The War Game - Massive Axis and Allies Variant

[Imperious Leader]

yes goto the site. they are posted in pdf.

[Ddraiglais]

Any new developements for the game? Are we still looking at late Summer for a release?

[Imperious Leader]

yes indeed. August release

[Flashman]

IL mentions a future version featuring nation specific pieces for all the powers.  Two questions on this for those of us considering buying the game:

Does the future version (i.e. with ns pieces) depend on the success of the first run, or is that success already considered a certainty?

If we buy the first production, will it be possible to buy the new ns pieces as an addition rather than buying the whole game again to get them?

Of course I have certain issues with the board, which suffers heavily from “Pakistan syndrome”, but modifying boards is standard practice with me anyway.  I like the principles behind the naval pass-through, though I’m not quite sure I fully grok it yet, and have suggested a similar rule for tank breakthroughs.

Another interesting rule is that of rail movement limited by IPC values of territories they pass through;  how does this work in practice, and doesn’t it slow the game down as people try to work out their optimum timetables?

[Imperious Leader]

Does the future version (i.e. with ns pieces) depend on the success of the first run, or is that success already considered a certainty?

Nothing is certain. Its only the plan if everything goes AS PLANED. If too many people sit on the freaking fence not wishing to part with a misely $129.00 hoping to wait for a version with nation specific pieces… you will wait 10 years and end up buying the copy you should have bought in the first place, but now will be paying 300.00 on ebay for one of the few original prints.  So just buy a copy when it comes out and don’t wait.

If we buy the first production, will it be possible to buy the new ns pieces as an addition rather than buying the whole game again to get them?
YES, i asked Jeff this specifically. Its important to me too.

Of course I have certain issues with the board, which suffers heavily from “Pakistan syndrome”, but modifying boards is standard practice with me anyway.  I like the principles behind the naval pass-through, though I’m not quite sure I fully grok it yet, and have suggested a similar rule for tank breakthroughs.
The ONLY board issue after playing this like 100 times is too few territories in European Russia. Thats it.

Another interesting rule is that of rail movement limited by IPC values of territories they pass through;  how does this work in practice, and doesn’t it slow the game down as people try to work out their optimum timetables?

No not at all, once you do it after a while its really easy. You start by counting all the low IPC territories and using them first, then moving to the higher capacities. The idea works well

[Flashman]

Thanks.
Wondering about which “General” figures will be included:

We have Rommel
I would expect:
Montgomery
Patton
Zhukov
Yamamoto (he’d look silly in yellow, but I always said Japan should be white…)
De Gaulle
Aosta? Was there an outstanding Italian general?
Stillwell?  An American Chinese commander - well Chiang doesn’t seem to have gone too near the front line…

By the way, wouldn’t Chungking have been a better choice as Chinese capital, as Peking looks very vulnerable to Japanese attack?

Another thing - do we really still need blow-up boxes when the map is this big?  Or are the pieces correspondingly big as well?

[Imperious Leader]

The same general (Rommel) is used for all nations.

The pieces are a bit larger ( especially the planes and the tanks) and so some blow up boxes may be needed.

Capitals mean nothing in this game, as most civilized nations don’t fall that way anymore. they just move to a new location away from bloodshed and continue fighting. When all the industrial areas are under enemy hands then surrender becomes an option. Of course the exception is always france, but after all i did say ‘civilized’.

In the case of China Peking always falls on turn one, unless the Japanese player wants lose the game.

[Flashman]

I was suggesting generals for the new national pieces.  Have they been designed yet?

Peking should be Japanese to start with anyway, though I’m not sure it would qualify as industrialised in any case.  I just think the map would look better with Szechan as the natural “centre” for China, as well as being authenticaly the capital of the KMT.

[Imperious Leader]

http://www.thewargame.com/supplysergeant.htm

Its finally available to buy!!!

Go ahead and snap it up a new game is born!!!

[Imperious Leader]

Chongqing is what it your referring too but that was only Chiang Kai-shek’s provisional capital after the retreat from Nanking. But China was split anyway and fighting civil war so their is no real official unified capital. You can infer that Peking is really what hes calling the Hopei province. But like my Napoleonic wars its overlapping more than one province including parts of Shansi, Hopei, Jehol, and Shantung… so the name Peking as as good as any other. You see in these games their are no fixed names especially for territories carved out the the sake of game playability.

And in 1928, China moved its capital further south from Peking (Beijing) to Nanking ( in the Anhwei province), but latter the Japanese took this area too and the nationals had to move once more. But as i said capitals have no meaning in this game so it doesn’t matter anyway. When you get your copy you can make decals for all your corrections and grammar.

[Adlertag]

This could be the best map ever, but the Atlantic art with charging soldiers and roowling tanks make too much nuisance. I think art with mating whales had been better. Or even a compass needle had been better, than looking at a tank in the middle of Atlantic.

And typically the plastic pieces are either too big or too small to canabalize to the core game.

IL, when will this baby hit the Geek-list ?
A&A Revised is in 218’th place  with 7.18 points, if this get rated higher, i’ll buy it.

[Imperious Leader]

They are not the wrong size. IMO

you can use the tigers as heavy tanks

the fighters

all the naval pieces

the infantry

artillery

factories

basically only the bomber and maus tank are too big . thats only 2 pieces so stop complaining.

Buy the game and stop being so cheap.

[Flashman]

Will the new national pieces have the equivalent of the 190 and Maus?  Only the Maus is a terrible choice; a useless pet project of Hitler’s that never saw action. 
Given that the game specifically encourages the development of new units, I think medium and heavy tanks would have been far better than Heavy and “Too heavy”.  I want Panzer IVs!

Hoping the new units are not designed yet, hopefully feed back on the game will produce the new pieces people really want.

My choice would be tech units, even if tech is not officially part of the game:

SS inf - Australians, Indians, Romanians etc. rather than “elite” units

Nebelwefer - Heavy Artillery
FW 190 - Long range fighter
me262 - Jet fighter
Maus - medium/heavy tank (PIV, KV1, Pershing, Comet)
Heavy bombers - are the WWII pieces too big even for this?
The subs will do for long range subs

Rockets
Radar installations

[Imperious Leader]

These are already in the game:

Nebelwefer - Heavy Artillery
me262 - Jet fighter
Maus - heavy tank
–---------------------------------------------------

Heavy bombers - are the WWII pieces too big even for this?.. the bombers are quite large

they are not worrying about other new pieces and as i said if your waiting for them you will wait 10 years. It will take a number of 2,000 print runs to recoup costs and thats what they plan to do before breaking the bank, with 100 new molds just so you can totally change the game to suit your needs. They are going after real customers and not piece junkies to sell this game. Just buy it and play it and stop finding ways to change a game you never played before. The game is very good for what it does.

[Adlertag]

@Imperious:

Buy the game and stop being so cheap.

I am a poor noob, can only afford one monster-map, wich should it bee ?
I like the mountains in WWII:Struggle map, and the rules too, but have an issue with the ruined Africa.
I like the War Game Massive map too, but miss convoy zones and mountain territory, and are annoied by the art in Atlantic.
I also like the deluxe maps from IL, but disagree with the IPC income.

I need to sleep on this one.

[Flashman]

@Imperious:

they are not worrying about other new pieces and as i said if your waiting for them you will wait 10 years. It will take a number of 2,000 print runs to recoup costs and thats what they plan to do before breaking the bank, with 100 new molds just so you can totally change the game to suit your needs. They are going after real customers and not piece junkies to sell this game. Just buy it and play it and stop finding ways to change a game you never played before. The game is very good for what it does.

But the very fact that the extra semi-official pieces are listed in the rulebook demonstrates that the designer knows full well that his target audience (expereinced A&A players) very rarely play games “out of the box” for more than a few times before introducing their own rules and changes. This is not a criticism of the game, merely a recognition that it is clearly created with customisable rules and pieces in mind.

Aldertag: you’ve criticised the IPC values on my maps too - do you have your own map or list of values to compare with others?

I don’t think convoy zones are relevant on a WORLD map, as they were introduced in E and P to represent income from areas off-board. This should be represented by the transportation of actual units and the ability of opponents to sink them.

[Adlertag]

@Flashman:

Aldertag: you’ve criticised the IPC values on my maps too - do you have your own map or list of values to compare with others?

I don’t think convoy zones are relevant on a WORLD map, as they were introduced in E and P to represent income from areas off-board. This should be represented by the transportation of actual units and the ability of opponents to sink them.

Hi englishman

I got Mark Harrisons book about economics on WW II, and know presicely how much GDP income each had, and how much they used on military outlays, and how many guns they made etc. All I want is a game that reflects the historic facts. Before the release of Revised in 2004, AH had a series of articles where Mike Selinker said he would give the Axis something they did not have in real world, he would give them money. Now if I wantet a balanced game I would buy Attack ! from Eagle Games, there every player start with 10 inf, 6 tanks and 4 artillery, and can pick 4 territories each to start with. Its even more balanced than Risk.

As for convoy zones, in my head they represents “wet territories” that give the controller some economic advantages. They may represent international trade with neutrals, or the benefit of using ships instead of trucks to move resources. I think one of the first WiF editions had a very correct system where you moved every resource with a ship, but it booged down the game, so in the latest ed they used convoy zones.

[Imperious Leader]

But the very fact that the extra semi-official pieces are listed in the rulebook demonstrates that the designer knows full well that his target audience (expereinced A&A players) very rarely play games “out of the box” for more than a few times before introducing their own rules and changes. This is not a criticism of the game, merely a recognition that it is clearly created with customisable rules and pieces in mind.

Not correct. The extra pieces have always been part of the ‘full’ version of the game that we play as well. These pieces form the optional rules for the game. They should be already posted somewhere on the site or will be soon. The extra pieces add complexity to the game and the designer doesn’t believe in ‘house rules’ his original concept has not changed since the late 1980’s with the sole exception of various set up changes and rules for 1939 which are seldom played and are very scripted.

[Flashman]

Hi Norseman.

I wonder about the accuracy of your information, for example does German income include any for conquered territory like Ukraine, Belarus and  France, or any money for places that invited the Nazi in like Norway?  :-o
Does Japan’s figure include the vast resources captured in Burma, Malaya and the East Indies, not to mention Manchuria and China?  Remember also that to make a tank in the USA cost a lot more than making one in Russia.  All these have to be factored in and I doubt if reliable figures are availabe anywhere.

Actually there are other ways to balance a game up by changing history.  For example, codebreaking.  The Allies knew virtually everything the Axis was going to do before they did it.  Remove this and it becomes a lot harder for the Allies.

By the way, being from Yorkshire makes me half Danish.  But even though our last King was a Norwegian I don’t think there’s much Norse blood in us, so we’re more cousins that brothers.

@Adlertag:

@Flashman:

Aldertag: you’ve criticised the IPC values on my maps too - do you have your own map or list of values to compare with others?

I don’t think convoy zones are relevant on a WORLD map, as they were introduced in E and P to represent income from areas off-board. This should be represented by the transportation of actual units and the ability of opponents to sink them.

Hi englishman

I got Mark Harrisons book about economics on WW II, and know presicely how much GDP income each had, and how much they used on military outlays, and how many guns they made etc. All I want is a game that reflects the historic facts. Before the release of Revised in 2004, AH had a series of articles where Mike Selinker said he would give the Axis something they did not have in real world, he would give them money. Now if I wantet a balanced game I would buy Attack ! from Eagle Games, there every player start with 10 inf, 6 tanks and 4 artillery, and can pick 4 territories each to start with. Its even more balanced than Risk.

As for convoy zones, in my head they represents “wet territories” that give the controller some economic advantages. They may represent international trade with neutrals, or the benefit of using ships instead of trucks to move resources. I think one of the first WiF editions had a very correct system where you moved every resource with a ship, but it booged down the game, so in the latest ed they used convoy zones.

[Imperious Leader]

Ill save him the trouble:

German economy in 1942:

GDP in billions:

Denmark 20.9
Netherlands 44.5
Belgium 39.6
France 185.6
Norway 11.6
Czecho-Slovakia 30.3
Greece 19.3
Poland 76.6
Baltic 12.9
occupied USSR 134.2
Yugoslavia 21.9

Minor Axis Allies:
Finland 12.7
Hungary 24.3
Bulgaria 10.5
Romania 19.4

Allies:
USSR 318
USA 1,235
UK 353

Italy 145