Posts made by Ddraiglais

I second the request for a list of games. Actually, I think there should be several lists. One list of A&A games you can buy, one for expansions that are no longer in production, one for games and expansions that are non-WW II, and one for homebrew. URLs should be included where possible. That would be awesome.

WW II: The Struggle is waaayy too expensive. I thought The War Game showed promise. You seem to be hesitating on WaW because of the miniatures. That’s the big reason why I won’t buy The War Game. All of the miniatures are for one country (different colors, but they’re all Germans). I’m not ready to drop that much money on a game that was halfway done. Get WaW. Don’t settle with just the WaW rules. Take what you like from all of the A&A games and create your own.

@Imperious:

There comes a time when realism has to give way to playability and fun.

If you want playability then make India impassible and a non-factor in the game

If you want fun make the map without India, assuming a tidal wave took it out just before Dec 41…so you don’t have to deal with it.

Make Sinai into two parts

And Rio De Oro now has nukes.

I don’t even know why I’m adressing this post.

Of course I want the game to be as realistic as possible, but you can’t be 100% accurate. I saw somewhere else on these boards where somebody listed the GDP of all the major countries. Using those numbers the US would be able to fight the Axis, UK, and USSR combined. The game has to be a balance between realism and playability. Every version of rules has it’s compromises. There’s no way around it.

@Imperious:

dude just buy www.thewargame.com its a 6x3 foot map ( thick cardboard i may add) and it comes with pieces all for $100.00 you could never ever make a map for so cheap. Its accurate. If you don’t like the territories i guess you can bust out a marker and and add a few.

I’ve already decided against that. I was set on getting it, but I’ve had a change of heart.

@Flashman:

This is a pretty good source:

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/axis.htm

Loads of diplomacy maps:

http://www.diplom.org/Online/maps.html

Do your own thing, but here are a few golden rules from Flashy;

Decide FIRST if, and how much, map distortion you want.  Western Europe and Japan are hopelessly small on a world map, so most of us use projections that exaggerate their size.  It’s no good basing your outline on a real map, then discovering later that you don’t have room for enough territories in Europe.

THINGS TO AVOID AT ALL COSTS

1. Rio de Oro is in NORTH Africa. Mark that point.  It is VERY important.
2. Moscow is in EUROPE. That is, nowhere near where official A&A boards put it.  If you can live with such an outrageous falsehood as Moscow-in-the-Urals, go ahead.  But in that case abandon any pretence of creating a historical map.
3. The Sinai penninsular is in EGYPT. There is therefore no need to complicate the board with having two territories controlling access to the Suez canal.
4. Countries such as Pakistan only came into being AFTER the war. You should NEVER include them, it is prefferable to use geographical terms such as “Western India” or “Indus Valley”.
5. India is a BIG country, in fact a sub-continent.  It is the SECOND most populous country on earth after China.  DO NOT follow the example of the uneducated and just lump it together as one territory worth a scandalously low 3 dollar value.
6. Regarding IPCS, an important factor is fuel. Using GDP figures gives you a starting reference, but remember that areas such as Romania, Caucasus and the Dutch East Indies were much more important than their GDP value owing to their crude oil production.

Thanks for those links.

I hadn’t thought about distorting the map to help with more territories in Europe. That does make sense.

Since I would rather have a 1939 start, keeping Moscow where it should be shouldn’t be much of a problem.

I like the idea of one territory controlling the ditch. I’m not sure if Egypt will be 1 territory or more.

I was going to include Baluchistan, Sind, Punjab, etc. Neither Pakistan nor India will exist. I want more territories, and the subcontinent is a great place to add some.

I’m not sure about IPCs. You can argue for fuel. What about iron and coal deposits? What about better scientists? Weapons developement is a part of the game, and the US and Germany excelled there. Where do you draw the line, and where do you add to the game as far as IPCs go? Others have already mentioned people power. How does that apply? Some of the game has to be abstract. I think a lot of things need to be considered when assigning IPCs, but I don’t think there is a way to nail it. If you could come up with realistic numbers, then the already disadvantaged Axis would never win. Showing the US’s industrial might might be more realistic, but it wouldn’t be much fun. There comes a time when realism has to give way to playability and fun.

There is another route that I thought I might try. I saw a site where a guy uses real maps for A&A. I really like this idea. The problem I have now is where to find a 1930’s map of the World. Maps (dot) com has 1935 Africa, 1933 Asia, 1938 bible lands and cradle of civilization, Atlantic Ocean map 1939, Central Europe and the Med 1939, and Europe and the Med map 1938. All of these come close, but none of them are what I need. I need a map that shows the entire World just before Germany moved into Austria. I would like major territories/regions to be labelled (Normandy, Bavaria, Silesia, Walachia, Shangtung, Yunnan, etc). I would also like major cities and capitals to be on it. If anyone has any idea where I can find a map like this, please let me know. As far as size, I am looking for something that will fit an 8’ x 4’ area nicely (as close to filling up the area without going over the sides). If all else fails, then I guess I’ll have to try my hand at drawing my own map. I will need some help assigning IPC values to the territories though.

Any new developements for the game? Are we still looking at late Summer for a release?

Germany should be building subs. The USSR doesn’t really need a navy. China should be more concerned about surviving against Japan. France will want to protect her overseas empire IF she survives long enough. Italy could use battleships and transports to take Africa and other Med territories. The only powers that wouldn’t really be buying naval units is the USSR and China.

Tekkyy,

We’ll use whichever house rules we like. We are not really doing a new game. We are just combining the best of what’s out there.

For the map I am trying to achieve a few things. I want it to be a bit more difficult to knock someone out. I will definately be expanding the sea zones to get more naval action and force people other than Japan and the US to build naval units. I also want Italy/othe minor Axis to be more fun and not an afterthought. I don’t want the French player knocked out on turn 1. That’s no fun for him.

Another consideration is we often do free-for-alls. Everyone gets an amount of IPCs to spend on their starting forces. Then everyone gets like 50 IPCs a round. Nobody is allied with anyone unless they make an alliance. That version is fun.

I tried to look at that map, but it wouldn’t load for me.

Imperious Leader,

We’re not trying to create a new game. We’re basically taking in all of the rules from supplements and house rules that we like. Switching to d12 is just to allow more units and such from various supplements. The game should flow pretty much like regular Axis & Allies (probably a bit more like World at War or another more complex supplement) with extra units (half tracks, cruisers, etc). Of course income will probably be doubled, and costs will go up to allow for the additional units.

After I buy a few more expansions (The War Game, Table Tactics expansions, and Axis & Allies expansions I, II, and III), I intend to take all of the rules I like, convert everything to d12, make a map of my own, and basically have a huge game to play. Maps.com has a few World maps that I like. The one I’m leaning towards is 6.5’ x 5’. I want to include the US, UK, France, USSR, China, Germany, Japan, and Italy/Balkan Axis as players. I want a lot of territories. My question for you guys is how many territories is to many? How many territories can I squeeze into Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey, France, etc? Should Italy just be N. Italy, S. Italy, Sicily, Libya, E. Africa, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Hungary? Should Hungary be with Italy or Germany? For Germany I intend to have E. Prussia, Berlin, Austria, Czechoslovakia, and I’m not sure. I think I should include the Rheinland. What else? Should Poland be just E Poland and W. Poland like I see on most games, or should I include things like the Danzig strip? Please help. I have a tendency to go overboard on things like this. How many territories per country would be manageable on a map this large? Africa and the Americas should be fairly easy to do. What about Asia? Any help or suggestions would be much appreciated. Oh, and I want to do a 1939 start time.

There was a set of three espansions we had in the 90s. You can still buy them, and I intend to get them again. I forget the specifics, but the carrier launched planes weren’t as great as regular fighters. They cost less. You could also put three of them on a CV. The rules were for Japan (zeros) and the US (I forget which plane they used).

I might even take things further and restrict the European powers to planes like this, but only allow them to put 2 on their carriers. That would be much more historically accurate. In the naval arms race leading up to the war, Britain was the only European player in the carrier race. Japan and the US eventually left the Brits behind. They were getting more and more planes on their carriers. They were also putting better planes designed for carrier operations on them. The Royal Navy was using discarded WW I era biplanes for their carrier based planes.

I always like the rules for CV launched aircraft myself. I love having more choices.

A few notes I made while reading this list:

1. Sinice most units in A&A aren’t a single unit, you don’t need to use a fghter to get gliders off the ground. You can assume that is included in the unit.

2. A successful attack by an AA gun should kill both the paratroopers and the air transport. Otherwise paratroopers become too powerful of a unit.

3. The cost should stay right around a bomber. If you make air transports too cheap, seagoing transports would rarely get used.

4. Bombers and air transport should be seperate units. You shouldn’t be able to drop paratroopers off in one round and bomb with the same unit the next. Since I have both the MB version and revised, it’s not hard to distinguish between bombers and air transport.

5. Paratroopers were semi-elite. I have no problem letting them attack at 2. Another idea I liked was allowing them to attack at 2 during their jump, but then they revert back to normal infantry. Either way should work. Another idea that you could use would be to use elite units (SS, USMC, etc) as your airborne. This isn’t exactly historically accurate though. Marines and SS were seperate from airborne and falshirmjagers.

6. Only one infantry should be allowed per transport. There are two reasons for this. 1-You don’t want to run into the problem that nobody is using sea transports. 2-Each piece represents a lot of men. A squadron of air transports would be hard pressed to deliver that many men to battle. A&A does require you to allow a few inaccuracies, but I think you should try to stay as accurate as possible.

7. Air transports should get 0 attack. I would say 0 defense, but I would be o.k. with 1 defense. If switching over to d12, then the defense should stay at 1 though.

If half tracks are such a big deal, then why not use Table Tactics or other pieces and come up with house rules to use them? I’m sure I’ll be adding house rules and additional pieces to the game. I’ve done it with every other A&A game and expansion I’ve owned.

Now that I look at it, the site hasn’t been updated since 2003. I have my doubts on the availability of those sets.

… Yeah, it’s only up for reference. Too bad. Sorry if I got your hopes up.

I haven’t bought them yet. I found a website that had a bunch of alternative pieces and rules by PewterCraft. Here’s the link: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tpope/miniatures/pewtercraft/axis.html I had these pieces at the tail end of my Axis and Allies buying. I hope you can still order from them.

I wasn’t refering to the China setup sheets. The setup sheets were made in China. When they got to Cali, they were warped. It sounded like they had that problem mostly taken care of though.

I found a discussion about the Pewtercraft’s gaming pieces, but has anyone tried their rules with their pieces? Are they worth getting? Do they add anything to the game?

Slavery wasn’t even an issue until later in the war, and it had nothing to do with freeing the slaves for any moral purpose. There were two main reasons for the Emancipation Proclamation. 1-To disrupt the South’s economy because of the thousands of slaves that would escape to the Union’s lines. 2-To keep Europe out of the war. Europeans were addicted to American cotton. Britain and France supported the South. However, once the reasons for the war included slavery; the more enlightened Europeans no longer supported the South.

Also worth noting is that the EP did nothing to free slaves in loyal border states.

Another thing worthy of note is the majority of Northerners didn’t want the blacks. When they decided to free the slaves in D.C., Lincoln looked for places to resettle them. They looked for places in Latin America to send the slaves once they were freed. The newly freed slaves in D.C. rioted when they heard the news. The representatives trying to sell Lincoln land were scam artists. The idea was eventually scrapped.

Slavery was also going to die anyway. In the Northern parts of the South it had already become unprofitable to keep slaves. Tobacco was dying. Many slave owners in the Upper South were freeing their slaves leading up to the Civil War. I really don’t think the institution of slavery would have lasted much longer if the Confederacy had won the war or if the US just let them leave peacefully.

Oh, and are the playing pieces roughly the same size as regular A&A? Looking at how huge the gameboard is, the pieces might be a bit big.

Do we have a release date yet, or is it still “late Summer”? I understand that there was a problem with the setup cards in China. I’m getting very anxious for this game to come out.