AA50 Themed Dice Towers

Heading back up to your logic up above–its not “units that can (in some situations) retreat”. It is units in this situation that can retreat (attacking tts yes defending ones no). That rule is written as it is to cover the situations where submerged subs, unhittable units (subs vs planes) or amphibious assaults where some units can retreat and others cant.

As a lawyer–I get what you’re trying to do and say that the rule doesn’t say what its supposed to say. As Krieg points out, that’s up for debate. Many lawsuits are about this kind of thing.

But that’s not because its dogma Canon law its because the other outcome is insensible, contradictory, gamey, requires a tortured reading of the language devised over multiple editions and revisons of the game to try and cover so many different situations.

there is no such thing as a perfect document try to write one

i hate to do this to you but 50$ per and italin panters at a 10:1.

\no id just jokeing you can have them at 8$ a piece. wow id never buy them at that price! you must like them or something

I will get this for you… send me an e-mail reminder.

Thanks

It’s even worse: allies fall as a card castle after China fall J1: India, Australia and then or Soviet Union (KJF) or Alaska plus Canada and maybe Africa and finally Soviet Union anyway (KGF). As in Revised, ignore a theater and you lose the war. Opposite to Revised, you cannot choose as allies in 1941, it’s Japan who chooses ignore China or not, and if Japan is wise, it will not ignore China J1

Your point is valid: even if the game were balanced (and it’s not), it has no fun the way China is designed, even for Japan. When I play face to face, Japan is my last option, because it’s the more boring: just stomp all at your reach  :| I could even pick Italy (but not China) before than Japan

I more than agree with templeton on the freedom to players idea. I appreciate the game offers a nice historical point of view, but it is the idea of being able to do the “what if” playing that makes it really exciting.

Except first rnd, Jap killed my BB, all US units went to Europe. The problem with the -41 scenario is that US must use much more ipc to build a sustainable fleet than in the 42 scenario. I did not play effective as allies though, with not killing German fleet UK1, I screwed US purchases etc. Maybe I played too aggressive with Russia, but I think Germany + Italy could take Caucasus anyway. Game wouldnt end if I didn’t take Berlin, unless the attempt was a failure :)
Axis player slowed Jap himself with not taking either Philly or Borneo and east Indies J1, but the Jap beachhead in Asia was as strong as the Normandy landings, so there is not really an opening to KJF, more than in AAR. SJF is important where it can be done. I killed a lone Jap trans with DD, these things are mistakes that will happen sometimes, until we get used to the new rules.

I was just looking over the new AA50 board image and it occured to me how arbitrary the geography is in this game.

Why is the Belgian Congo in this game at all?

Spain is off limits, even though certainly in the realm of possible history/gameplay Spain could have been a major player or battlefield of WWII; a lot more of a possibility than French Eq Africa or the Belgian Congo which are indeed in play.

Certainly Turkey could have been a significant factor in this alternative universe of a game we call Axis & Allies than ever could have would been French West Africa or Rhodesia.

Yet there they are: Belgian Congo, French West Africa, Rhodesia all open for invasion. Spain and Turkey and others are closed off.

This is so ahistorical, we disagree about countless other nuances and rules about being historically deficient. Yet without Spain and Turkey, we are are not even accorded the ability to play out WWII in ways which could have indeed happened a lot more probable than the invasion of the Belgian Congo and Rhodesia by the Nazi war machine.

Why of all the possibilities of the Axis and Allies timeline/universe are these 2 of the more likely ones that could have happend are indeed shut down?

I think Norway is going to be much more important to Germany under this set up, than it was in Revised. If the AA50-41 info is correct, I’m going to be sinking that British battleship every game, and moving a good portion of the air defense from France to Norway, at least for the first round.  Seems way too easy a kill to pass up, and at least that will shut down any immediate threat to Scandinavia, while still covering Russia and the critical sea zones around the UK/North sea. The situation on the eastern front seems a bit slower on the uptake, especially with no Russian air, so I think its probably best to concentrate on England first.

Right now I’m liking the 8 inf 1 bomber buy for G, since they have very little infantry fodder at the outset. At least according to the current info/set up. Maybe even two rounds worth, before seriously pushing with the armor.

What buys are you guys looking at for Germany?