Two game changes

Page 11 of the Rulebook: “You must collect income if you can, but all other parts of the turn sequence are voluntary.”

Bonus income from NOs is income, so it must also be collected.

I think they should still cost 5. The Wizards.com FAQ for revised (2004 edition) says AA guns can target fighters or bombers separately. So the AA guns are no stronger in AA50. They are actually weaker because they no longer fire on planes passing over-head like they did in revised.

Try the tripleA thread.

@supremacy:

My friend was Axis and myself the Allies.  I had just taken Germany with Uk and USA while he was trying to invade russia.  oh  I should mention he was playing the game and watching TV at the same time.  he started building up japan with transports armed with tanks  infantry and artillery,  6 loaded transports sitting in
on the coast line of japan.  so i put a battleship in 55.  on his next turn he moved all 6 loaded transports to zone 57 with out any navel escorts.  of course on my turn i moved the battleship into zone 57 with his transports  baaaam  all gone  he looked up at me and said  ( where the heck did that come from ?  how the heck can Axis win when the allies have cloaking and stealth abbilites ?  LOL  ) 
I think he will NOT be watching TV while playing next time,    what do you think  ?  ?  ?  LOL

Lol

@Lema099:

And his scale may(?) be more based on movement/production rates rather than speed of play.

This makes common sense. I discussed this issue with Larry, and will edit in a link later. But the importent here is the production rate. The ship movement dont fit into this, because it took 12 days to cross the Atlantic, not 3 months.

When it comes to speed of play, as you put it, that is very a difficult issue. In the 1939 startline we had no guarantee that WW II would go on for 5 years. If UK, France, USA and Russia had attacked Germany in 1939, then the war would have lasted 1 year, because of an alternate decision. If Hitler had not done all his mistakes, the war might have lasted for 10 years. Just look at the Vietnam war, that lastet for 20 years, in one tiny territory. And the Iraq war 1990 lastet 100 days. The speed of production are fixed, the speed of movement and play are not.

Cool program!  I’ll try it out the next time I’m with friends.

@templeton:

… but there were nearly 100 players. (http://www.jimwallman.org.uk/tlw/index.htm) That way you simulate the reality of missinterpreted orders, bad briefings…

This looked like an amazing simulation. I can’t imagine having conflicting political and military objectives along with poor communication. What wonderful chaos that must have created. Were any of the German Generals shot for not following orders?

@templeton:

I like to try and do this for Axis and Allies, and hope to get 12 people playing in the new year. This way you can have Japanese Army and Japanese Navy and make them argue over strategy. Ditto the US are split into ETO and PTO - that way you don’t get such a strong KGF, as the other player wants to follow KJF.

Keep us posted on this one. It has some real interesting potential – I’d like to try and get this working with our local gaming group. We can usually muster 10 people or so once a month and get 2 boards going at once so combining it to one group wouldn’t be too far of a stretch.

What kind of white “control” team do you need to pull this off, and how to you keep the dialectic tension at a high level within the teams?

@captainjack:

Could you take a picture of the IPC’s - I’ve heard they look cool.

I’ve uploaded one to BoardGameGeek.