New Release Date - November 18?

Some more thoughts:

@cousin_joe:

2. Cheaper ICs (15–>12IPC)
-would encourage UK ICs in Aus/India again more likely to give global playout (and less likely for UK KGF)

---

Incorrect. That will prevent IC at India is not price. It’s not only UK’s crappy initial forces at India and playing after Japan, those two would be enough bad. That kills any indian IC is China’s sparring status. A no brainer move for Japan 1 is destroy all chinese forces. All. They can even take Philippines and still kill all chineses. I means 1 built chinese round 1, zero built chineses round 2. Without chineses, Japan can focus on India. With India conquered (round 4 as much), USA’s Pacific fleet cannot beat a 55-60 ipcs japanese navy, and with USA’s fleet beaten (or going to Atlantic), USA can be invaded. The idea is that BGG must be a false setup or will soon be modded, it’s too good for Japan

---

3. Interceptors as either standard or Tech
-Let defending FTRs in SBR territories get a single 1@1 shot each to shoot down Rockets or SBR BMBRs
-if Germany gets multiple ICs at game start (which they should), I’d say make it standard, otherwise make it at least a Tech to give Germany some chance of countering a cheap SBR+/-HB strategy

---

Interceptors are good

---

4. Make Techs Directed
-Random Techs are for kids.  There should  be no place for Random Techs in a game of Grand Strategy.  Make players outsmart their opponents, not outluck them.

---

In fact, this is a good system, you don’t spent ipcs for nothing, and the techs are not uber powerful. Improved industry and radar counter HB. And allied strat bomb campaigns are prevented by Godzilla Japan’s assault on America. A grand strategy player must take luck in count

---

5. Give SUBs some added survivability
-they are still too weak.  Presence of a single DD basically makes them autokilled.  Either let them at least dive after 1 round of combat regardless of DD presence, or make DD’s have to roll a profiency roll to detect them in the first place
-added SUB survivability will go a long way to encourageing a naval campaign.  Right now, they’re still pretty useless… even at 6IPC.

---

I fear more dds. At 8 ipcs, a 2/2 that defend against airfleet is a no brainer. Maybe a too good unit

---

I think just these 5 simple changes will make this game more like the Global Playout Grand Strategy game it should be, rather than the old KGF and JTDTM we have seen too many times before  :-(

I’d say change the BGG setup (has serious flaws at Pacific), make tech not optional, introduce interceptors and make China a non-sparring country

I agree, i mean i understand all the kkgf and the ideas from all of the people here. But i must say that im not a newb and when i play agasint my game group who dont have the game, i kill them 75% of the time. But when they beat me, this is so good lol. I just try to give them some minor advantage. I put my self in a minor country or in revised i give them national advantages and this works.

So the point of this is……i wont clap for WOTC cause…I WANT MY GAME for the 23 OCTOBER. Thats all, AA50 will be a masterpiece and i know it. I dont listen to people who are negatif about it. Im just so angry that the date change and we dont know WHY. Just tell me why and give me a good damn reason about it. I just sold my opld revised game in prediction of having AA50 in about 2 weeks so…ARRGGG :x :mrgreen:

@Constantinople:

It will certainly be fun and that’s the bottom line isn’t it?

You are so right.

What about if Hawaii is worth 10 ipc, and Australia also 10 ipc? Then perhaps we see some US navy in the pacific, and Japan maybe think twice before chosing the JTDTM?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! They better be addign some real good stuff or i go bam bam! you dead

I have on very good authority, that the delay was to include a new naval unit.

@cousin_joe:

@Imperious:

why?  Perhaps they will include something more? or a surprise?

I wish this was the case.
You know… If I was Avalon Hill, and had the wherewithall to release another version of A&A so soon after Revised (2004), I would want to make sure it was not just a simple upgrade, but rather something that just totally blew the socks off of anything before it!!!

So far, I’m not getting that.  Meh, you got Italy and China as playable in the game.  Meh, you got a new Cruiser unit.  Meh, you’ve thrown in some National Objectives.  You know, a lot of these are nice, but where is the Grand Strategy?!?  Where is the World at War?!? Where is the game of Global Warfare?!?

This is how I see the game playing out…

Subs are still too vulnerable and do no convoy damage, so Germany will forego navy and just attack Russia
Russia as always, will fight Germany
Japan will seek to expand and India is the most ideal target
UK will see India as undefendable (ICs are so expensive), and will build up in SZ 6 to hem any German sea units in and trade Norway and NW Europe
Now that KGF is on, Italy will try and do it’s best to expand in Africa while helping vs. Russia
US, to support KGF most quickly, will ignore Japan, and buy BMBRs and bomb Germany and Italy into the stone age (-20 and -12 IPC/ROUND).  Tranports and troops will eventually follow
on following rounds, Japan seeing they are ignored will seek to expand quickly while rushing to put some back pressure on Moscow

Basically, the game is KGF with JTDTM playout all over again and nothing is fixed.   We’re back to the playout we had in Revised and Classic.  This game as is still has some serious flaws, and I honestly hope that the delayed release is an effort to fix things.  The board and the molds are fine, but they should certainly be able to make some last minute changes to the manual to save this game and give us the proper global playout and increased strategy we deserve.

Last minute changes I would love to see…

1. Some Convoy Raid Rules - ideally, the more subs, the more damage, but even something as simple as this would be nice…

National Objectives:
Germany: At least 2 SUBs in North Atlantic (SZs 1,2,3,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) = 5IPC
Germany: At least 4 SUBs in North Atlantic (SZs 1,2,3,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) = 10IPC

Japan: At least 2 SUBs off US W coast (SZs 44,53,54,55,56,57,65) = 5IPC
Japan: At least 4 SUBs off US W coast (SZs 44,53,54,55,56,57,65) = 10IPC

USA: At least 2 SUBS off Japan coast (SZs 58,59,60,61,62,63) = 5IPC
USA: At least 4 SUBs off Japan coast (SZs 58,59,60,61,62,63) = 10IPC

This would at least encourage the possibility of a German naval campaign as well as Japanese and American Pacific campaigns

2. Cheaper ICs (15–>12IPC)
-would encourage UK ICs in Aus/India again more likely to give global playout (and less likely for UK KGF)

3. Interceptors as either standard or Tech
-Let defending FTRs in SBR territories get a single 1@1 shot each to shoot down Rockets or SBR BMBRs
-if Germany gets multiple ICs at game start (which they should), I’d say make it standard, otherwise make it at least a Tech to give Germany some chance of countering a cheap SBR+/-HB strategy

4. Make Techs Directed
-Random Techs are for kids.  There should  be no place for Random Techs in a game of Grand Strategy.  Make players outsmart their opponents, not outluck them.

5. Give SUBs some added survivability
-they are still too weak.  Presence of a single DD basically makes them autokilled.  Either let them at least dive after 1 round of combat regardless of DD presence, or make DD’s have to roll a profiency roll to detect them in the first place
-added SUB survivability will go a long way to encourageing a naval campaign.  Right now, they’re still pretty useless… even at 6IPC.

I think just these 5 simple changes will make this game more like the Global Playout Grand Strategy game it should be, rather than the old KGF and JTDTM we have seen too many times before  :-(

Good post.

@cousin_joe:

@Funcioneta:

I disagree with cousinjoe. With BGG setup, a KGF is not possible if Japan don’t want.

Funcioneta,

Have you ever played games by e-mail?  With all due respect, give me Allies and I will absolutely DESTROY you with a KGF!

I played tons of games by e-mail  :-) I think my score in league this year is 9-4, 10 with allies (all of them KJF, score 8 wins, 2 loses if I’m not wrong). In fact, I’m worst at face to face, there is less time to think.

In Revised, I’ll simply don’t let you make a KGF. I have discovered a counter for KGF in Revised a couple of weeks ago. It’s new, and I have to polish still, so probably you would have a 50/50 chance.

In Anniversary, with BGG setup, with this counter, I think there is about no chance for allies if they try KGF. I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California

@cousin_joe:

True, we have not seen the actual setup, but it would need to be extremely favourable for the Allies to keep them in Asia and the Pacific, minimum 1 IC and a strong US Navy (all info so far would indicate this is not the case).  With that said, I am fine playing with the BGG setup.  I’d prefer no tech (which actually helps Axis) as the tech system as it stands right now is for kids, and not serious gamers.

So how about it Funcioneta…
Sure, you can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?  :-D

Wait a second…  are you saying that you want a game with BGG “setup”? I have few time for more games and it would be a slow pace game, but it will be interesting. Me playing Axis and you Allies is that you want? No techs, you don’t want them and they are not mandatory (I cannot force you, but I think we are losing a interesting feature). No bids (testing game). AABattlemap and forum dices.

To Funcioneta- No offense, but I don’t think your gaming experiences are representative of the norm. Japan rarely has any control over which strategy the Allies adopt, and certainly nothing that can halt a concerted KGF strat. If you’re seeing more KJF games than KGF, I suspect that you’re just not playing against very skilled opponents. Either that, or they’re just so bored of ‘business as usual’, that they are intentionally adopting the weaker strat just for the change of pace.

To Constantinople- Everyone here understands and appreciates that the game is a lot of fun to play with newbies, and people who have not yet learned how to break the set up. That’s not a problem as far as I’m concerned, because the game will always be essentially the same/entertaining for the uninitiated. The problem is with those of us who have played this game to death, worked through all the major strategies, and understand how the underlying mechanics work. Among that crowd, once you’ve been shown how to exploit the set up, you will understand why KGF turns the game on its head. The reason why we get frustrated is because the same basic problems have been with this game since Classic: and, everytime a new version comes out, we make the same sort of recommendations, only to be ignored again. There are core issues with the Classic and Revised games that are not being addressed in AA50. At least not according to the information we have right now. Its a bummer for people who have remained loyal fans of the game for all these years, because the issues have been discussed at length by different people from different groups, and given enough time they all end up arriving at the same conclusion: basically that the game does not do enough to encourage a fight in the Pacific.

As a casual player, you might not have seen before just how busted the Revised game can be using the Out of Box rules, but, once you’ve seen the optimal openings, its hard forget them. It might not be an issue in your players group,  but for many of us, this horse has been beat to death a hundred times over already. Something major needs to be done (either with the unit set up, or the IPC distribution, or the rules for Victory/Capitals) and its not clear at this point whether the AA50 game is going to deliver. Joe’s views are fairly typical for those of us who went through this process when Revised was first released. If we seem skeptical now its just because many of the issues we raised then still have not been taken care of.

@Black_Elk:

To Funcioneta- No offense, but I don’t think your gaming experiences are representative of the norm. Japan rarely has any control over which strategy the Allies adopt, and certainly nothing that can halt a concerted KGF strat. If you’re seeing more KJF games than KGF, I suspect that you’re just not playing against very skilled opponents. Either that, or they’re just so bored of ‘business as usual’, that they are intentionally adopting the weaker strat just for the change of pace.

I think you should re-read his posts and try again.

@Funcioneta:

@cousin_joe:

@Funcioneta:

I disagree with cousinjoe. With BGG setup, a KGF is not possible if Japan don’t want.

Funcioneta,

Have you ever played games by e-mail?  With all due respect, give me Allies and I will absolutely DESTROY you with a KGF!

I played tons of games by e-mail  :-) I think my score in league this year is 9-4, 10 with allies (all of them KJF, score 8 wins, 2 loses if I’m not wrong). In fact, I’m worst at face to face, there is less time to think.

In Revised, I’ll simply don’t let you make a KGF. I have discovered a counter for KGF in Revised a couple of weeks ago. It’s new, and I have to polish still, so probably you would have a 50/50 chance.

In Anniversary, with BGG setup, with this counter, I think there is about no chance for allies if they try KGF. I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California

So what’s this strategy?  If you don’t want it public before playing CJ, can you just PM it to me?  I’m curious.

I think you should re-read his posts and try again.

:|
I read it the first time man.
I don’t usually spend 15 minutes typing a response to a post without first considering what it says.

I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California

You are playing a rather different game than the rest of us, if you think that the only chance the Allies have of winning the game is to build a fleet at California. Sorry, it just makes it hard for me to follow the rest of what you’re saying when I hear suggestions like that.

I think my score in league this year is 9-4, 10 with allies (all of them KJF, score 8 wins, 2 loses if I’m not wrong). In fact, I’m worst at face to face, there is less time to think.

In Revised, I’ll simply don’t let you make a KGF. I have discovered a counter for KGF in Revised a couple of weeks ago.

The point I tried to make is that it is always up to the Allies to determine which kind of game is played (KGF/KJF). There is simply nothing you can do to change this as the Axis player. I find it hard to believe that Funcioneta, or anyone else for that matter, has hit upon on a Japanese strategy in the last two weeks, that has somehow eluded the rest of us for the past 4 years now.

So what’s this strategy?  If you don’t want it public before playing CJ, can you just PM it to me?  I’m curious

The strategy Joe refers to is common knowledge. We all call it the “KGF” game for general reference, because there are a number of different variations on the same basic concept. All of them involve ignoring Japan (within reason), and concentrating all attention on Moscow/Berlin. Its the easiest way to win as the Allies, and impossible to counter as the Axis without either considerable luck in the first round, or a pre-placement bid. That’s why almost everyone gives the Axis player at least 8 ipcs to make things fair.

Well, most of your post was talking about how he must not be playing good players because he’s playing vs. KJFs, which has nothing to do with anything he ever said at all.  He said that he, as Allies, plays KJFs and wins, that’s it.  Also, he never said Japan controls the Allies’ strategy, or that the KGF counter is even mainly dependent on Japan, or that the KGF counter forces the Allies to go KJF.

As for your point in this post about him suddenly discovering a KGF-counter, yeah, I am both curious about what he might have found and aware that the chances of him making some miraculous discovery like that aren’t great.  /shrug

And yes, I know I come off blunt and sarcastic, don’t take it personally.

AA50 will be a masterpiece and i know it. I dont listen to people who are negatif about it.

I agree with this. Its a new evolution The new prices and rules will work. leave out the technology until you play it a bunch of times.

The new ideas are more historical and have finally foreseen and removed some of the glitches that made you scratch your head.

Only thing is they missed the battle of atlantic dynamic, subs should take off UK’s income or return convoy boxes. I already made them anyway.

The other huge thing is the map is finally a correct size and the noob team can play Italy. I which they had some fog of war so they can eliminate the bean counter types who have to calculate everything. I was hoping marshaling cards would be used as fog of war tokens to hide your forces.

@Black_Elk:

The strategy Joe refers to is common knowledge. We all call it the “KGF” game for general reference, because there are a number of different variations on the same basic concept. All of them involve ignoring Japan (within reason), and concentrating all attention on Moscow/Berlin. Its the easiest way to win as the Allies, and impossible to counter as the Axis without either considerable luck in the first round, or a pre-placement bid. That’s why almost everyone gives the Axis player at least 8 ipcs to make things fair.

You misunderstood my post, I was asking that guy what his “counter” to KGF is, not what KGF is  :-P

@Black_Elk:

I think there is not much chance for allies even playing a traditional axis strat against KGF. Japan is simply too powerful in a KGF strat, playing Japan traditional or innovative. I think the only slim chance allies have of win is building fleet at California

You are playing a rather different game than the rest of us, if you think that the only chance the Allies have of winning the game is to build a fleet at California. Sorry, it just makes it hard for me to follow the rest of what you’re saying when I hear suggestions like that.

You and your edits.  :P

You know he’s talking about AA50 here, right?  Not saying he’s right or wrong, just trying to clarify.

I wonder if the release date was extended because something we posted here may have been overlooked by play testing requiring a change in the setup?  I know they have wiseguys looking around here for how people are receiving the game and possibly somebody has made some comment that has opened discussion on some flaw in the opening moves based on the set up. This site does have the best minds working and thinking on AA50 as well as the other games. I think its probable, considering they already said the game was completed months ago and larry had a copy. They don’t make final games and then say we need more time, unless something needed a change.

The only other possibility is WOTC is a bunch of idiots who forgot to do something like add the rules or map to the game before shipping.

Its all gravy  :-D

You know he’s talking about AA50 here, right?  Not saying he’s right or wrong, just trying to clarify.

Perhaps I latched onto something that wasn’t really there. But I agree with most of what Joe said, so I wanted to lend some extra weight to his arguments. It seemed to me that Funcioneta was bringing Japan into the discussion, as some sort of counter point to the things Joe said, which I don’t understand at all. I know he started out talking about AA50, but the conversation appeared to drift back to the big dilema, which we’ve been dealing with since Revised/Classic. We don’t even know for sure what AA50 is going to look like yet, so I’m not sure whether we can trust anything having to do with strategy at this point. Japan has no relevance to the KGF game in Revised though, that’s the whole point, and the reason for all our frustrations.

I don’t believe that there is an effective counter to the KGF opening in Revised, and I’ll be surprised if we hear anything new on the subject at this late stage. By all means though, do enlighten us. What is this counter to the KGF game that you haven’t finished polishing yet?
:-)

If we’re talking about AA50, then that’s a different story. Are we even sure that abattlemap is 100%? I noticed that Larry has not yet responded to Blue’s post about the 41 set up. Maybe its true what Funcioneta suggested elsewhere, that the current speculations based on the Gen Con photos are not accurate.

ps. I’m no stranger to internet sarcasm myself, and I sometimes come off the same way. I almost never take it personally though, especially when its a game we’re talking about. Hence the excessive use of smilies
:-D

pps.

You and your edits.  :-P

I’m constantly editing. Haven’t you noticed that yet?
I usually post first and then edit for grammar/clarity. I try to not to make any substantive changes after someone responds, but I think I was still editing while you were posting. Bad habit, but its the way I operate.
Sorry for the confusion

You misunderstood my post, I was asking that guy what his “counter” to KGF is, not what KGF is  :-P

My bad. When you said “before playing CJ”, I read the emphasis incorrectly. I thought you were speaking to him rather than Funcioneta. Seems 03321’s criticism about careful reading tonight is more on point than I wanted to admit. I should have payed more attention to who was asking the question. :wink:

I wonder if the release date was extended because something we posted here may have been overlooked by play testing requiring a change in the setup?

That would be really encouraging actually. I would happily accept a delay on the release, if they’re really using this as an opportunity to fix something that is busted with the rules/setup.