September 24, 2017, 09:59:42 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Want a t-shirt? Check out our awesome Axis & Allies .org T-Shirt Store! Search me
  Articles  
   Home   Help Login Register AACalc  
Loading
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »
  Print  
Author Topic: No love for bulge?  (Read 17209 times)
Make_It_Round
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 3174


Our Aim: 100% Entry, 100% Pass


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: August 27, 2012, 10:40:57 pm »
0

The Guadalcanal combat system is a walk back to regular A&A where every hit counts.  5 successful rolls hit five units where in BOTB that could see all the rolls landing on one unit.  It is the standard combat system with a random shot at hitting a more valuable unit. It also walked back to player determined reinforcements. It walked back to moving units into the same spaces as enemy units during combat movement. 

These elements of Guadalcanal that you describe as a 'walk back' to regular A&A are virtues, not vices.


Every hit counts?

Great, because I rolled a hit, so I should get a resultant casualty on the enemy side. This fits with player intuitions, and doesn't make anyone feel 'cheated' by laying 5 of their hits on 1 infantry.


Player-determined reinforcements?

Fantastic! The players get to control the order of battle, not a cardboard sheet... This is both more satisfying and skill-testing. One of the main factors I cite to new players about what sets A&A apart from Risk is the ability to choose between a wide range of unit types, and to buy those units that best suit the situation. Imagine how terrible 'regular' A&A would be if the purchases for each round were preset by reinforcement cards!


Attacking units move into the same spaces as enemy units?

Perfect. This makes player decisions much clearer to track on the board, and works better with our intuitions of what 'combat' entails.


BotB fails to deliver the goods in each of these areas, where Guadalcanal succeeds, and then some.


Let's consider some other differences:

Each game uses supplies -- BotB to enable combat and movement, GC to build and repair infrastructure. I call this a tie, as both seem like interesting and novel uses of supplies. (As an aside, the regular game really should find some role for supplies, even as an optional rule.)

Hex map (BotB) vs. geographical map (GC): Here, I think that GC has the edge; the board is just much more aesthetically pleasing, while retaining its functionality. It makes me want to play the game, where BotB's Spartan aesthetic is quite off-putting. GC wins.

Unit Choice: BotB has no naval units (as you'd expect in a land battle!), and no extra land units or air units (e.g. half-tracks, snipers, paratroopers, engineers, dive-bombers, etc.) to compensate for this lack of variety. GC has naval units (as you'd expect in an island-to-island battle!), and also a dedicated AAA piece (while BotB has its artillery doing double duty -- as well as its being a super-unit on land -- leading to an artificial inflation of artillery's importance). Assuming they're properly balanced, more unit options make for a more interesting game. GC wins.

Consistency: In GC, all units move according to the same rules. In BotB, planes and trucks move pretty much anywhere they want, while all other units are bound to a separate set of movement rules. In fact, one of the main obstacles to my getting started in BotB was figuring out how trucks were supposed to operate in the rules. They seemed like units imported from a different game: "They move anywhere on roads? They carry what? They can be captured?" I'm certain that a more consistent and intuitive set of rules could have been implemented for trucks in BotB. GC wins.

Combat: GC uses a three-tiered air/sea/land unit combat system, as well as a near-simultaneous player commitment of units (works kind of like throwing in more chips in poker). BotB has a stacking limit (meaning that the balance of opposing forces is usually much tighter) and rules for 'displacing' enemy units through involuntary retreats. I think that both systems are interesting and contain elements that could be profitably implemented into the main game. Let's call this one a tie, too.

Reviewing all of the considerations above, I must conclude that Guadalcanal is the better system. It's not that I have 'no love' for BotB, it's that I have 'way more love' for its competing battle game (D-Day doesn't even qualify for this competition, IMO). Thanks for the occasion to further scrutinize my feelings on this matter.

Best, MIR
Logged
frimmel
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Battleship
*
*
******
Posts: 3659


Krieghund Rule Deputy for BOTB, GCNL, D-Day


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: August 28, 2012, 04:03:29 am »
0

The Guadalcanal combat system is a walk back to regular A&A where every hit counts.  5 successful rolls hit five units where in BOTB that could see all the rolls landing on one unit.  It is the standard combat system with a random shot at hitting a more valuable unit. It also walked back to player determined reinforcements. It walked back to moving units into the same spaces as enemy units during combat movement.  

These elements of Guadalcanal that you describe as a 'walk back' to regular A&A are virtues, not vices.



I'd say that (and your entire post really) illustrates why we've gotten nothing but modestly tweaked reprints for 5 years.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2012, 04:05:41 am by frimmel » Logged
frimmel
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Battleship
*
*
******
Posts: 3659


Krieghund Rule Deputy for BOTB, GCNL, D-Day


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: August 28, 2012, 04:06:31 am »
0

So I got the game today and when I opened it up , low and behold there it is!!!  Copy's of frimmels strategy guides for both axis and allies!  It looks like the guy that sold it is a user on this site.   Very pleased to see the axis and allies.org logo as soon as I open the box.

I look forward to reading these tips and thanks to you, guy from North Carolina that was kind enough to include them.

Awesome.  afro
Logged
Gargantua
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 14550


AA.org's Villain


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: August 28, 2012, 06:54:44 am »
0

The way the allies win, is by managing a successful retreat, and keeping units ALIVE.

You're not looking to defeat the German onslaught,  you're just looking to prevent them from taking the win.

Very simple theory IMO...
Logged
frimmel
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Battleship
*
*
******
Posts: 3659


Krieghund Rule Deputy for BOTB, GCNL, D-Day


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: August 28, 2012, 07:05:34 am »
0

The way the allies win, is by managing a successful retreat, and keeping units ALIVE.

You're not looking to defeat the German onslaught,  you're just looking to prevent them from taking the win.

Very simple theory IMO...

Yep, but it is not what is usually 'done' in A&A. Add that to Make It Round's list of why BOTB 'fails' (on the one hand complaining about not enough unit types while on the other complaining because he couldn't figure out how trucks work) and folks have a terribly hard time getting their head's around the whole thing.

« Last Edit: August 28, 2012, 07:07:38 am by frimmel » Logged
Make_It_Round
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 3174


Our Aim: 100% Entry, 100% Pass


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: August 28, 2012, 07:52:36 pm »
0

The way the allies win, is by managing a successful retreat, and keeping units ALIVE.

You're not looking to defeat the German onslaught,  you're just looking to prevent them from taking the win.

Very simple theory IMO...

Yep, but it is not what is usually 'done' in A&A. Add that to Make It Round's list of why BOTB 'fails' (on the one hand complaining about not enough unit types while on the other complaining because he couldn't figure out how trucks work) and folks have a terribly hard time getting their head's around the whole thing.



Assuming that they are well balanced and made consistent with the way other units operate, more units to choose from is always a plus.

My beef was not that they included a truck unit in the game, but rather the cavalier manner in which they attached radically different rules for its behavior and function.

There's no contradiction inherent in what I'm saying.

An extreme example: A sculpt made to look like a UFO, which according to the rules should appear on a random territory or sea zone at the end of each player's turn, destroying every other unit there, would be counter-intuitive and unwelcome. It just doesn't fit in the context of the game (like having tanks that move '2' but trucks that move 'infinite'). You probably would want to exclude it from the game or add house rules to fix it (although you would still save the sculpt for one reason or another).
Logged
frimmel
2007 AAR League
A&A.org Battleship
*
*
******
Posts: 3659


Krieghund Rule Deputy for BOTB, GCNL, D-Day


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: August 29, 2012, 04:59:28 am »
0

Look, Make it Round, all of your complaints add up to "It isn't 'regular' A&A." Enough of the rest of the audience for these games share your opinion (or the Powers That Be think enough share your opinion) so what we've gotten is nearing on 8 revisions of 'regular' A&A over the last 5 years. Since Guadalcanal appears to be even less popular than BOTB despite all of the walk backs towards 'regular' A&A, I hold no hope that we're going to ever see anything on the lines of BOTB ever again. I find that very sad on a number of levels.
Logged
wittmann
Site Moderator
A&A.org Heavy Bomber
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*******
Posts: 15811


KIA 8th August 1944


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: August 29, 2012, 06:40:53 am »
0

I wish there was a similar game. I love my Bulge!
And probably could learn to love Guadalcanal if I gave  it a few more goes:  do not have the time.
Logged
Yavid
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 832


Ray Guy Hall of Fame punter


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: August 29, 2012, 05:27:34 pm »
0

I loved Bulge, and D-Day haven't tried GC. I was very excited when D-Day was released, again excited for Bulge and again excited for GC unfortantly I never got GC due to life getting in the way but I still plan on buying it one day. I like both Bulge and D-Day so much when I started rebuilding my A&A collection I prechased them before Revised, Classic and the old Europe/Pacific games. I was so very much hoping they would cont. doing the same type of games. I was thinking and looking forward to stuff like Kursk, The Invasion of Italy, North Africa, Battle of the Atlantic, Iwo Jima, Phillpines all stuff I would have loved to have seen the light of day. Alot of people complain about D-Day, Bulge, and GC and even more people complain about how none of the games I've listed has ever been released. Well complaining about the games they did do isn't a very good way of getting them to do the games you want them to do. I would love something more than just reprinting and tweeking old games.
Logged
Make_It_Round
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 3174


Our Aim: 100% Entry, 100% Pass


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2012, 09:14:03 pm »
0

Look, Make it Round, all of your complaints add up to "It isn't 'regular' A&A." Enough of the rest of the audience for these games share your opinion (or the Powers That Be think enough share your opinion) so what we've gotten is nearing on 8 revisions of 'regular' A&A over the last 5 years. Since Guadalcanal appears to be even less popular than BOTB despite all of the walk backs towards 'regular' A&A, I hold no hope that we're going to ever see anything on the lines of BOTB ever again. I find that very sad on a number of levels.

Simply untrue. I lauded the Guadalcanal system for its 3-tier combat system, and simultaneous unit movement, neither of which appear in the core game. But hey, if the core game bores you, you don't need to play A&A... there are plenty of other games out there for you.

Lamenting BotB's lack of popularity is like getting worked up about the demise of some obscure tribal dialect in New Guinea... You could do it, but there isn't much point to it.
Logged
Yavid
A&A.org Submarine
****
Posts: 832


Ray Guy Hall of Fame punter


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: September 02, 2012, 06:56:34 am »
0

I think the reason why Bulge isn't or wasn't popular is the different combat system. It's so different you have to throw out everything you know about Axis and Allies and look at it as a different game. And on top of that it's not a simple system. I saw it last night when I was showing off the games I had at a game of Global. After I said the combat system is different and takes so time to get used to no one seemed interested anymore.
Logged
ABWorsham
A&A.org Bomber
*****
Posts: 2499


Capt. Archer Ben Worsham in 1918


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: October 10, 2012, 04:35:30 pm »
0

Twice monthly is pushing it... lol.

I hear that. My kids have legos everywhere.
Logged
Pacific War
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 175



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: October 10, 2012, 08:48:21 pm »
0

I loved Bulge, and D-Day haven't tried GC. I was very excited when D-Day was released, again excited for Bulge and again excited for GC unfortantly I never got GC due to life getting in the way but I still plan on buying it one day. I like both Bulge and D-Day so much when I started rebuilding my A&A collection I prechased them before Revised, Classic and the old Europe/Pacific games. I was so very much hoping they would cont. doing the same type of games. I was thinking and looking forward to stuff like Kursk, The Invasion of Italy, North Africa, Battle of the Atlantic, Iwo Jima, Phillpines all stuff I would have loved to have seen the light of day. Alot of people complain about D-Day, Bulge, and GC and even more people complain about how none of the games I've listed has ever been released. Well complaining about the games they did do isn't a very good way of getting them to do the games you want them to do. I would love something more than just reprinting and tweeking old games.

You might be pleasantly surprised very soon my friend.......
Logged
Make_It_Round
A&A.org Battleship
******
Posts: 3174


Our Aim: 100% Entry, 100% Pass


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: October 10, 2012, 11:12:51 pm »
0

I loved Bulge, and D-Day haven't tried GC. I was very excited when D-Day was released, again excited for Bulge and again excited for GC unfortantly I never got GC due to life getting in the way but I still plan on buying it one day. I like both Bulge and D-Day so much when I started rebuilding my A&A collection I prechased them before Revised, Classic and the old Europe/Pacific games. I was so very much hoping they would cont. doing the same type of games. I was thinking and looking forward to stuff like Kursk, The Invasion of Italy, North Africa, Battle of the Atlantic, Iwo Jima, Phillpines all stuff I would have loved to have seen the light of day. Alot of people complain about D-Day, Bulge, and GC and even more people complain about how none of the games I've listed has ever been released. Well complaining about the games they did do isn't a very good way of getting them to do the games you want them to do. I would love something more than just reprinting and tweeking old games.

You might be pleasantly surprised very soon my friend.......

Is this simply blithe reassurance or do you have some facts you'd care to report?
Logged
Pacific War
A&A.org Artillery
**
Posts: 175



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: October 11, 2012, 05:51:37 am »
0

I'm sworn to secrecy at the moment.  grin   All I can say is that a company other than Hasbro is coming out with a fresh idea.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

2017 Support Drive

Read about this 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: Historical Board Gaming

Axis & Allies.org Official Silver Sponsor: Field Marchal Games
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP © 2015 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 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!