A&A: 1942 Edition

well concepts from AA50 seem to make their way to this game, so what you got is evolution of the game taking the best ideas from different AA games. But the map and set up would be different because cruisers now make their appearance.

But for $25 bucks you got a new set of pieces for 5 nations and that is what you will use for AA50…basically swapping the pieces. I think Larry finally got the message from the piece junkies who wanted new pieces.

I belive that when this game is released in august, it will be our greatest hour.

Yes, I will defenitely purchase it.

I love my A&A 50 Ann edition, as a luxery game for special ocations with adults only.

This new game will be what we play everyday. Got some spare time a monday evening, well pull out the 1942 editon and play a shorty with the kids.

We need both editions.

If you dont need it, dont buy it.

@Craig:

@Imperious:

I doubt that the units/sculpts will be any different

Its been confirmed that they are new, but yes they may be the same unit used ( e.g. Americans have a new version of the Sherman as the replacement tank… it will have more detail and look better)  Of course the artillery will all be different and pieces include new infantry sculpts as well.

Please show us specific info to verify your statements.

Where is it stated that they are going to produce new sculpts for the pieces in this version? …

I am not saying that they aren’t going to change some of the plastic parts, I am just saying that it is highly unlikely that they are going to do this, based solely on their previous track record.  Until I see something to the contrary, I am not going to put any hope into the idea that they would fix this issue.

Craig

I have to think this as well.

There are any number of changes they could introduce but ‘new’ sculpts (beyond what was introduced in AAAniv) seem likely to be pretty far down the list.

It seems likely there are two motivations for this release on WOTC/Hasbro/AH part:

1. Sell the hard core yet another A&A set.

2. Get something at the Revised price point and niche out on the shelves having likely sold through (?) all the Revised production run.

Update

Well it looks like IL might be  on the mark according to the product page at AH.

Axis & Allies: Spring 1942 details:

Rulebook updated by Larry Harris, creator of the Axis & Allies game system

Packaging, play components, and game board map feature updated art

370 game pieces featuring refreshed sculpts plus new models for cruisers

Updated naval unit rules as debuted in Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition

@Craig:

“Refreshed” is still too vague for my tastes.

Good point. ‘Refreshed’ might simply mean they found a way to make them with less plastic.

@Subotai:

This means that the AA42 map will be the same as today, except different colors and drawing? Not new territories?
Rules will be the same as AA50, with exception of the NOs? And same or old tech rules?

Unit costs, SBR, naval rules are sure enough, but how about NOs in AA42? Imo it could be interesting if it’s implemented. And this means that tech is optional in AA42.
Also, the 2 new optional rules which was added after AA50 was released will probably be optional rules in AA42.
I think Revised (AA42) can be fun even if AA50 is still teh real deal.

Then why buy it if you have revised and the anniversary edition???

You have the map (revised). You have the units. You have the rules. All you need for the game.

If this is “revised + cruiser unit + rules” its a waste of your money.

It could be different…but somehow I’m doubting it given the history of AH/WOTC…

If this is “revised + cruiser unit + rules+ normal map that looks like a map + fixed rules+ all new pieces” its a great use of your money.

Yes i agree!

The new pieces will replace my AA50 pieces for $25 bucks sans the Italians, which FMG is doing shortly. Perfect!

It’s definitely lots of f2f players on this board who are concerned about visual design and aesthetics.
I’m more concerned about rule changes and such, what will be incorporated from AA50. It’s more important if AA42 has more territories than revised then the change of colors and map art.

What WOTC have said in plain text is that some rules from AA50 will make it into the AA42. They use the word “utilize”, what does that really mean?

1. To make use of.
  2. To make do with something not normally used for the purpose.[2]
  3. To use to its fullest extent, potential, or ability.
  4. To take advantage of.

We can only speculate to what features from AA50 will make it into the AA42, but I’m hoping for as much as possible. With tech as an optional rule, and NOs are optional in AA50, I can see only positive aspects in implementing these rules into AA42, although I hope if AA42 include NOs there will be fewer NOs (for each nation) than in AA50.
Naval rules are already confirmed, and it would be very weird if not AA50 SBR rules will be included in AA42.
What we’re left with for uncertain factors, are more TTs, NOs, tech, changes in setup units for all powers. The turn order can not be changed since there will be 3 allied powers and 2 axis powers in AA42.

How bout some spy missions to get some intelligence on all the details in AA42?

If this is “revised + cruiser unit + rules” its a waste of your money.

I agree.  On the flip side, $25 isn’t too much to ask to have an replacement set of units.  Still I’m looking for better quality units, not more of them.

@squirecam:

Then why buy it if you have revised and the anniversary edition???

I probably won’t buy it, just like I didn’t buy revised and AA50. I would buy both games if it was a software version which was way better than triplea. Since triplea is freeware we shouldn’t expect too much, but for live games triplea is the best there is today. I know some players prefer GTO, and in some aspects GTO is better than triplea, but overall, the GTO version of A&A cannot compete with triplea imo.

A&A games have sold close to 2 mill. copies, with 1,5 billion Internet users, then why is there no official software versions of all A&A games designed by Larry Harris?? Forget about strategic AI, make software versions available for all platforms, the company (Avalon Hill or WOTC) sets up a server in which we can host and join games.

But for those who mainly plays the boardgame f2f, if AA42 doesn’t come with much more than new rules and new art drawings, there’s no incentive to buy it, you can just use the old revised board and the plastic units from AA50. That’s why AA42 probably will have some slight changes to the map, with only one or two more territories A&A fans will buy AA42 rather than using an obsolete revised map.

If I am WOTC, Mr Leeds is it;

1)I have already paid for the development of new game rules with AA50, lets add them too AAR$.

2)I have already paid for a new map, lets add this to AAR, sans Italy-repaint it as German territory, wait someone was critical of the dark borders, change to light$.

3)I have already paid for new box art, lets add this to AAR$.

4)I can cut money out-lower costs increase profit$.

5)I have already paid for new sculpts-lets add them to AAR, less Italy$.

6. I have already paid for cruisers units-lets add them to the AAR game$.

7)There does seem to be some minor interest in this game, they bought out my limited run of AA50 at twice the cost of a regular game, emm, it does not cost much to repackage AA50 lite and rebrand as something new-I already paid for everything this is all profit$.

God, I hope I am wrong.  The jaded sox I wear.

IL, are you firm on new Mech INF? 
This would indicate, someone has convinced them, an opportunity exists, to do something more then just rehash AA50 lite.

If we think more on the lines that someone serious about game design will be involved in the development of the game, and that they think on the lines of a shorter but still well balanced game, let’s see how they can replace some of the complicated but good changes in AA50:

NOs, advantage: makes for a more historical game with a stronger Pacific theater, disadvantage: high learning curve, complicates and prolongs the game. Alternate way of doing the same thing: simply make each VC count for 5 IPCs of income, gets the same effect and this change can be balanced by adjustment to the IPC value of territories.

Italy, adv.: more fun Mediterranean campaign, disadv.: a power no-one wants to play, problems balance-wise (Caucasus invasions). Alternative: make Italy into a minor power, controlled by Germany but with money separate, close the Dardanelles.

China, adv.: more historical Pacific campaign, slows down JTDTM, disadv.: a whole page of extra rules, still of marginal effect. Alternative: make China into a minor power, controlled by USA but with separate IPCs and an IC.

@Lynxes:

China, adv.: more historical Pacific campaign, slows down JTDTM

:lol: do you really think that? Japs killing chineses round 1 and no hope of defendig India?  :lol: Revised had a much more historical Pacific (there were strats involving defending both China and India that worked sometimes, there is no such thing in 1941 scenario)

And the JTDTM … it wasn’t not a need in Revised (you had Polar Express) and is totally not needed in AA50 with new shiny axis economic advantage

Sorry, i had to say that  :-D

@Craig:

Yes, the Italy faction back under German control is good.  Splitting the income might just be the way to go on this.  The two powers still get to attack together, but buy separately.

Yes, allies need this. No more can openers with sneaky italians  :-D

/Craig Yope

Of course you would adjust the number and placement of VCs. If we start from the AA50 set of VCs, Ottawa, Warsaw, Leningrad, Hong-Kong, Sydney would have to go. Capital would be exceptions to the 5 IPC bonus since you get that instant bonus anyway if you capture them. The at-start bonuses would be: Germany 5 (Paris), Russia 5 (Stalingrad), Japan 10 (Shanghai, Manila), UK 5 (Calcutta), USA 10 (Hawaii, San Fransisco), equalling the NO bonuses in AA50 except Germany but they would still be up to 47 IPCs with Italian territories and almost equal to USA at 48 IPCs. Leningrad as a 2 IPC IC but not a VC is fairly balanced and gives an area to fight for in Eastern Europe.

/Funcioneta

With the slowing down of the JTDTM I refer mainly to the geographic changes, that makes marching ground units over Asia cumbersome (appropriately). Also only one 3 IPC territory to place an IC in instead of three as before. China can sometimes be kept alive a few turns, but I agree the Chinese production is insignificant in most games.

With the change I propose you would have one Capital territory at 2 IPCs away from the front, a China income of around 8-9 IPCs so you could build one infantry and one artillery or tank per turn. The low IPC value of the capital territory is because the Japs shouldn’t get too much of an advantage by grabbing it. Giving the Chinese a fair amount of infantry at the set-up and availability of reinforcements from Russia and USA could make this type of Chinese minor power a viable thing. For example, if you by sending some Russian inf shielded the Chinese from Jap attacks you could transfer american air to China and really boost them.

The problem with minor powers and splitting income is which power gets extra areas and to what bag of income that adds. Maybe Africa to Italy and the rest to Germany, and for China only home areas? A simpler rule would be to keep all income together, but then you would probably have to still have some popping China infantry rule and Rome would be a non-capital VC with maybe 4 IPC map income.

Try my mod: stronger China, but greater reward if Japan beat her :wink:

/Funcioneta

Well, it’s a nice mod but you need a new set of units to play it. Also Japan will be severely boosted if they get China and we really should be careful about boosting that evil imperial economy more than it already is.

Even my idea is to good for Japan, a free IC if captured. Maybe you could have a partisan rule so that Japan gets NO IPCS WHATSOEVER from any China territory (and no builds in ICs allowed). Manchuria would be considered a Jap territory but just as Kwangtung belong to China’s sphere of interest. With this rule you could have a 3 or even 4 IPC capital area for China without adverse effects for game balance.

(Realizing the possibility that the thread will be exported to house rules, maybe we should get back to how the 1942 edition will look… )  :wink:

@Lynxes:

/Funcioneta

Well, it’s a nice mod but you need a new set of units to play it

I use USA’s units for tanks and such, and chinese markers from AA Pacific for chinese eeerrr… conquests  :-D

@Craig:

(Rumor has it that Avalon Hill will re-release Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition in time for the 2009 holiday season.)

I know of no plans to re-release Anniversary.  I believe the source of this rumor is confusion caused by the fact that the 1942 Edition box art strongly resembles the Anniversary box art.

If they are using the Revised map, I wouldn’t mind seeing a couple of tweaks:
Add at least 1 more Northern Russia territory
Split China into 4 territories.  You have Sin on the far west as the bottleneck then Chi is divided so that a J arm in Fic/Kwa/Man cannot get to Sin in 1 move.
Reallocation of Pacific IPCs.  All islands at least 1 ipc and HI/Sol/Mid get a significant boost in IPC value.

But these are probably too drastic for just a reivented Revised.

If it is pretty much exactly the same then they just need to give Ger about 3 inf to Egy for a well balanced game or at least an extra inf and arm.
Maybe throw a German cruiser in the Med or Baltic, but that might have to be balance with an addition to the UK and/or US.