Just to add an extra comment here: I’m not sure I’m understanding the original question correctly, but if it means “what is the footprint (length x width) of every sculpt in the game?” my reaction would be that this information a) would take a lot of work to compile and b) is unnecessary for designing a custom map. To make sure that a custom map is large enough, all that’s really needed are three measurements: the dimensions of the Anniversary game board, the dimensions of the largest naval sculpt in the game (which is probably either the Japanese battleship or the American aircraft carrier), and the dimensions of the largest sculpt in the game which can be positioned on a land territory (which I think would be the American B-17 bomber). If custom map’s sea and land territories are big enough to handle those large sculpts, then they’ll be big enough to handle the smaller ones.
Starting pieces totals:
-
I prefer a more historically accurate approach, and if the Axis loose every time, I will be quite happy with the outcome.
Although I disagree, seeing how Japan now has China to deal with, has a harder time hitting Russia, Germany is split between 2 nations, Russia has more territories and income, something tells me we wont see many Axis victories. That’s a good 4 major nerfs to the Axis, in a game that already favors the Allies. The games will probably mostly run KIF (Kill Italy First), then Germany, then just roll over Japan. While Japan may be powerful, it is unable to harm Russia in a meaningful way, and now has China to deal with. Since it has such a large navy, I imagine a US player would much rather KIF, KG, then go for japan, as opposed to any other strategy. The game might last a long time, but I can’t imagine the Allies losing if they go all out at Germany and Italy. Just some speculation.
-
/IL
Isn’t the ship off Hawaiian Islands a battleship? It thought it was laid out for Pearl Harbor repeated? It’s pretty clear on the other BGG pic where you see the Pacific better.
So, US should be, navally speaking:
1 Battleship
1 CV +ftr
4 destroyers
3 transportsOf which the battleship, 2 destroyers and 2 transports (Hawaii, Phillipines & West Coast) would never survive turn J1… Will force the US to put loads of production into Pacific, which is fine by me, good for game balance! I assume the US can’t ignore the Japanese, now that Sydney and Honolulu are VCs.
All in all, good naval balance I think. Only four battleships at start, and you would be hard pressed to build one. Probably only US would afford it in a normal game. So, going at the battleship at Pearl for the Japanese IS a good move. Likewise, the Germans might be tempted to commit its air force to destroy the British battleship off Scapa Flow, with potentially disastrous consequences on the Eastern front…
-
@Imperious:
Hey timerover:
I think you should make a historical 1941 scenario. I can help you if you like.
But i think the balance should also somewhat reflect in the set up.
Id say:
BB= 4 BB
CV= 4 CV
CA= 12-15 CA
DD= 20 DD
SS= 20 SS
AP= 100 APInf= 1 army ( 3-5 corps)
Tank= 2,500 tanks
Art= mech/tanks combo
Fighter= 2,000-3,000
bomber= 1,000-1,500You might want to rethink your proposed ideas for Infantry, Tanks, Fighters, and Bombers. With those numbers, no Africa Corps, maybe one or two German tank units, no Japanese tanks units, and maybe one or two fighters for Germany and Japan. Carrier air groups would not exist. Example, total Axis tanks at El Alamein, 496. Total Allied tanks, 1029. Aircraft, Axis about 350 total, Allied 530. Before doing any work on what I would regard as an Historical 1941 scenario, I would need to have the game in front of me, and see what the standard start up positions look like.
I would have to do some thinking about the naval ratios, and probably give some navies more than they should have simply to give them the capability that they had, like transports for the Italians. I would most likely look at total merchant marine tonnage to come up with some transport number.
Given the number of Official Historys that I have, I suspect that I already have all of the data I need for doing a 1941 and 1942 scenario. The biggest thing will be coming up with a reasonable scaling factor.
Comment to Rakeman: Kill Italy First was the strategy actually used in the war. Worked quite well. I suspect that what will happen is that you will rarely have 6 players in the game, and that as a result, the German player will control Italy. For those who are really worried about play balance, I would recommend in the 4 player game, one player controls the Axis, and you have three Allied players. Getting three players or teams to cooperate is not what I would call easy, having watched the way our Axis and Allied games have gone over the past 5 years.
-
You might want to rethink your proposed ideas for Infantry, Tanks, Fighters, and Bombers.
you missed my point. Im looking purely at the total aggregate military forces. Once its decided what for example the total number of tanks or infantry of each side should be , THEN we reallocate a reasonable set up based on this.
Its not the case where we look at the ACTUAL set up and try to make sence of something that totally flawed from a historical viewpoint.
-
Isn’t the ship off Hawaiian Islands a battleship? It thought it was laid out for Pearl Harbor repeated? It’s pretty clear on the other BGG pic where you see the Pacific better.
I was looking closely at that and had a cruiser and Battleship piece and trying to compare them. I see a Cruiser, but i would think like you that it should be a BB… do what i did and see if you don’t have the same conclusion.
-
After taking a good look at the one photo on Boardgame Geek,
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/362530?size=original
I would say that the US ship is a battleship, which would make the lineup 1 battleship, and no cruisers. That helps a little bit, but no cruisers, and 1 battleship. I figure I will have to wait until more data is available.
-
Balance should always come before historical accuracy.
-
I still think setup is accurate becasue if you gave the US a big navy at the start of the game they take over the med on turn 2 and that would be almost just as bad historically as the japanese taking moscow.
Plus i can’t beleive ILs scaleing becasue in A&A superior forces in quality of soldeirs and equipment are represented by superior quantity of them.
So shouldn’t they scaling also change based on country and front
-
Looking at this starting setup I have to agree with Emperor_Taiki.
We have to remeber two things. First A&A pieces are abstract pieces and not historical formations or units. Second the number of units on the board depict not only the quantity but also the quality of the units. Red Army in 1941 was still recovering from the purges inflicted by Stalin and by the Finnish campaign. USSR had the greatest number of tanks, but the great part of them are outdated models and are also employed with inferior tactics.Moreover, I like the order of play of the 1941 scenario.
-
With Russia having so much INF at the begining they can splerge and do a 100% ARM build first round if they wanted to.
-
@LT04:
With Russia having so much INF at the begining they can splerge and do a 100% ARM build first round if they wanted to.
Maybe even a fighter. It helps that they start with 30 IPC
-
That will be nice that Russia get so discretion as is able to be creative beside the normal build INF and don’t loose Moscow routine.
LT
-
I edited the set up for the Hawaiian battleship
also, on Soviets 1941 they got no air, or armor, so thats what id buy… maybe even a Soviet Bomber!
first 2 fighters
then armor -
@Imperious:
1941 scenario:
UK:
1 BB
1 Cruiser
3 Transports
5 DestroyersI find it`s not quite obvious to figure out what ships are found on the map as still they all look imho too equal. UK is just an exemple.
Could you be please so kind and post the units per sea zone, so e.g. Bb, Trn (sz1), etc…
So are these Cru, Des in sz12 (AZO)?
P.S.: And I also count 11 UK-ships, so that`s propably one more trn I think
-
What is the part of this publicity I dont get…?!
Axis & Allies: Anniversary Edition details:
Designed by Larry Harris, creator of Axis & Allies
Italy introduced as the third Axis nation
Two set-up options: Spring 1941 and Spring 1942
Cruiser class ships join the naval unit line-up
China included as US controlled ally
New sculpts for Italy ??? , China, and others
Game board measures ~ 24” x 46”
Over 600 game pieces
48 page rulebookCan someone tell me?
Italian “new” pieces:
infantry = NEW; hurray!!!
artillery = old japanese one;
armour = old japanese one;
fighter = german messerchmitt;
bomber = I really dont know but Im afraid is more of the same “AH new”-old AA German bomber;battleship = german biscmark?!?
cruiser = “new” german cruiser
transport = old german transport
destroyer = old german destroyer
submarine = old german submarine
bomber = I really dont know but Im afraid is more of the same “AH new”-old AA German carrier;Now now…whats this deal?! Is AH joking or what?! 100$ ( probably 100€… ) and they reuse the same molds with different colours?!
You know where this will lead dont you? 4 years from now youll see another “development” in the A&A game and another promise of “super-new-molds-for-the-new-old-italian-nation…” probably 150$… they promise 1000+ pieces and we all get happy!!! Thats ridiculous.
I guess they cant throw a game with all the goodies… they have to squeeze all the juice…and the longer they do it, more $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Pieces are cheaper by larger numbers… the only costy thing is the MOLD of the pieces…
So where does this leaves us? Misleading advertising… Why do you think AH didnt give details/images about this game? Only promises… you go with the hype! and pre-order the game like there is no tomorrow…
Well, happy you!
-
Yes, Dagon81, this point is the worst point of Anniversry. I was eagerly awaiting for italian units and … we will have recycled miniatures… :(
-
To be fair, there are “new sculpts for Italy”, just not for all the units. The tank is actually new, it just looks a lot like the Japanese one. All the naval units are the same as the German ones, and the bomber is the same as the Japanese one. On the plus side, the UK gets its own tank.
-
To be fair, there are “new sculpts for Italy”, just not for all the units. The tank is actually new, it just looks a lot like the Japanese one. All the naval units are the same as the German ones, and the bomber is the same as the Japanese one. On the plus side, the UK gets its own tank.
Krieghund, this is no “fair”.
-
My point is that they never promised that all of the Italian units would be new scuplts. I have to agree with you, though, I am disappointed that they aren’t. As to whether the game is worth $100 (or whatever you pay on-line), I’ll have to wait until it’s physically in my possession before making that call.
-
My point is that they never promised that all of the Italian units would be new scuplts. I have to agree with you, though, I am disappointed that they aren’t. As to whether the game is worth $100 (or whatever you pay on-line), I’ll have to wait until it’s physically in my possession before making that call.
Questionable.
In the same way they never said that only some Italian units will be old sculpts.
Suggested Topics
