@c64:
I used the zones indicated on the gameboard. Nothing special here. And I still use the rule that the airborne units can’t destroy blockhouses ( see Card #1).
Offtopic : What about your AAPacific games. Was Japan overwhelming ?
And after airborn predawn attack in your additional rule, these units continue with attack 2 or they act as regular infantry?
@c64:
I used the zones indicated on the gameboard. Nothing special here. And I still use the rule that the airborne units can’t destroy blockhouses ( see Card #1).
Offtopic : What about your AAPacific games. Was Japan overwhelming ?
Oh, you have remembered it :-) We tried few days ago including additional setup from FAQ and 24VPs for Japan. The situation is more balanced now, but I think Japan is still little bit stronger. Certainly, the Japan player didn`t share the same opinion. :-D. He pointed out that we had 75 million of IPC for America :|. We are going to try to play several games more with that rules you told me last time.
@c64:
After playing several times I found the one thing, that balances this game for me. I use different infantry models ( mine are painted, but you could get Russian units from AA1942 ) for the airborne units ( 6 US & 3 British ) and give them an attack value of 2. This way it’s always a tight race and seems balanced to me.
Without it it’s too easy for the Germans.
What about that airborn units. Where did you put them, instead of regular airborn units in particular zone for airborn assault? Or, you put them on the Reinf. card as a later reinforcement?
Hmm, it sounds interesting.
I have noticed that the creators of a&a games cheer for Axis :-D
What are your impressions? From total number of games you have played so far, who wins more frequently Germany or Allies? Is it the German side stronger? According to your expiriance, is it necessary to raise the number of turns from 10 to 12?
I found some Tournaments rules for A&A. (attachment in my post). Some Pacific detailes are also mentioned in it. What about BIDDING rule, what is exactly bidding for a number of I.P.C.'s and what is the sense of that rule?
Attacking subs are allowed to submerge before any round of combat. This allows them to move into a hostile sea zone and submerge immediately, without fighting at all. This can cause problems for the victimized fleet (unable to load transports, take advantage of naval base movement, etc.). This is called “sub stalling”. Many players don’t like this, so they make house rules against it. This is fine, but it changes the game balance.
Oh, I see. Preaty much interesting. Is this a house rule, who invents it? And what happens if a destroyer is present in that zone? Can it detects substalling or submarine is immune to it? Whether this rule holds true for Japan and the Allies or only for Allies?
Pretty much. This may seem like an odd question, but you are playing with sub stalling, right?
Mr. Krieghund, I’m afraid I do not know what is sub stalling. I have recently bought this game even though it is old. I didn `t find anything about sub stalling in my user manual. Should I apply this rule in order to balance powers in the game, and if the answer is Yes , please tell me where to find instructions for that rule? Or could you explain me here substalling rule, please?
I suspect that you haven’t yet figured out how to maximize Allied cooperation. I’d spot the Allies 6 to 8 IPCs worth of units at startup rather than change any rules. That way you can make adjustments later if you need to without changing the way the game plays too much.
Maybe you’re right we`ll try to play several games more. However, according to this new setup from official site you gave me:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=ah/faqs/axispacific
the difference is only -20 IPC points (1 transport + 1 fighter) regarding to original setup. Are you sure it could be enough together with 24 vps for Japan to balance the game?
Thanks in advance