@DoManMacgee

Simply awesome response. I love accounting for the historical prevalence. I think for the next session we do, we will take a bid system. That will let us figure out the NOs a bit better.

@axis_roll

Very interesting. I have heard the Dardanelles strait as a limitation before but never understood it. Maybe our group does not use it much, but what is the implication of closing it VS not?

@DoManMacgee

Simply awesome response. I love accounting for the historical prevalence. I think for the next session we do, we will take a bid system. That will let us figure out the NOs a bit better.

@DoManMacgee
I have heard of NO being worth 4 pts, but never altering the allies NO.

How would you balance that?

@DoManMacgee

I have seen some threads of a similar nature. Thanks for the great response!

It is interesting that with more money comes more choices, (units/tech/strategies) but also can lead to more swingy and snowballs games. It can be hard and dangerous to find the middle ground. If everything was even then there would be more balance, but with that maybe a less interesting game.

Played a few games of AA anniversary 1941. The better the group gets at the game, the worse the games have been. Far more one sided wars than close ones.

My question is this.

• How should an experienced group play the anniversary edition to create a close and interesting game?
• should there be National objectives?
• should there be a bid or house rules?

Playing vanilla does not hold a lot of weight for us. We would rather spend a Saturday playing a legendary game than 2-3 lame ones.

Thank you!