AA42 has been revealed….. now what?

Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.

I hadn’t played A&A since the late 80’s, and bought AA50 for my brother-in-law, because he asked for a copy of Revised, and the clerk talked me into 50. We played, and whammo, I became addicted again like I was a kid. Then I found this kicka** site, and I think sometimes I may need a talkgroup to get me off it. I have no complaints about the balance, about all the options, anything really. I think it is the best BY FAR game out there. I really don’t understand anyone being upset about a game that hasn’t been introduced, I’d certainly be willing to try it. Honestly, it may take a while to even go there because AA50 is so cool, and there are so many variables to play. I think the creators have it together, and I bet it will be an awesome game, that in ftf we could maybe even finish in less then, what, say 6 hours? That will really help my friends and I to keep our wives off our backs…

@Krieghund:

They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.

You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

+1 for Krieghund

I’m glad the paper ‘money’ is gone.

My AA50 ‘money’ is still in the plastic.

It would be nice if the rulebook gave a player some suggestions how to keep tract of IPC’s.

I am bothered about the small board and waste of resources on a Russian battleship.

Do people even use the production chart in other AA games?

Too easy for mistakes, I always count up a nation’s income each time anyway.

@Joe:

…that in ftf we could maybe even finish in less then, what, say 6 hours? That will really help my friends and I to keep our wives off our backs…

So true.

@Krieghund:

Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.

Because instead of a money grab, AA42 could have been so much more. Yes, the rules in the anniversary edition are popular, and using them is not a bad idea. But the map and the setup is revised (minor changes) which, if you already own the game, is spending money needlessly. Moreover, this stuff about “aa42” not being for us is BS. AA is for a niche market already. Its NOT like someone will see AA42 and buy it, when they passed over Revised. Especially not in this economy.

Revised came out just a few years ago. But apparently WOTC thought they cant sell any more. But throw in a new map image and a new unit, and suddenly there is a “reason” to buy a product 99% of which you already have.

No, AA42 was a bad effort. Even Larry knows WOTC shouldnt have done this. And so do we.

@Krieghund:

Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.

No, you’re wrong.  And I’ll tell you why.  Though I believe squirecam and allboxcars put forth the necessary arguments.

The notion of AA1942 being a “entry-level” game is fanciful – to say the least.  Does someone looking to get into Monopoly start by playing Junior Monopoly?  No, he begins with Monopoly – the real deal – and learns from other players.  I would wager that the transition from AA1942 to AA50 is less steep than in Jr. Monopoly to Monpoly.  After all, the pieces are the same, the rules are the same (mostly), and the territories are the same (again, mostly).  You, Kreighund, praised the very rules found in AA50.  Why couldn’t Wizards just reprint AA50?  I don’t get it.

If Wizards was worried AA50 was too daunting to new customers, then there were alternatives to this spit pile.

(Though based on experience, new players are enthusiastic when they see the oversized board and quality game components)

What Wizards COULD HAVE done was re-release AA50, but packaged with a set of rules tailored for beginnings, intermediates, and junkies.  This could have included optional rules for Technology, National Objectives, Strategic Bombing, and Extra Powers.  What I’m preaching is nothing new.  In fact, MOST strategy games do this already.  See “Conquest of the Empire” for an example of modular rules done right.

The point is new players don’t like being babied.  They don’t like playing an inferior game when they know a more complete game already exists.  Veteran players don’t like to pay for game that delivers NO VALUE OTHER THAN AS A TRAINING AID TO NEW PLAYERS.  Sorry for the all caps but this point can’t be stressed enough.  Personally, I hate it when I’m told I have to play a “beginners game” because I’m incapable of learning the real thing.

(History Lesson: Wizard’s actually tried doing this with their cash cow, Magic the Gathering.  They released a beginner’s version of the game entitled “Portal.”  It was pulled after two seasons due to abysmal sales)

Finally, I don’t agree with this whole “cornerstone” business.  In my mind AA50 is the cornerstone of the A&A Franchise – not this cheap imitation.  Cornerstone in that AA50 will be the game played most often by local playgroups and tournament organizers.  Cornerstone because it’ll be the game discussed most often by fans of A&A, such as the ones on this website.

PS:  Why should I be forced buy to Wizard’s product before I have the “right to complain?”  Is that not perpetuating a broken system?  No, I should be free to express my disapproval for a product whether I purchase it or not.  To me this 1942 foray screams “Cash Grab” by Wizards and I’ll respond in due kindness.

PPS:  Keep up the good work Kreighund!  I find your rules clearifications to be extremely informative.   :wink:

It has not AA50 rules: even if has the same combat system, it lacks the new super shiny tech system and the NOs, and also lacks the 2 scenarios. AA42 it’s symply a poor mix of Revised gameboard and some of the AA50 rules -> there were few work developing this hibryd. Not valuable for hardore A&A fans nor for newbies (as someone said, they should buy Revised instead, that one at least has tech and paper money)

However, there’s a great reason for all this hate against WOTC: they killed TripleA, a stupid move, because most players on internet will think three times before buying any new A&A product. WOTC caused severe damage to the gaming community for no real reason, and our only possible retaliate is not buying their new products unless they are a total masterpiece. AA42, sadly is not the case

@TG:

The point is new players don’t like being babied.  They don’t like playing an inferior game when they know a more complete game already exists.  Veteran players don’t like to pay for game that delivers NO VALUE OTHER THAN AS A TRAINING AID TO NEW PLAYERS.  Sorry for the all caps but this point can’t be stressed enough.  Personally, I hate it when I’m told I have to play a “beginners game” because I’m incapable of learning the real thing.

(History Lesson: Wizard’s actually tried doing this with their cash cow, Magic the Gathering.  They released a beginner’s version of the game entitled “Portal.”  It was pulled after two seasons due to abysmal sales)

He really does have a point here. I played Magic ‘back in the day’ and occasionally poke my head into the website to see what’s going on and recently found WOTC peeps making this very point. The majority of players come into a game via other players. We never brought players in via Portal. We threw them a deck and taught them how to play. The players who picked up Portal and then tried to play with the crowd became quickly frustrated because they weren’t playing the same game as everyone else.

Perhaps the number of folks interested all on their own in playing A&A are scared away at the higher price point is greater than we suspect. I’m sure the lower price point will get a lot more sales at Christmas in Toys 'R Us to parents putting stuff under the tree.

And there would be no need for ‘refreshed’ sculpts if they were just making an entry level game. An entry level player wouldn’t know the difference. The refreshed sculpts are strictly because there aren’t enough entry level players to make this venture profitable without the veterans.

Companies who take their customer’s loyalty for granted are unwise.

I only own A&A: Pacific, so I can’t comment about the board size (though if it is really too small, it’s a shame). Frimmel may have a point that the price may attract new players - the kind who are not sure about the game and don’t want to shell out $50 to give it a try. The low price may attract as many new players as the relative simplicity (it doesn’t seem any easier than Revised).

Even though purchasing the phsyical game may not be too attractive for those who own AA50 and Revised (or maybe even Revised alone), I’m curious about the gameplay. The AA50 game is just a tad too big for me - I think Revised offers the right amount of complexity to allow strategic depth while not having to spend too much time on a single move or an entire game. Combining the Revised board with AA50 rules may be an easy move, but if it produces a great game I don’t care.

What do you think will be the impact of the new rules in comparison with Revised? For one, I think KJF will become easier - the transport rules will hurt Japan much more than the US (trns used to add punch to a fleet, but now they are only a burden).

Won’t even use it to replace pieces.

I have images that can be made into tiles (circa Avalon Hill Bookshelf Games like “Rise and Decline of the Third Reich”).  Bad economy guys, can’t afford frilly things like molded pieces. :P

@KGB:

I only own A&A: Pacific, so I can’t comment about the board size (though if it is really too small, it’s a shame). Frimmel may have a point that the price may attract new players - the kind who are not sure about the game and don’t want to shell out $50 to give it a try. The low price may attract as many new players as the relative simplicity (it doesn’t seem any easier than Revised).

Even though purchasing the phsyical game may not be too attractive for those who own AA50 and Revised (or maybe even Revised alone), I’m curious about the gameplay. The AA50 game is just a tad too big for me - I think Revised offers the right amount of complexity to allow strategic depth while not having to spend too much time on a single move or an entire game. Combining the Revised board with AA50 rules may be an easy move, but if it produces a great game I don’t care.

What do you think will be the impact of the new rules in comparison with Revised? For one, I think KJF will become easier - the transport rules will hurt Japan much more than the US (trns used to add punch to a fleet, but now they are only a burden).

With $12 bombers, KGF will be even easier than before too. And a German navy build will be more difficult, given the less defensive punch to carriers, less defensive power of subs, and inability to prevent allied mass bombing.

This assumes Anniversary rules, which, with no tech (radar), or escorts (optional rule excluded), national objectives (extra income) or territory limits (as Revised-LHTR), Germany has no defense.

The Dardanelles and Fighter Escort/Interceptor optional rules are included.

@Krieghund:

The Dardanelles and Fighter Escort/Interceptor optional rules are included.

So is it an actual rule this time, or still an optional rule?

I think in tough economic times they are making a great decision to release a low priced version of the game.  I probably won’t buy it as I already have revised and 50 but I do believe it will bring new people to the game as paying $135.00 (CAD) for the AA50 will just scare a lot of people away.  I would bet that the number of people that bought AA50 that did not have any previous experience with the game, or were not urged by someone of the likes, is extremely microscopic.  I would never have purchased AA50 first before purchasing AAR, it was just too expensive.

Also, I may be the minority, but I hope they do not reprint the AA50 anniversary edition, not right away anyway.  I paid the price I did because I wanted to be one of few who owned the game.  I don’t want them flooding the market with more and more reprints.  It brings the value of my game down (not just monetary value either).  I would rather see them do what Disney does and re-release the anniversay edition every 7 years or so.  This way can continue to release NEW battle versions and buying AA50 will be an exciting event, every 7 years or so  :-)  Just my opion, for what it is worth.

A&A42 will be sold on the market, if it will be unsuccessful then it will be a bad move. No one is forced to buy it no one is forced to like it. At same time every one may express his/hers opinion about the game. The only thing required is the respect for the work other people did.

Also Anniversary has been criticized in several ways. The Japanese have a too much high income after a couple of turns. Allies can not win. No Axis can not win. China rule are stupid. Sub are useless. Supersub are BS. etc.

It seems that all the copies made has been sold in a small amount of time. If it will be reprinted it will be sold in great quantity, even if it cost about 100$.

Now, numbers of copies sold is not an absolute index of quality in a game nor is an index for us strategy-wargames fans. In fact, for me, Settlers of Cataan or Puerto Rico are for sure less interesting of A&A. So, from a business point of view AH and Wizards have an objective: selling the boxes. They try to obtain this goal with their strategy. They are not a brotherhood for the diffusion of A&A or other similar initiative. They are a business company on the market.
According to me they may sold more boxes with an alternative and at least decent marketing and advertising campaign but these are theirs problem.

What care for us is: A&A42 is revised with SIMPLIFIED and CORE Anniversary rules, with the same map with a new graphics, and new (and useless) russian ships miniatures, without money (I have several tons of IPC money at home if I need I can use them) no paper and no pencil (but also anniversary come without table and chairs and they are NEEDED to play the game).
Ok, it is accetable for me. Not the A&A of my dreams but accetable. Moreover the real requirement about boardgame is: having friends to play with.

My Revised is usured and I am already playing it with Anniversary rules and I never use tech (even in Anniversary). At same way in the past I played Europe and Pacific with LHTR rules. In fact, spending half an hour before a game for checking and rememebrign to alla players the defense of the tanks, when sub may submerge, etc., is a waste of time. Using the same ruleset avoid this waste of time.
Having a family of games requires having same basic rules to be applied to different scenarios. So if A&A42 had introduced a NEW SET or rules different from Anniversary I had considered more problematic than having the same ruleset. So this is ok for my and my playgroup.
The map and the setup are the same, this is a missed occasion for sure (another, also in Anniversary there are a lot of missed occasion). They could have “adjusted” the set up adding, for example, a sort of bid to the Revised setup, moving some of the units around, and could have made some modification to the map. They have not done, an it is a pity.

Finally, I will buy A&A42 for replacing my usured Revised. I am not going to go in ecstasy for this game but it will see a lot of play in my playgroup, and this is an important thing.
I agree that maybe they should have reprinted Anniversary, leaving to us the task of adapting our Revised to Anniversary rules an units. They have the idea that they could make money making such adaptation officially.

Three points I’d like to touch upon:

1.  Affordablility.

The greatest hoax in the world is that Wizards made you believe AA50 costs $100.  AA1942 retails for $35.  Clearly Wizards had you, the customer’s best interest, in mind with 1942.  Yet, I wonder how much would it cost Wizards to “upgrade” the game components of AA1942 with those found in AA50.  $10?  $20?  $50?   The answer is on the lower end.  In fact, I would be surprised if the manufactuer’s cost per unit of AA50 was more than $5 over AA1942.  It all comes down to economies of scale.  Produce more copies of AA50 and the price goes down.

There could been a version of AA50 on store sleeves right now  – at this moment – for less than $50 retail.  KGB’s argument that even $50 may be too much is certainly justifiable.  However, look at the most successful “toy” on the children’s market for the past two decades: Video Games.  If parents are willing to shell $60-$70 per video game as stocking stuffers, then there’s no reason that copy of A&A (which is larger and more tangible) can’t be underneath the Christmas tree.

Side Note:  I bought my copy of AA50 for $60.  I still have the packaging slip to prove it.  Don’t believe it for a second if Wizards or Larry Harris tells you they barely made a profit on AA50.  The reality is that they made a killing on AA50.  Which is why they’re so quick to rush out AA1942, to milk even more money from you guys.

2.  Play Time.

When I was at the Eindhoven Board Game Con, I came across the most remarkable facsimile of Axis and Allies.  It was a Euro-game depicting World War II in Europe.  Think AA:Europe but at an even grander scale.  What’s important is that the board had breakaway sections to allow players to customize the scope – and play length – of their game.  For instance, if you wanted to portray the Normandy Operations, you could simply swap out the Western Europe tile for a similar tile of France broken up into many territories.  The same could be done with the Eastern Front and Southern Europe.  New board setups were provided for whatever option the player chose.

Why couldn’t Axis and Allies: 1942 be more like this?  Simply have Eastern Europe and China as break away sections.  Or if Wizards is lacking in know how, just include a glossy mat of 1942 with AA50 for beginners.

Wizard’s criteria for “sound business” is to make the client PAY for a copy of AA1942.  And when he tires of that the client can PAY AGAIN for a $200 copy of AA50 on ebay.  Brilliant.

3.  Pieces.

Not much of an argument can be made here.  You could buy 1942 just for the pieces and the price point would be similar to what you pay for pieces from a third party retailer.  However, to do so is to – again – perpetuate a broken system.  This is a clear sign to Wizards that fans are perfectly content to replace their pieces by buying a new game.  As opposed to Wizard’s quality assurance department providing fans with replacement pieces SEPARATELY when they run out.

I’m with Jennifer here: in this tough economy, how can you justify spending even $20 on plastic playing pieces of 1942 quality?  You cannot.

Quit whining. The 1942 ed is a beginners game. Anniversary ed is the cornerstone-game that we play, and next year we get Advanced A&A Pacific and Europe. All games with the same basic rules and combat system. This is great. Remember when we had MB Classic unchanged for 20 years ? Now we got new games every year.

But, there is a “but”. WOTC are bussiness-men. They do this for money. So we buy this beginners edition and get new refreshed pieces. Next year when the advanced Pacific and Europe games come, we might get new Italian pieces too, and maybe halftracks and divebombers or neutral infantry. So just buy this game and stop beeing so cheap.

WOTC are business-men. They do this for money.

or bananas…

Or a nice tree to live in…