Why continue to play classic?

@Scarface:

Erica,Erica,Erica….Do you actually believe that the AXIS have a prayer of winning with no compensation against topnotch competition?? I will take the allies against you & your club and spot you 20 ipc (low bid) and leave your retarded geniuses mumbling to themselves. Let’s do it!!! :-D

You tell her MADDOG!  Er….

Who is Maddogg? :-D

To Scarface, my new whipping boy!

Yes, yes.  You make me laugh!  You are the top competition!!!

And you will give 20ipc and take the allies. you remember in classic there is that tiny little thing….economic victory?

Those dumb bunnies at Mensa, they are really quite a bunch, you know, they all want to play.  They do actually put a little cash on the table though!!

Say 50USD for each of your ipc?  WTA.

Ha, Ha.  I can’t wait.

Erica,Erica…I am not playing for money here because I have no way to collect from the dodo mensa squad. I do however back up what I say! I like to use the dice server at aamcbunker.net/main/login.html    My e-mail is scarface.tmontana@yahoo.com  All I need is for you to pm me your email address & let me know where you want your bid to be placed and I will start a thread on the “games forum” and make my russian turn! Then you and your club of intellectual goofballs can get together & decide what to do with ger!!
HAHA, I can’t wait…Do you only talk…or can you produce??

@ericajordan:

Ha, Ha. I can’t wait.

Weird, she can’t wait to pay money to Scarface.

Well, I like freaky girls . . .

If Erica wants to show how good she is, I will take her on as well… So without a bid you play the Axis :D Bring it on!!!

Hmmmm, Erica double teaming Bashir and Scarface….you better believe I’ll be keeping my eye on this game thread  :wink:

So where is Erica & her band of mensa monkeys? I’m ready for some action!!

I hope this erica is actually Eric A. Jordan so you people stop slobering over yourselves. its soo obvious!

@Imperious:

I hope this erica is actually Eric A. Jordan so you people stop slobering over yourselves. its soo obvious!

i agree.
This sad slobbering is pretty ridiculous.

@Imperious:

I hope this erica is actually Eric A. Jordan so you people stop slobering over yourselves. its soo obvious!

Haha that would be funny

ok,ok Eric, bring it on!! And your monkeys too!! Any sad slobbering there? 8-)

I would strongly disagree, with reasons posted in many threads over the past 18 months.

:roll:
  AA 2nd Edition, ie; Classic is like going back to your folks home for a vacation. Some stress yes, but not as bad as a bad week at work.
Actually, I’m quite used to AA revised now, and don’t seek to play Classic anymore, but will if that is all someone wants to play.
And yes, my folks moved away and didn’t tell me where they went  :cry:.
  Cazy Ivan  :-o

I continue to play classic as it is used in a summer historical gaming program that I teach in.  The 6th through 10th graders pick up the rules pretty quickly, and generally we can play enough in the time alloted to determine a probable winner.  We have just purchased the 2004 edition, and after my initial review of the game, we might work some aspects, mainly the destroyer into the Classic game rules.

I am not a fan of the new board, as it looks depressing, and the though of staring at it for several hours over a 5 day period is even more depressing.  The use of victory cities makes the game much more complicated for a beginning gamer, while the classic game of focusing on the capital simplifies the game greatly and clarifies what each players objectives are.  I am not a fan of the National Advantages either, especially as some of them are incorrect historically, and it one case, totally wrong.

All of the weapons development focuses on increasing attack capabilities, nothing increases the defense capabilitiesl.  By the end of the war, with the development of the Hedgehog and Squid antisubmarine projectiles, and use of larger depth charge patterns, the Allies were killing over half of the subs attacked, and aircraft were using sonobuoys, homing torpedoes, and Magnetic Anamoly Detection gear to locate and attack submerged subs.

There is no consideration of the proximity fuze used by the US and UK from 1943 on, which drastically increased the effectiveness of anti-aircraft fire, to the degree that between intercepting fighters and anti-aircraft fire, the Japanese were taking losses of 90% of their aircraft in conventional attacks.  Also, the British and the US shared all information relating to radar with each other during the war, so if the British get to use radar for their antiaircraft, so should the US.  Also, radar allowed for far better positioning of intercepting fighters, so in theory, your fighters should be able to defend at 5 with radar, rather than 4.

Japanese tanks were not exactly potent, to say the least, yet Japanese tanks have the same attack as the Sherman, T34, or Panther.  The Allies loved to see a Banzai charge, as the normal casualty exchange ratio started at 10 to 1 and at times hit 700 to 0 (Merrill’s Marauders in Burma).

The Germans did attempt to use the Stuka in the Battle of Britain as a strategic bomber.  After one week, it was withdrawn because of heavy losses.  When they tried again with fighters later, the British had a field day shooting them down, and German fighters never had the range to really attack anything significant in Britain.

Overall, I do not regard the Revised Edition of the game as an improvement over the Classic edition.  We will likely incorporate the destroyer into the classic rules, most likely using the destroyer rules from Axis and Allies Pacific.  The units will also prove useful in expanding the Axis and Allies Europe game to five players, and for my expansion of the Pacific game, as we will now be able to distinguish between Indian and Australian units, or use the odd color of the UK units for the Dutch.