Anniversary Edition at Gen Con?

@wanguskhan

They may reprint it again, preserving all the errors and the illogicially ordered setup charts.

Comp for WW1 is $350-600 now.

thank you for the answer

@taamvan said in Anniversary 2017 Reprint - rule changes?:

The reprint could have re-organized the setup charts, which are not very rationally laid out and appear to just wander around the area and put the units in a different order in each list. In the better organized versions, the lists are alphabetical, or some snake around the land then the sea–but it would be more rational to have some uniformity to that, rather than just a messy list without any rhyme or reason.

As to the tournament rules, the game is VASTLY different in that setting than OOB. The NOs add a ton of money, the tech adds a lot of randomness. I think the tech favors the allies because they are well-positioned to invest in that starting on turn 1, and would probably make better use of most of the random outcomes than the Axis.

I find both games to be quite imbalanced, towards the Allies. There are no other maps where fighters can fly in one move from US to London, then from London unblockably to Moscow (over the top, 4 moves). There are more layers of buffer territories for moscow–almost as many territories in the “maze” as global. In the 42 scenario, the Germans just punch themselves out really quickly trying to fight in the russian maze. And the 5$ tanks are a big boon for Russia because it can fight Germany on even terms. You might argue that goes both ways, but in most of our 41 and 42 games, Germany has to buy DEFENSIVELY, all game–not just $5 tanks. The Allies have easy choices of what to buy–tanks for russia and fighters for the other two powers, until Russia is absolutely untakable. India without a factory is a lost cause. Both setups are an easy 5-turn KGF, OOB.

In the tourney, its a 6 turn game with less than a 6 bid for either side. The Allies won 1-2 more games than the Axis did, in 2018, under these parameters. I think the only way this is possible is for the Axis to grab Sydney, India, Karelia, and then hold those, plus the original Axis cities. They can lose 1 and still win a tie, I believe.

Not having watched the invitational games in detail, that’s the only conclusion I can draw from the available data.

This is an odd reply to a question about the rules being reprinted…

@Slapshot86:

My only wish for the game would’ve been that he could’ve incorporated the national advantages from the original revised and put them in anniversary. Other than that it’s the best one ever.

We’ve done this as part of our Chicago House Rules:

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=41066.0

There are Tech rules for the Chicago Rules as well as the ‘base’ Chicago Rules.
Both are also in the House rules section

@TheAandAClassicDude:

If so, what kinds of videos?

I’m sort of new here and I don’t know what kind of videos you normally do. I assume that they’re A&A related, but that’s all I know. So, um, what kind of videos would you be willing to do?

-Midnight_Reaper

what are “the strait rules from G40?”

Just bring your laptops over and play AA50 over tripleA.

It’s kind of sad global is not a finished map yet. As long as they can get game balance within a 20 IPC range, it’s a complete map and players can bid for the side at a disadvantage. I feel the game should make axis be at a disadvantage so making bid rules would be much easier.

aa50 is good to go, out of box with or without national objectives. If you play with national objectives, what I like to do is roll 1d6 add 5 and that’s the allies bid. :)