@The_Good_Captain Yes. Only “unoccupied” territories may be blitzed through.
Armor values
-
So I’m looking at the rules for AAE, and wondering about the attack/defend values for armor. I believe that the game (AAE-1999) in my rule book) came out before AAR (2004), and so it seems that perhaps that is why the classic rules for armor are used. If AAE was released post-AAR, it seem possible (no guarantee) that it would have incorporated the armor values from AAR rather than Classic? Do you think that values for revised att-3/def-3 should be used instead of att-3/def-2 that the rules have?
Do you think that this would skew the balance of the game (assuming you see it as a balanced game to begin) or would it potentially bring balance or at least help to balance?
-
Making armor 3-3 would further significantly unbalance the game in favour of Germany. Germany starts the game with 13 armor on the board. Russia has 5, UK has 3 and US has none. Therefore, you have significantly enhanced the ability of the Germans to defend and hold a forward position in Russia. On top of that, transport capacity for the Allies (the manner in which all UK and US ground units get into play) is limited to 1 armor. Therefore increasing the defensive strength of armor does not help the Allies at all. While Russia could use a few armor units, it is so short of IPCs that it cannot build many.
The game is already unbalanced in favour of Germany and the turn 7 stack. Making armor defend on a 3 only makes the problem worse.
SS
-
Murry Moto is you play with 3/3 tanks then you may want to give the soviets a siberian army to compensate. At BGG they have a house rule under AAE where the soviets have such an army. If you dont use this then i would consider some ‘winter rules’ for german units to slow the tanks down somewhat.
rolld D6 1-2 clear ( no effect), 3-4, mud ( rasputita- all units move one) 5-6 snow ( all move at 1- all land units attack at one).
-
This question came from when we’ve played AAE, which hasn’t been much I’ll admit, the german’s fate is sealed about 4 rounds in. Maybe they haven’t been aggressive enough, I don’t know.
I guess if AAE had come out post AAR, then tanks may well have been 3/3, as would transports capacities been upgraded like Saburo mentioned, and the layout of units to begin would have been altered to compensate.
And that’s the beauty of playing house rules.
thanks for the input…
-
Make sure to look at Boardgamegeek and also Elbowmasters 1944 scenario
-
IL,
I forgot to mention too that the alternate rules that you posted in other threads with the weather factors and Siberian army are a nice variation. Thanks!if anyone else is interested:
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=7067.0 -
Armours at 3/3 don’t foster the practice of high level strategy.
Transports with transport capability of an armour plus an infantry each, also don’t.
Two reasons among others
why success in Revised is less likely to represent high quality strategy.
Thus is less interesting and a disapointment from a competitive point of view.I would think the opposite. you excatly get some startgry to buying units.
-
To perhaps address historical differences you could do this:
Start with American, Soviet, British and Japanese tanks at 3/2 and all tanks built in the future by soviets and America at 3/3 ( use Milton Bradley tanks for 3/2).
Japanese and British tanks stay at 3/2 costs 5 for entire gameAlso, German tanks cost 6 but attack at 4/3 these apply to starting tanks as well as built tanks. The Germans can build one 4/4 tank per turn also at 6 (representing SS Panzerkorps)
American tanks still cost 5 and are 3/3
-
My suggestion would be this: consider only Soviet starting tanks 3-3 to represent the huge and virtually indestructible KV1s. Germany only applies 3-3 to new tanks built after the opening turn, the western Allies never.
-
@Imperious:
To perhaps address historical differences you could do this:
Start with American, Soviet, British and Japanese tanks at 3/2 and all tanks built in the future by soviets and America at 3/3 ( use Milton Bradley tanks for 3/2).
Japanese and British tanks stay at 3/2 costs 5 for entire gameAlso, German tanks cost 6 but attack at 4/3 these apply to starting tanks as well as built tanks. The Germans can build one 4/4 tank per turn also at 6 (representing SS Panzerkorps)
American tanks still cost 5 and are 3/3
Thats a good idea, the only problom I see is keeping trac of them all.
-
I have always played Europe and Pacific for that matter with revised unit values. Carrier 16,Tanks defend on 3,fighters 10. Maybe because I got AAR first. I don’t think that it unbalances the game with the defend 3. I find it is definitely easier to win with Revised as the axis then in AAR.
IPC Startoff
AAR
Allies-96IPC
Axis- 70IPC
=26 IPC initial advantageAAE
Allies-89IPC
Axis-40
=49 IPC initial Advantage. -
Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?
-
I think they reduced the IPC amount and defense value for tanks to encourage different unit purchases. Not all inf and subs.
-
Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?
“Players didn’t purchase fighters as often as we wanted. Now they’re a better buy, so they’re more likely to be purchased.”
(From my Revised Box)
And maybe… they are right.
-
Can anyone tell me why they changed the fg value from 12-10 IC in AAR-AAE?
They didn’t know how handle those numbers to accurately emulate WWII battles/tactics…Thus the route followed from 2nd Edition, instead of improving such emulation, screwd up/decreased it…AARevised is a step backwards in WWII battle/tactic/strategy emulation.
It was a Revision for worse(though there are few improvements).can you please explain how its a step backwards.
-
I feel a good emulation/simulation should model the usefulness of air units in WWII.
For power vs. IPC air units is a bad purchase.
By reducing the cost of the fighter the benefits of an air unit can show a tad better.Yes sales is important at the end of the day.
Revised is for age 12+ so they can’t make it too complicated.But for us, just create house rules to your tastes. Introducing air combat rules for example can add much dynamics to land combat.
Suggested Topics
