Axis & Allies and Zombies is REAL

I don’t think you will be able to remove the “Zombies” from this upcoming game. The slobs that will make this monster will make it the focus in the game, not an afterthought. Its what they are.

D$D players making an Axis and Allies game.

Agreed, you probably won’t be able to remove the zombies/cards.

However, you might get a nice map which would replace the revised map. You might then be able to create a faster playing A&A game.
This would then replace 1941 as the intro game for new players.

The cards might be transferable, but that is a wait and see.

Extra pieces might be used elsewhere if colour and sculpt  permit.

Chips and dice, meh, unless the chips are a different colour.

I am looking forward to a press release to see what they have in mind for this game.

I am looking forward to scattering chainsaw tanks on your hardwood floors while you are wearing socks and getting your coffee in the morning

At least they haven’t let this line die. Get it, die…
:-D
Crickets…

All in all, purists will hate it. It is what it is. But, it could be fun.
As Grandma always said, try what’s on your plate. You might like it.

That’s what most folks are scared of. They might actually have to admit that the game is fun and entertaining. Correct me if I’m wrong, games are supposed to be both of those things and more.

My 2 cents.

Purists may indeed hate it, but they might also buy it for the various bits.

1941 falls into that category I do believe.

I’m in the “let’s wait for a more detailed announcement before denouncing it” crowd, but I’ve already said that like 5 times in this thread.

We’ll see how it goes. Novemeber’s a ways off yet.

I think they plan a press release in April with more details about the game.

@Dajokr:

This is one of the stupidest things I have ever seen or heard. Disrespectful to the memory of those who fought and mentally lazy game design.

First A&A game I won�t own.

As a long time AA fan, 110% agree.

@Krieghund:

@djensen:

The upside is that a younger generation might see this game and become interested in the regular Axis & Allies game as well as WWII history.

Precisely.  This is the reason that Larry created A&A in the first place.

This may be controversial, but anything that gets new players interested is a good thing.

Company line…c’mon guys, please give me a break.

These muppets at WOTC basically don’t know how to make a proper History based wargame using the AA system. What they know is bullcrap and the ability to interject fantasy into reality. The result is AAZ, which is in their wheelhouse and since they are attempting to revive the Avalon Hill brand and keep AA people somewhat in the loop, this is the result. Normally, we would get something like Barbarossa AA or Civil War AA or even an enlarged 1914 game with all sorts of new units and sculpting into national specific sculpts. That is NOT in their wheelhouse. I suspect after this debacle, they may reemploy Larry to make a proper game.

They lost DnD to Paizo  by being inflexible and refusing to serve their market

They lost Magic to “Pay to Win” -ism and trying to re-print an overly simplistic and inflated game system for 30 years without modding it

They lost Gencon to legal squabbling, overexpansionism, and being territorial about an all-industry convention

They took all their national tourneys and made them stand alone outside the national circuit

Fantasy Flight has basically demonstrated that if you design good games and serve your customers then the licenses and the fan base will come

They had so much money and bought every classic property but they fell victim to GE like conglomeration…games are not that suited to a monolithic TSR like management structure and there are endless examples (from TSR) about why you don’t build a game company that way.

Yea Tragic:The Disbursement was a sucky game.

this is dumb

I don’t think that many young ppl who have never played a grand strategy game will spend alot of time playing a very dumbed down version of a&a, then all the sudden be playing 1940. Especially for zombies. Its a sad excuse and a waste of time to be making a A&A zombie game. Chainsaw tanks? Maybe.  Again so many things could have been done. But its all wasted by developer, who are good at fantasy games, be making war games. Create your own brand, don’t befoul a classic one.

I think it’s an insult to A&A enthusiasts, a disgrace to WW2 veterans, and a shameless way to treat a classic franchise title within their own industry.

No truer words have ever been spoken.

there is a reason the company is referred to as “Has-borg”.

It consumes smaller companies and assimilates their products.

Every large company (and there aren’t that many independents)  is profit driven today. The customer’s wishes are secondary.

This product will succeed/fail as a result of a younger generations interest.
WWII is another generation removed from being well known/remembered.
Just as WWI, the Boar War, the American Civil War before have now been remembered by history enthusiasts and wargamers.

Well if you’re upset about the Direction this franchise is taking,  what would your reaction have been if they instead released “Axis & Allies: Napoleon”?

If this would have interested you more than Zombies,  it already happened in everything but name alone… search for “Worthington Games War and Peace”… Reviews can be found on Board Gamer Geeks website, YouTube, Amazon and I even think it was mentioned in the other games forum on this site… I’ve had it for a number of years and it really is Axis and Allies Napoleon… right down to the battle board and needing to roll some 1’s.

I wish they had expanded the map more though.
Caribbean and the far east were points of conflict, not to menton Egypt and the middle east and Ottoman empire.
Tilst edition Napoleon Risk has a better map.

@robert:

I wish they had expanded the map more though.
Caribbean and the far east were points of conflict, not to menton Egypt and the middle east and Ottoman empire.
Tilst edition Napoleon Risk has a better map.

The Napoleonic Wars of Emperor Napoleon and the French Empire from 1805 to 1815 did NOT include those areas as points of conflict… they were limited to continental Europe from Spain to Russia which is covered in the game.

The Ottoman Empire wasn’t involved directly in the Napoleonic wars, and the Egypt campaign while Napoleon was there, was during the Republic of France,  before Napoleon was ever Emperor… I find no fault with the map of the game, it’s about the Napoleonic wars between 1805 and 1815 and the map covers all of those campaigns using the Axis &Allies system.