September 23, 2014, 12:26:05 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Do you live near Cincinnati? Join us this weekend for A&A Spring Gathering XI on April 5-6, 2013. Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register AACalc  
Loading
Poll
Question: Do you want europe1940 NAs like in AAR??
yes - 35 (66%)
no - 13 (24.5%)
doesnt matter - 5 (9.4%)
Total Voters: 52

Pages: 1 2 3 4 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Do you want europe NAs like in AAR??  (Read 2638 times)
i rock
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 606


best tank ever B****


View Profile
« on: February 10, 2010, 01:56:35 pm »
0

ive played AAR alot and the one thing i will miss is NAs their so cool like germany buying subs to kill US UK income.
Logged
savage
A&A.org Infantry
*
Posts: 28



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2010, 03:40:14 pm »
0

in the new game the Germans will be able to destroy ipc's with subs through convoys
Logged
idk_iam_swiss
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 699



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2010, 10:39:13 pm »
0

Wont that only complicate matters? add a whole nother level of crazy?
Logged
allboxcars
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 724


Bellum omnium contra omnes (SPNBS)


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2010, 05:51:55 am »
0

ive played AAR alot and the one thing i will miss is NAs their so cool like germany buying subs to kill US UK income.

Well I concede they add flavour... but I've always been skeptical of NAs as they tend to favour repeating the war, ignoring the potential for ahistorical game developments.

For instance, making Marines an American NA (rather than a unit anyone can purchase or develop) seems to me IMTO to be the wrong way to model this capability.

Making Partisans a Soviet NA raises the question: are we saying the Mexicans couldn't have conducted guerrilla warfare against a Japanese occupier?

And of course NAs tend to reek of game balancing... "OK everybody but the Italians have five NAs, quick stop editing that battlestrip and come up with a 5th for Italy!"


#462
Logged
Lozmoid
A&A.org Submarine
*
*
****
Posts: 829



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2010, 06:07:47 am »
0

I voted No because there's already plenty going on as it is, what with National Objectives and the like. They were cool with AAR but things have moved on from there.
Logged
finnman
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 348



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2010, 11:06:21 am »
0

Yes I loved them, my favourite was fortress europe but some {like island bases were stupid
Logged
Stoney229
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 798



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2010, 01:34:48 pm »
0

I loved playing NAs!  After a playing the game with the same people for a while you want to change it up and make it more interesting - NAs is the perfect way to do that!
Logged
The Fire Knight
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 280



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2010, 05:01:56 pm »
0

As long as it doesn't ruin the game balance. I always thought that the allies having 18 NAs and the axis having 12 in the revised edition was a bit unfair. So I made it so that each of the allies only got 4.
Logged
Gharen
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 149


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2010, 05:50:59 pm »
0

I think the NOs were their attempt to replace NAs but it doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see them in globabl game, not just europe.  And as for complicating the game more, once you wrap your head around all of the rules it just adds more to the richness and depth of the game.  I say bring on more unique things to make it an even more insane board game.
Logged
Brain Damaged
Guest
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2010, 08:01:10 pm »
0

Heavy Bombers was always a game ender.
Logged
finnman
A&A.org Tank
***
Posts: 348



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 24, 2010, 02:21:16 pm »
0

Heavy Bombers was always a game ender.
I thought heavy bombers was a tech not a na
Logged
Brain Damaged
Guest
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2010, 07:05:33 pm »
0

Tech, NA what's the difference?
Logged
idk_iam_swiss
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 699



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2010, 09:56:27 pm »
0

I Lot less Lulz
Logged
Brain Damaged
Guest
« Reply #13 on: February 25, 2010, 06:24:48 pm »
0

I Lot less Lulz

Translation please.
Logged
idk_iam_swiss
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 699



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2010, 09:10:08 pm »
0

meaning a lot less fun. Techs are game ending but can typically be achieved by any side. (especially the way i play with techs larrys way gaurountees they will be universally ignored. as they were.

NAs are those things that give specific countries specific bonuses. for example Russian winter or Japanese bonsai soldiers Typically made the games NO FUN. I cant tell you how un-fun it was to stay up past midnight playing with friends and have that dumb russian winter. Plus america had better "NAs" while japans "NAs" were terrible. They were subjective. and dont even get me started on how awful the axis advantages were when compared to the allied.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2014 Support Drive
Support Level
Forum Username
Note: payee will appear as Livid Labs, LLC.
Buy Axis & Allies
  • Axis & Allies 1942 [Amazon]
  • A&A Pacific 1940 [Amazon]
  • A&A Europe 1940 [FMG]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • A&A D-Day [Amazon]
  • A&A Battle of the Bulge [Amazon]
  • [eBay]
  • [eBay]
  • WWII Themed Combat Dice [FMG]



Axis and Allies.org Official Gold Sponsor: Field Marshal Games

Axis & Allies.org Official Silver Sponsor: Historical Board Gaming
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2014 Livid Labs, LLC. All rights reserved.
Axis & Allies is registered trademark of Wizards of the Coast, a division of Hasbro, Inc.
Note: the copyright below is for the forum software only.
Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!