Classic rules, and some disagreements.

  • Official Q&A

    For the record, @CrazyIvan asked me the extra pieces question privately, and I gave him the same answer that @AcesWild5049 did: extra pieces don’t allow you to have extra stacks. The rules and FAQ are clear on this.

    As to the question of why MB would sell extra pieces if they can’t be used for extra stacks, the reason is simple. After the publication of the first edition, many players wrote to MB asking if they could buy extra pieces, so MB made them available (to make money, of course). Rather than sell them piecemeal, they sold them in complete sets, as that was the easiest to deal with both in terms of manufacturing and order fulfillment.

    As to the question of why someone would buy extra pieces if not to allow extra stacks, there are a few reasons:

    1. Many people don’t like to use chips.
    2. They could be used for house rules, including lifting the stack restriction.
    3. People need replacement parts.
    4. The pieces are cool. You have to remember, this was 1984, and there was nothing else like this game on the market. The pieces were an even bigger deal then than they are today.

    Hope this helps!

  • '19

    First, let me apologise.
    Second, let me apologise again.

    In homage to a movie scene I love:
    “It looks like {CROW} is back on the menu, boys!”

    I had more images, and a large amount of text that was going to be my reply, but then I noticed something else that I cannot explain.

    I’ve been going on and on about the “Extra Playing Pieces” offered in the manual, but going back to the photo I just took in the wee hours of the morning, I just now noticed that it doesn’t actually say that!:upside_down_face:

    In homage to a song I love:
    "My eyes saw {Extra Playing Pieces} but the {book} still said {Additional Game Parts}.

    I think I’ll shut up now, and wait for confirmation of what the official answer guy is saying just above.

    Appropriately named 'Crazy’Ivan sits down at a very large dinner table, covered with a vast variety of dishes, all of which contain CROW!

    @AcesWild5049 @Krieghund My sincere apologies, gentlemen, and maybe I should see the doctor.:face_with_head_bandage:


  • no worries, this is what the forum is for anyway.


  • @CrazyIvan
    My personal take on this issue has always been: “The rules as written say that you can only have x number of stacks, limited by the amount of pieces in one standard box. That said, we are going to ignore that particular rule, here’s a boat-load more pieces, dig in!”

    It’s good to be able to hold on to what you understand, and it’s also good to admit when you’ve been mistaken.

    Take care, and game on!

    -Midnight_Reaper


  • @redrum said in Classic rules, and some disagreements.:

    @AcesWild5049 Interesting. Never knew that though not a classic expert. I believe that is a classic only rule so given that few people play it at this point, its fairly unlikely TripleA will ever support that.

    @AcesWild5049 or @Krieghund please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is not a “Classic” rule, but a 1st and 2nd edition only rule, while the two 3rd editions roll all at once (really unsure here).

    Also @DizzKneeLand33 traditional Low Luck gameplay on the 2nd edition ignores this rule, as well, right? If so, TripleA would probably have this behaviour not applying if Low Luck is selected, which would reduce even more the pool of users, as I believe most of the few remaining Classic players play Low Luck.


  • @AcesWild5049 or @Krieghund please correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is not a “Classic” rule, but a 1st and 2nd edition only rule, while the two 3rd editions roll all at once (really unsure here).

    Yes, that’s true. It disappeared in the 3rd edition, which was computer-based.


  • @Cernel

    To the first point, OOB rules of MB edition Axis and Allies comes with a 2nd edition rulebook. In point of fact, this IS the classic.

    To the second point, who and where are the “few remaining Classic” players and how do you know they use Low Luck? I’m asking out of curiosity given that I have a YouTube channel dedicated to OoB classic play.

    Thanks!


  • @AcesWild5049 Well, no. Classic is an official (or semi-official?) retroactively applied definition for anything until and comprising Iron Blitz (@Krieghund will correct me if I’m wrong); so, if you think that is not Classic (?), you would need such definition to be changed (if I’m correct).

    I was thinking at the TripleA lobby. Classic has almost completely died out, but I recall there were around some die-hard fanatics, and Low Luck was a popular setting. Aside from TripleA, I can think about the DAAK (no idea if still alive), that it is strongly Low Luck oriented. However, I’ve no actual statistics about how many Regular Luck vs Low Luck games of Classic are played, and I’m not seeing Classic being played by forum (where you could check this out).

    However, talking about things that it is obvious exist just to make the game somewhat easier to play for real, the fact that TripleA doesn’t support multiple stacks limits is probably the biggest issue here.

    Also, you could fix the rolling inconsistency by just moving over to the 3rd edition rules, as you can use those for the boardgame too. You just have to remember not to move from Western Canada to the Atlantic Ocean.


  • Also talking from a TripleA coding standpoint, if a developer would just implement that feature generally for Classic, he would bug off all the 3rd edition ones, as well as all custom maps that are supposed to be Classic 3rd edition based.


  • @Cernel

    I can write off the first bit to semantics. I didn’t know the community definition bundled all of that together. The MB box has this rule.

    I can’t tell if you’re saying that 3rd edition TripleA has column rolling or not.

    As to the forums, I’ve played a number of 2nd edition classic very recently with more scheduled. Doesn’t seem to be a terrible shortage of opponents atm.

    I’m aware of Daak which is dead as far as I can tell. Thanks for the response 👍👍

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    You guys are completely wrong about the game being dead; Champion Steve runs an early-bird Classic Only tournament, it is avidly played at Gencon–and Steve being its biggest proponent (and best player, nationally) still plays other versions. Sometimes at the same time as a good game of Classic (like speed chess).

    So this does have some relevance, I wonder if the tournament play limits you to 2 locations for each piece.

    And, to be a real rules lawyer, what if your edition came with more pieces, by mistake–could you sell that edition for $300 because in that one copy, 3 carriers are allowed for Japan? ;)


  • @taamvan We were just talking about TripleA and nobody said dead (I just said almost so, meaning rarely played).

  • '21 '20 '18 '17

    @Cernel Right–I just meant that this version is avidly played by persons other than myself.


  • A guy named Jason from my group still plays Classic with his brother since 2003. I even got them a 3 x 6 classic map printed for them a few months ago. And also Jason was at Gen Con to play classic. Just saying.


  • @SS-GEN

    @taamvan ”Right–I just meant that this version is avidly played by persons other than myself.”

    Awesome! so would either of you or your friends like to play a game by forum? Oob rules, no bid, RR, you pick side?


  • I’ll see if I can get Jason to play. I don’t think he’s on Triple A.


  • @redrum said in Classic rules, and some disagreements.:

    @AcesWild5049 Well you are always welcome to make a feature request for it. Here is the feature request subforum for TripleA: https://forums.triplea-game.org/category/42/feature-requests-ideas

    Here is a list of the existing feature requests: https://forums.triplea-game.org/topic/182/guidelines-and-feature-request-list

    Myself and a few others are the TripleA developers but only do this in our free time so prioritize what we think impacts the most users and what we are passionate about. If you know a bit of Java coding then you are always welcome to contribute yourself :)

    Not trying to push about this or anything, but why feature request? Classic 2nd not following column (same strength) rolling is surely a bug, isn’t it? Also it impacts on defending submarines pretty badly, significantly lowering the average results for Russians in the typical round 1 attack on the Baltic Sea (without restricted), and that cannot be really fixed by moving the submarines shoots after the other units, as that would fix the case of submarines with transports, but move the problem to a number of other cases.


  • @Cernel

    It should be “feature requested” as it is a clearly defined out-of-box rule. AAA is perpetually running on a “house-rules” variant of Classic without it.

    Here is my rationale and an example of when and where it can matter on turn 1 (starts at 8:14): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_u_mOFTcQA&t=511s

    I don’t understand your comment about defending submarines.

    -Aces


  • @AcesWild5049 said in Classic rules, and some disagreements.:

    @Cernel

    It should be “feature requested” as it is a clearly defined out-of-box rule. AAA is perpetually running on a “house-rules” variant of Classic without it.

    Again, I would say “2nd Edition”, not just “Classic”.

    How about if the armours would defend at 3 instead of 2? Would having armour at defence 2 be a feature request? I think that when something doesn’t work as it should, that is a bug, not a missing feature, especially when you cannot even have the game working as intended by following the rules yourself.

    In any case, go ahead posting the matter in here, if @redrum actually believes this is a feature request (got no answer so far):
    https://forums.triplea-game.org/category/42/feature-requests-ideas

    The only thing I’ve pointed out about this matter is that you should not simply say this is a Classic rule, because if, then, a developer would apply it for Classic in general, 3rd edition games would get it too, which would be bad (you can see by yourself that, at least in TripleA, 3rd edition is called Classic).

    @djensen renamed this section as “Axis & Allies Classic” (it was called “Axis & Allies 2nd Edition”, or something like that, in the old forum, I recall), that I think it is going to be confusing (we have a good example right here). I suggested to name it “Axis & Allies (Classic) 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” or “Axis & Allies 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” (just adding “Classic” between parenthesis or in the description), but this has been already discussed here:
    https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/32567/chicago-nfl-team-bears
    Calling it the current way would have been fine if the description would have been something like:
    Includes MB Gamemaster Series 1st and 2nd editions, and the two Hasbro Interactive (CD-ROM) 3rd Edition.
    or like it is called in the official Larry Harris forum:
    Original Axis & Allies 1984-2004
    (though this is rather vague, or surely not very clear)
    but I see it currently is:
    The original MB Gamemaster Series game from 1984-2004
    that is substantially a wrong description, as long as @Krieghund or anybody can confirm the 3rd edition is Classic too, as I believe it is, and those are not part of the Gamemaster Series.

    Here is my rationale and an example of when and where it can matter on turn 1 (starts at 8:14): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_u_mOFTcQA&t=511s

    I don’t understand your comment about defending submarines.

    -Aces

    I’ve watched and listened to all that video, and it seems you missed the most important item related to column rolling.

    Simple example: without Russia Restricted, if you are attacking the Baltic Sea with 1 submarine and any number of fighters, your fighters may be completely safe for that combat round, while in TripleA you will have a quite scary 1/18 probability to lose a precious fighter.

    On top of that, TripleA is actually not even consistently rolling all dice at the same time, as you can test that defending submarines are rolled and assigned before any other defending units.

    So, yeah, TripleA distorces the rules with this wrong implementation of 2nd edition rolling, giving an advantage to the Axis by discouraging the attack on the Balic Sea, or making it a little less effective and efficient.

    On the other hand, I partially disagree that what would happen in your example around the Hawaii is that much of a game changer. Considering all cases in which you are in the situation of the attacking carrier not hitting, the attacking submarine not hitting, and the two attacking fighters scoring 1 hit, if, then, the two battleships both hit, it doesn’t matter what you selected as casualty before, as you will lose all your defending units (I’m sure no disagreement here, of course). If, in the same situation, only one of the two attacking battleships hit, deciding whether to take out the submarine or not before or after they do makes no difference, as, in this case, you should always not take the submarines as casualty, and the same applies to the case of both battleships missing. In any possible cases in which the attacker scores 1 or more hits, in that situation, it seems clear to me that taking the submarine last as casualty is always the best choice. If, then, you would have only taken the carrier as casualty, and both battleships miss, you can consider not retreating the submarine if you score 3 hits on defence, but you should always retreat the submarine if you only score 1 or 2 hits (that is the average, you would consider upon taking casualties, no matter if with or without column rolling). But I would agree that may have a small role if, instead, you would be in a condition in which the attacking force is weaker than in your case, either because you sent a little less than you did or because you had a very unlucky first combat round in wich the attacker missed every hits and the defender hit enough to suggest not retreating the submarine already, but waiting at least one more combat round (but this is very unlikely to happen).

    But I agree that this rule might keep coming up over the course of the entire game, giving some subtle advantage to the attacker.

    This also means that TripleA is bugged for 3rd edition too, albeit in a different way, and despite the fact that it factually works fine by Classic 3rd edition rules if you have defending transports and subarines, but not if you have defending submarines and anything else but transports.

    @Krieghund can you please confirm this is what it is supposed to happen:

    If you have 1 submarine and 1 fighter attacking 1 transport and 1 submarine, if the attacking submarine misses and both defending units hit:

    • In 1st/2nd edition, you only lose the attacking submarine, as long as the attacking player doesn’t take a fighter as casualty when the transport hits (that would be absolutely idiotic).
    • In 3rd edition, you lose both attacking units (you are not permitted to do the trick of assigning the transport’s hit to the submarine, thus being unable to assign the submarine’s hit to anything else).

    If the above is true, I’m curious what is the implied intended rule for assigning defensive submarines and others hits (say, if you would be playing by 3rd edition rules on a board). Should defending submarines hits be assigned before anything else or should you assign them at the same time, but taking care to lose the maximum number of units you can (I know in practice both would work the same)?

    Also, I found a download for Classic 3rd Edition here:
    https://www.myabandonware.com/game/axis-allies-a3l#download
    Is it true that this game is now “abandonware”, and does that mean that it can be legally freely distributed and downloaded/installed (I have no idea; just noticing that site is offering it for free)?

    p.s.: Regarding attacking the Baltic Sea on round 1, it should also be remembered that 3rd edition rules add the “Submerge” rule (effective as default, but optable out, as any other 2nd-to-3rd editions changes), making unworthwhile attacking that sea zone with 2 Russian units (better either sending both units in the North Sea or sending only the submarine to the Baltic Sea).


  • @Cernel

    cool deal.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

42

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts