Posts made by elrojo33

It’s too bad your new schedule is not accomodatring. I was looking forward to being able to join you guys for a game day. Sounds liek you guys have a good thing going with the space and the company there.

I just find it amazing that after more than 25 years (all be it with different publishers and manufacturers) they are still getting this stuff wrong.
I look back at the quick-reference/set-up country cards from my original MB game and those cards are some of the best tools ever included in the game. Remember how the setup cards had a deployment area, tables showing all the values associated with each unit, and some rule references too? I think I actually used the same format and started making the same type of set-up card for 1940 Global. There were not quite enough chips but there was plenty of everything else. The only real short-coming (production wise) were some of the map spaces size and the odd choices for “blow-up boxes” around the edge of the map. 
Which brings me to my question. Which version or variant of A&A do you think was the best produced one? I am not referring to the mechanics of the game just strictly based on the physical product.

The index idea would be great. But I do miss the separate sections that tell you all you need to know about each unit (like the original and almost every rule book after it).
I will agree with Krieg that some sections of the older books required you to read up to 3 different pages to clarify a rule, that was annoying too, equally flawed.
Regarding the table on Pg.20 showing the movement and combat values of each naval unit, why not put that on the battle board? Or in several sections of this intuitive rule book, for example, reprint the table in the sections on combat and movement.

Hey Dave.
I finished my first full game of 1914 this past weekend with 2 buddies. It was a lot of fun. We finished the game in about 9.5 hours (one completely new player) and it ended with the Allies conceding defeat to the CP. It could have gone one for about 2 more hours I estimated but I couldn’t convince the Allies to play it out. We got to turn 7.
My thoughts:
I’m not sure why so many people on these forums are complaining that the allies have some huge slanted advantage? I can see a lot of parity in the game and believe both powers have the opportunity to win the game.
We decided not to use the optional Russian Revolution rule but the conditions would have been satisfied by the end of turn 5 (though there was quite a stack in Russia, 40+ men).
The game mechanics are great and provide opportunities for a lot of new strategies, very interesting.
Once again the production of the game is terrible! This game is not playable out of the box. We added chips (love those little coloured chips but do you think they could give us 2x as many please?), used some IPC’s from another set (actually the FMG supplemental cash, a rip off for $10 but it did the trick since Wizards of the Coast are too stupid to give us any), used a generic national production chart from Global (how do they expect us to manage 16 roundels on the stupid little chart in the Sahara desert??? WTF?? Really?). I also took some clippings from the inadequate rule book and made our own quick reference cards, which included things like the combat and movement values of the naval units.

@Krieghund:

The reason there are no unit descriptions is simply because we felt they weren’t necessary.  All land units have the same movement, and their combat values are printed on the battle board.  All sea units except cruisers have the same movement, and their combat values are simple and intuitive.  The prices of everything are printed in the mobilization zone.  In addition, the rules for combat and movement in this game are much simpler than in WW-II A&A games.  With only around eight pages of rules actually concerning the units, it seemed unnecessary to summarize them.

Allow me to rebute… Obviously your feeling that they weren’t necessary was not correct. Referring to the naval units movement and combat values being “simple and intuitive” is a terrible statement of reason. Simple and intuitive to whom?! Someone who has never played an Axis&Allies game before would not find these things “Simple & Intuitive”, instead they would have trouble finding them in the Un-Intuitive rule book. Not to mention the fact that not all naval units move the same AND there are special rules governing Subs. As for IPC the values being on the game board, that is true. They are printed there in 0.8 bold font and only one way up, NOT easy to read from accross the map/table and impossible to read while somones purchased stack is sitting there (most of the time). Which brings me to that mess you call a National Production tracker in the Sahara Desert, which ironically is a good place to put it because it gets about just as much use as a giant desert would. How in the name of everything that is simple and organized could you ever expect players to manager 16 roundels (beside a stack of un-mobilized units) on that tiny billiard style score-keeper? Really? This play-tested well? I love the game, I think it is a great variant with unique mechanics and does capture the antiquitous qualities of the war to end all wars. But, the physical game itself is just poorly put together once again. Not enough pieces, not enough chips, no IPCs (again! really? you suggest we use a pad and pencil?), incomplete battle-board (where are the naval unit descriptions?), terrible (just terrible!) national production chart and an un-intuitive “half-done” rule set. Great game Larry, terrible execution Wizards of the Coast. This game is not playable out of the box, we added our own IPC’s, used a National production chart from Global, added chips and pieces from another game and have clipped excerpts from the rule book to keep as quick reference guides. I guess we had to finish the game before we played it. There is just no defending some of the “decisions” that were made in the produciton of this game, a lot of it just feels like laziness or glaring over-sights.

I am wondering how you have found the tanks in the game so far? I noticed from some of your twats (or is it tweets?) that there were some on the board. Have they been effective or a waste of money?

Looking forward to it Dave. I can’t wait to see what hilarious antics the Huns have gotten themselves up to in this episode…

I’ll bring it along just in case. It intrigues me, I’ll be brushed up on it by the time the convention rolls around  :wink: (and yes there were 2 puns in that sentence)

What about Flames of War? Anyone into playign Flames of War at this? I can bring “Open Fire” (the starter set). Dying to play buthaven’t had a chance yet.

@loki17:

I’m going to play with whatever rules Flashman proposes, as LH is too busy to correct the many errors.  We as an internet community should come up with our own official rules.

Also please see my rail unit image below.  When we do RR movement we run this guy around the board and whistle the tune to Thomas the Tank Engine.

Really?

I suppose if she warned me before I got home or gave me the option to take her out instead of having a frozen Pizza OR if there were immediate extenuating cicumstances then I would be OK. But if she tried to pass that off as “cooking dinner” on a regular night I wouldn’t be very happy. Nor would she if I said I was cooking dinner and then produced a frozen Pizza!

That would be my answer. Anyway, I’ll keep an eye out. If I come across some I will let you know.
Happy hunting.

I think I am going to play the game as it was published a few times (like 10?) before I clamour for rule changes. It’s too early for me to say anything is necessarily “broken” (with exception to; the number of pieces, the ridiculous National Production chart and absence of IPC’s.)

I actually saw them at a local hobby store not on their website. Here is the decal section of their website and there are no Union Jacks, but there are St. Georges Cross variants. Perhaps the UJ was not used in the war to mark units?

Flames of War has just the decals, all sorts of sizes I saw union Jack ones in the British kit. Looked pretty affordable, you can order them online just check their website.
www.flamesofwar.com

I don’t understand why Larry would want to mess with this game right away like this. He prepares player for the slow moving type of game in the forward of the rule book, …
“While playing this game you will quickly realize that this is not World War II. There are no massive sweeps across continents
with blitzing armored divisions and aircraft. Instead, there is a series of determined offensives resisted by equally determined
armies dedicated to holding the line. You will find that your depleting resources of men and artillery must be deployed with
great thought and efficiency.”

Seems like this proposed additional rule is abandoning the essence he was trying to capture? Anyone else think so?

I would look for these tiny decals in old model kits. Anything you might have or find that is a British racing model will likely have some tiny Union Jack transfers in it. That’s all I can think of other than making your own on some with labels using felt or gel pens.

Sometimes you are damned if you do and damned if you don’t. Forums are for opinions and you know what they say about opinions…
“Opinions are like A$$hol#$, everybody has one and they usually stink”…
:|

What is the turn out looking like so far for this con? I registered last year but was unable to attend in the end (I think it was in April last year no?). I hear that the event was a success last year. I am wondering if this year will bring out any WWI 1914 players? I guess I’ll bring my box and find out. I’m looking forward to connnecting with the community and actually getting some games in. I see there is going to be a big RoE table but has anyone ever brought out Flames of War? I’m also curious to see Angels on the table so I hope there will be one.

@Flashman:

You really have to see new A&A editions as game kits.

Nobody seriously believes that the first edition is the finished article anymore; the small playtest group and cloak and dagger secrecy puts paid to that.

How many people who bought this don’t have cash? I still use my MB edition money, and have 3 or 4 unopened money packs from other games I’ve never needed.

The shortage of infantry is due to it being completely new sculpts; expect this to be rectified in the next edition.

The income chart is a serious blip, can’t believe anyone uses it.

You make some valid points Flashman, and of course in my case you are correct on all accounts. I have cash from previous games and supplements I have purchased over the years, I always tally the income at the end of every turn regardless of what the NP chart says, and I have more than enough pieces from other games to fill in the blanks. But what about a player who is completely new to the A&A universe? This person is not going to be satisfied, it’s like they don’t want new customers! They are effectively alienating new enthusiasts and are not even cashing in on their own incompetence to provide the required game pieces. I could understand WotC implementing a strategy to get people to buy extra chips, IPC’s, sculpts etc. but the reality is that they don’t even sell these extra pieces as a standalone. Which can only lead me to the conclusion that they just made a mistake or don’t care? Either way, it’s BIZARRE right? I love the games, I think they are all very clever and have subtle intricacies that impose no limits on the game’s “replay-ability”. They just haven’t constructed them very well.