AA50 Worth it?

Agreed, need and want are different. From what I gather, they only waited about 3 years between 1942.1 and 1942.2.

It’s nice to not have to house rule too much - even using a bid implies some additional play testing would have been beneficial. But to be able to discuss strategies here, etc, requires us to have the same rules. :)

We need people. Please sign up!

Here is the link:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=22003.30

Thanks for sharing the info on the Bob Semple tank, that was a fun little piece of trivia to learn about!  I guess it was an attempt to beat plowshares into swords… :-D

Sounds like they’d have been better off trying to convert some kind of car or light truck into an armored car, though, as tractors just aren’t geared right to make into tanks…

As to the Brits & ANZACs and their Matilda’s: I guess it’s kind of nice to get them a different model for variety/ visual appeal, but the fact remains that the Matilda is really a decisive step down in quality vs. the Sherman… and the Brits actually used more Shermans than any other tank.  I’d have been much happier if they’d chosen the Cromwell; it was at least not outclassed by the Sherman (not to mention nearly every German tank…)

This has been sold. Thanks jrchase.

After further consideration I no longer feel the fighter escort/interceptor rule needs any fine tuning. In my previous posts I expressed the view that the rule nerfed strategic bombing too much but I’ve since changed my mind. After all, bombing raids over inland German targets without escorts was near suicidal, especially during the daylight. It wasn’t until the Allies had deployed long range escort fighters and had outnumbered the defending Luftwaffe aircraft, that the Allies were able to conduct bombing missions without terrible loses. The same is true with the fighter escort/interceptor rule as it stands now and it should stay that way.

Flying Tiger is correct.  Sorry if my original post was unclear.  :oops: I’ll try again.

You place an existing fighter on a new carrier by moving the fighter in either combat or noncombat movement, whichever applies, into the sea zone where the new carrier will be mobilized.  Air units don’t actually “land” until the end of the Mobilize New Units phase, though they must be in the space in which they will land by the end of noncombat movement.  The active player may only move pieces from one space to another during the combat movement and noncombat movement phases.

In Classic A&A, you can’t place fighters (new or existing) on new carriers at all.  In Revised, you can place existing fighters on a new carrier in the way you described in your original post.  In LHTR, it works the same way as it does in AA50.

@Bardoly:

@Rakeman:

@Bardoly:

Thank you Krieghund for your answer.  The Fact Sheet was very unclear about this.
With this, I have to agree with Funcioneta that this can be quite detrimental to the smaller ICs, but at least Germany can never be SBR’d in 1 round for all of its $ now.

Couldn’t in LHTR either.

In LHTR, in order to do 20 damage to Germany, USA and UK would each have to dedicated 10 IPC worth of bomber damage.  In this game, USA or UK needs to dedicate that much.  Big difference.  USA sitting back shipping bombers off while UK invades Northwestern Europe should be a viable strategy.  We’ll see.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.

Yes, but LHTR was the fix which castrated SBR/Rockets.  This rule change seems to have struck a balance between having a strictly SBR capaign to eliminate all of a country’s cash (usually Germany, but occasionally Rusia, and rarely England) which is a little boring, and the opposing view in which just about the only time someone SBRs is when their bomber has nothing else to do.  I mean how often does Germany need to produce 10 units in 1 turn?  Almost never, unless it it the end of the game for them.  Usually 6-7 is okay, which means that if they repair 15 (less than 6-7 because the cost of repairs means that you can’t build as much) so as to produce 5 units, then the next turns SBR can’t do more than 15 points of damage.  This rule change seems to be more fair, and especially if Germany gets Radar and/or the IC repair tech, then that really limits the effectiveness of the SBRs.

I disagree, nerfing a broken mechanic is a good thing IMO.  I don’t know about other players, but if I was Germany and only producing 5-7 units a turn, I’d be wondering how long it would take for Russia to run me down.  It is nice that damage doesn’t HAVE to be repaired completely, but most likely, it often will be, or at least enough to hurt badly.