WORLD CHAMP AA50 DOUBLE ELIMINATION 41+42, $25 AMAZON EACH

I know this post is pretty old, but I agree Karl.

I have a friend that I played endless AA games with a long time ago (classic & revised days). We played AA50 a couple of times when it first came out, but he hasn’t played now for years. He is interested in playing again, so I dug out my AA50 game (had to replenish units I stole over the years). We are planning a game in the next week or so and I’m looking forward to playing AA50 again. I thought about going with 1942 2nd edition, but AA50 is so much better IMO. Who knows maybe he’ll make the jump to G40 after……

On page 5

Shouldn’t “fighter” be replaced with “cruiser” in the first line of the answer. The defender has a sub and cruiser, the attacker has the fighter.

Q. Assume there’s a sea zone that contains an enemy sub and cruiser, and that I attack it with a destroyer and a fighter. If the defender scores two hits in the first combat round, can I take the hit from the cruiser on my destroyer, saving my fighter, since the sub can’t hit it?
A. No. Because you have a destroyer, the defender’s sub rolls in Step 4 along with his or her fighter cruiser. Since both defending units roll in the same combat step and all dice are rolled in a step before applying casualties, the two hits are applied together. Therefore, you must apply both hits if possible. The only way to apply both hits is to take the cruiser hit on the fighter and the sub hit on the destroyer.

I have an AA50 for sale. It has been played a few times but is still in excellent condition. If anyone is interested send me a message with an offer and the highest offer by 02/05/10 will get it along with the full set of Combat Dice from FMG. I also have a copy of 2nd edition, Revised, Europe, the original Pacific game, and Battle of the Bulge available for sale. Message me on those as well. I am keeping AAP40 and AA42. Thanks.

Panther, you’re +46/-0 now because that calculator is nice!  It’s already helped me a lot!

@hakan:

I have changed my mind. I also think the NO’s are brilliant! Not only because they make the strategies look more like in the real war, but also (don’t bark at me Krieghund) because you can balance the game yourself, or to simulate for example the “Sino-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact”, just by adding a few lines in the NO. Much better then to add complicated Optional Rules.

I have nothing against house rules, per se.  I use them myself.  I just think that some people are too quick to implement house rules to address perceived imbalances in games, before enough games have been played to determine whether there actually is a balance issue.

Except first rnd, Jap killed my BB, all US units went to Europe. The problem with the -41 scenario is that US must use much more ipc to build a sustainable fleet than in the 42 scenario. I did not play effective as allies though, with not killing German fleet UK1, I screwed US purchases etc. Maybe I played too aggressive with Russia, but I think Germany + Italy could take Caucasus anyway. Game wouldnt end if I didn’t take Berlin, unless the attempt was a failure :)
Axis player slowed Jap himself with not taking either Philly or Borneo and east Indies J1, but the Jap beachhead in Asia was as strong as the Normandy landings, so there is not really an opening to KJF, more than in AAR. SJF is important where it can be done. I killed a lone Jap trans with DD, these things are mistakes that will happen sometimes, until we get used to the new rules.

lol!