Are people still into 2nd Ed?

I’ve heard that one of the online clubs still has a small group of regular players.  And then there is the casual crowd who didn’t ever buy revised (and may not have even heard of it).  The latter demographic is probably not very active online.

Myself I haven’t played the Gamemaster edition in years, and likely won’t pick it up again unless by special request of my opponent.  I’m keeping a copy handy just in case!  I did just buy a vintage set of the old bookcase edition by Nova Games (1981).  This looks very different than Milton Bradley’s, and I hope to get one half to a full dozen games of it played at some point in time.

A few things:

1)  The rules are established in Classic

2)  I assume there are a lot more players who actually own the Classic game than who own Revised, Europe, Pacific, Anniversary, Etc…probably more who own Classic than all the rest combined.  But that’s opinion. (Some people think every opinion I espouse is me claiming it’s a die hard fact, so I generally have to say opinion or suffer a few irate twits spamming my responses with accusations I’m lieing or distorting the facts or whatever.)

3)  The tournament rules for Classic have been generally accepted uniformly across the spectrum of clubs.

4)  Most of these clubs, I think, formed during the days of the MS Gaming Zone when the Hasbro Axis and Allies and Iron Blitz games were released.

5)  We call it classic because it’s just that, a classic game!  Asking why it’s still around could be taken as asking why Chess or Checkers is still around. (AKA, that would be, taken as an insult. heh.)

6)  My personal opinion here, but, I think many people who remain and play only classic do so because they have formulas of what to do, when to do it, and how to recover from bad dice or exploit hot dice.  They say things like: 7 Infantry per 1 Tank; 7 Tanks per 1 Fighter; 7 Fighters per 1 Bomber.  That’s just an example, it’s not a recommendation for or against that ratio of equipment.  They know what their first round builds and attacks are, they know what their over all strategy is, etc.  They follow a set plan to the letter making only those modifications necessary to adjust for the fluctuation in dice. (Note, they take into account the statistical probabilities in their strategy, so we’re talking a relatively minor set of adjustments to their builds and moves to account for a few bad or good dice.)

The above are just my opinions.  I’m not saying it is fact.  I am not saying that they are bad players because they use a script - maybe they developed the script?  You can’t say a human is a bad player because they always play the first 4 moves of Chess the same way either.  I do feel they are missing out on a lot of fun by sticking to classic and nothing but.

Long time lurker, first time poster. I like the idea of the familiararity of the board and you know your moves. We have just started playing different versions within the last two years and I really like them, although we bust out the classic every third or fourth game now.

How do people play the new games and then go back and play Classic?  No Artillery, Destroyers, or Cruisers?  Submarines don’t ever submerge?  Single hit Battleships?  Carrier’s build with no planes on them?

Nope, don’t think I will ever play classic again.

Well, remember, the board is a lot smaller in classic than the newer versions as well.

For instance, England can build a carrier and American can land fighters from W. USA on it.  You just cannot do that anymore (Anniversary)

Submarines did not submerge, but they could retreat, buying you 3 movement points half of the time. (assuming 1 fighter vs 1 submarine with a non-enemy occupied sea zone to retreat to.)

And there is, of course, the added benefit of being able to finish a game between Lunch and Dinner without at least one non-gamer running screaming from the room because there are too many rules.

However, I, personally, am using classic to teach my children how to play before getting them into more advanced games.  It seems like a child’s version of Axis and Allies with dumbed down rules - comparitively speaking.  But still, all versions (sorry, all GLOBAL versions) are awesome!  I do not fancy Europe/Pacific A&A, but that’s just me.

@Cmdr:

However, I, personally, am using classic to teach my children how to play before getting them into more advanced games.

Now that’s a cool mom.  Not too many moms playing A&A with their kids  :-D

@gamerman01:

@Cmdr:

However, I, personally, am using classic to teach my children how to play before getting them into more advanced games.

Now that’s a cool mom.  Not too many moms playing A&A with their kids   :-D

I’m trying to teach my Mom to play.

If you want to freshen up your classic game, I recently finished an update for the 2nd edition that adapts many rules from AA40 and AA50.You can download the 4 page .pdf here. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/56539/rules-update-for-the-second-edition

@cyscott1:

If you want to freshen up your classic game, I recently finished an update for the 2nd edition that adapts many rules from AA40 and AA50.You can download the 4 page .pdf here. http://www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/56539/rules-update-for-the-second-edition

Hmmm - that’s cool, thanks.  I saved it, and will have to read it in detail some time.  They even have scrambling in there - jeez.

I play the 2nd edition because I own it. I can’t justify buying a new game, finding players is impossible in my area.

@ABWorsham:

I play the 2nd edition because I own it. I can’t justify buying a new game, finding players is impossible in my area.

Impossible everywhere except at conventions, I fear.

I’m in the navy, and on every ship I’ve been assigned to, I’ve recruited new players in order to have someone to play with, and we’ve allways started with the classic, and moved on to europe and pacific editions. The classic is the best game to intoduce to new players.

1. There is a bigger pool of players for Classic. Once you move to the niche games, it is harder to find an opponent.

2. The 3rd edition rules allow submarines to submerge and battleships can have 2 hits. Very good for the Japs!

@Iphicrates:

The 3rd edition rules allow submarines to submerge and battleships can have 2 hits. Very good for the Japs!

This is good for everyone, not just the Japanese…

@Juhlius:

I’m in the navy, and on every ship I’ve been assigned to, I’ve recruited new players in order to have someone to play with, and we’ve allways started with the classic, and moved on to europe and pacific editions. The classic is the best game to intoduce to new players.

Thanks for your service.

@Iphicrates:

The 3rd edition rules allow submarines to submerge and battleships can have 2 hits. Very good for the Japs!

Now here’s a question that I have. Have the 3rd edition rules ever been published? Or do they merely exist on the electronic platform of the 1998 A&A computer game?

They were not published outside of the computer game, but I have seen them in PDF form.

@Cmdr:

Submarines did not submerge, but they could retreat, buying you 3 movement points half of the time. (assuming 1 fighter vs 1 submarine with a non-enemy occupied sea zone to retreat to.)

Dusts off thread  That was only in the 3rd ed. (PC version).  In the 2nd ed, the defending sub just waited until the fighter sunk it.  Mind you, the 3rd ed rules became very popular with the boardgamers, too.  Too bad they never became official.  Maybe we need a new alpha for it.  :-D