance to prevent it from happening… But, oh well. I guess I’ll have to see how my group can try to avoid collapse, even with it being the first phase of a player’s turn.”
Hmm. That might end up being a problem, especially for smaller nations like Italy or the Ottomans. I wonder if it’s possible, with a deliberate strategy and coordinated ganging up, to cause a collapse of one of these powers before they even get their first turn? It might require extreme sacrifices on other fronts, but it might be worth it to eliminate a power completely (or at least cripple their economy).
This is why I originally suggested calculating collapses should involve the number of casualties suffered - it should be about war weariness as much as economic capacity.
I wonder if it’s possible, with a deliberate strategy and coordinated ganging up, to cause a collapse of one of these powers before they even get their first turn?
Italy is pretty safe turn 1.
Ottomen… well… Lets see:
Guaranteed to be atleast contested-
Russia can invade Mesopotamia - 3IPCs
Britain can invade TransJordan via Egypt - 1 IPC
The other 3 territories that can be invaded by sea have 6 Infantry and 1-2 artillery.
Also, to cause at least an economical collapse, the one French transport and/or British transport in the med will have to invade Ankara and/or Constantinople. With only two units each, there is no way they’ll survive the mines, artillery preemptive strikes and then the usual battle. So they’re pretty safe.
But Turkey’s long coastline would make it vulnerable on future turns.
It doesn’t seem right that concerted Allied landings could force the collapse before Turkey has its own turn to put things right, although remember that it would get a chance to prevent political collapse during its own movement & combat.
But Turkey’s long coastline would make it vulnerable on future turns.
It doesn’t seem right that concerted Allied landings could force the collapse before Turkey has its own turn to put things right, although remember that it would get a chance to prevent political collapse during its own movement & combat.
quoted from Larry’s site:
_Checking for economic collapse is done at the beginning of each power’s turn, and checking for political collapse is done at the end of each power’s turn. A collapse occurs when the total IPC value of a power’s homeland territories that are either captured or being contested by one or more enemy powers equals or exceeds its collapse threshold (see chart below). The effects of a collapse are resolved immediately. An economic collapse can be recovered from and its effects reversed, but the effects of a political collapse are permanent. A political collapse can occur without being preceded by an economic collapse.
Economic/Political Collapse Thresholds
Austria-Hungary 13/16
Russian Empire 13/15
Germany 16/18
France 8/10
British Empire 5/7
Ottoman Empire 7/9
Italy 7/9
If a power suffers an economic collapse, it is unable to purchase/mobilize units or collect income until it recovers. It does, however, retain any IPCs it may have in its treasury.
If at the end of a power�s turn it has arrived at or passed the political collapse threshold listed on the threshold chart it is considered to have suffered a political collapse. It is required to immediately surrender and leave the game at that time. It no longer has a turn, and all of its land, air, and sea units are removed from the board. Control of any territories that it was contesting is established, if necessary, using the rules for moving all units on one side out of a contested territory (see �Land Units�, page 15 of the rulebook). It also loses control of any territories that it controls, including its homeland territories. If units belonging to other powers on the same side are in these territories, control will likewise be established using the rules for moving all units on one side out of a contested territory; otherwise these territories will be uncontrolled (place any national control marker on it face down to denote this status) until another power moves into them. If a territory originally controlled by the surrendered power is captured by one if its former allies, the capturing power takes control of it. The surrendered power’s IPC treasury will be claimed by the first enemy power to gain control of its capital._
Just to get everyone on the same page, Larry has changed it so you have a chance to pull yourself out of political collapse (PC). You now check for PC at the end of your turn (see above). This should play out much better IMO.
So if I have this correct, when your turn starts if you are under econ collapse (EC) you can’t buy any units (must save all your income). You use the units you have on the board to attempt to regain “homeland” territory to pull yourself out of EC, so you don’t slip further into political collapse (PC). If successful, and you recover from EC (during your turn) this will allow you to collect income at the end of that same turn (you’ll now have 2 turns worth of income), but you very well might not be able to buy units on your next turn either if you again are put into EC.
This sounds kinda fishy to me for a couple reasons.
If you or your allies are able to bring you back from a 2 turn EC, you would have quite a bit of income and come back pretty strong (doesn’t sound like an EC to me).
Buy forcing you to save income over what could be a couple turns, if you end up in a PC, your IPC bank could be pretty large. If it is inevitable you will go into PC, this could actually help your side and be gamed if they are in position to take control of your capital when you fall. I’m not saying you build a strat for it, but I’m thinking France goes into PC on their turn, and because the Brits are helping to defend Paris (no CP units in Paris), the Brits get the loot on their turn (keep in mind they go back to back).
Would it play out better if when your turn starts, and you are in EC, you have to surrender 1/2 your income to the bank (round up or down TBD), but are allowed to spend the other 1/2 on units? Just because your economy is tanking, it shouldn’t stop you from fielding any uits should it, just how many units. Then if you do fall, most (or all) of your treasury would be gone and your allies or enemies wouldn’t inherit as much (if any).
Just my 2 cents WB
I don’t think you collect any income while under economic collapse
You just don’t lose what IPCs were in your hand when the collapse happens
@Uncrustable:
I don’t think you collect any income while under economic collapse
You just don’t lose what IPCs were in your hand when the collapse happens
Yeah, I just heard from Krieghund over at Larry’s site. In a nut shell he said the effects of the econ collapse last through your entire turn, and the recovery would take place upon your next turn if indeed you (or your allies) regained and held enough homeland territory to pull you out (this is explained better in the example that Larry gave on the first page (following the rule I took the quoted from).
I do think that it might be cool for you to be able pull yourself out of an economic crises though during your turn (like you can do to avoid a political collapse now), and this could be done with a couple of tweaks to the rule (see below). I’m not sure that an economic crises should completely shut down your new recruits, and equipment either (should restrict your builds though).
When your turn starts, and you are in econ collapse:
This would give you a chance to reinforce your homeland territories some (much less then OOB), and could reduce the income that your side has overall. It could also reduce the loot passed on the other powers (friend or foe) if you go into political collapse. Of coarse I guess it could also increase the the size of your bank as well if you are allowed recover, and collect income in the same turn (even if you forfeited 1/2 when your turn started).
