Taht is good to know.
If you ever wanted a game with members on this site, there is one every three months in Derbyshire. PM Private Panic or look in the Events thread.
Some set ups availible for AA50
-
@Subotai:
What does it mean: Yunnan: 1 infantry, 1 fighter (US). It means that the fighter is owned by the US? So China does not have any own fighters?
No, it simply means that it’s a US fighter piece. The fighter is controlled by China and moves and attacks with Chinese forces.
-
But if US brings in another fighter, that can under no circumstances be controlled by the chinese, right?
-
No, it simply means that it’s a US fighter piece. The fighter is controlled by China and moves and attacks with Chinese forces.
OK, that statement made me slightly confused … Why isn’t it just a chinese ftr piece? If it is a US ftr piece you risk mixing it up with other US ftr pieces…
Ok, I understand that the real-life unit was made up of US Nationals, but I still think it will confuse players more than clarify anything, don’t you think :? :?
-
@Silent:
But if US brings in another fighter, that can under no circumstances be controlled by the chinese, right?
Correct, even if the original one is gone.
-
No, it simply means that it’s a US fighter piece. The fighter is controlled by China and moves and attacks with Chinese forces.
OK, that statement made me slightly confused … Why isn’t it just a chinese ftr piece? If it is a US ftr piece you risk mixing it up with other US ftr pieces…
Ok, I understand that the real-life unit was made up of US Nationals, but I still think it will confuse players more than clarify anything, don’t you think :? :?
I’m sure that AH just didn’t want to go to the expense of including a single Chinese fighter piece in the game. If it becomes a problem, I’m sure it will be easy to find a way to differentiate this fighter from US fighters, such as turning it upside down or marking it in some way. My guess is that you won’t have both a Chinese and US fighter in China all that often, as the Chinese fighter tends to die early.
-
Maybe we need bidding fighters for China then :-P
-
I suppose we will play usually 1942 scenario then, unless Japan have almost zero guys in mainland Asia (for chineses being able of more than a sparring). There is a heavy danger of 1941 scenario favoring axis too heavy (Japan being able of killing a power in J1 :-P). Still, 1942 scenario has 3 USA bombers … hard to believe … the feared strat bombing party for free :-D
Let’s hope Japan’s setup will correct this. Or that those charts are Photoshop tricks :roll:
Imagine:
- I bid being axis, 1942 scenario, with radar tech from begining
- Wait! I bid being allies in 1941, with a fig and 3 inf to Yunnan
- Wait! I bid being China alone in a 7 players game, 1941 scenario and a big free pizza and free beer for me! :-D
-
So USA has the GENCON set-up after all, interesting. Still hoping for a stronger UK pacific fleet and a soviet airforce, we’ll see about that very shortly.
Anyways, me and Perry’s playtest game is now on a thread of its own and you can feel free to comment on that Subotai!
-
@Craig:
Let’s all get in approx. ten games before we start to proclaim which side has the advantage. Actually, let’s make that ten games with the NO’s and ten games without the NO’s so as to get a good read. Oh, and let’s make that both scenarios. 8-)
I don’t know, Craig, that sounds awfully reasonable to me! :wink:
-
The set up chart for Russia is up on the official message boards……
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1111655Bomber in the 42 setup.
-
Something odd with the Russian setup:
Russia has 30 IPCs for both 1941 and 1942. Does this refer to starting IPCs or IPC level?
On the US setup, it starts with 40 in 1941 but it drops to 38 in 1942 to reflect the loss of the Phillipines. Shouldn’t Russia be down to 24 as well?
Oh and there’s 2 AA guns on Russia.
-
Agreed
Great … 1942, soviets have 2 aa guns in Moscow but zero ICs there :-P And commie flag covers part of the setup. Income the same for both scenarios, even if soviets start 1942 with less territories. Or a typo or Photoshop magic :-D And zero fighters in both setups :?
-
OMG its a misprint!!!
they meant to have 1 factory in Russia, not 2 AA guns.
Incredable…nobody proofs anything… what a joke. :mrgreen:
-
Something odd with the Russian setup:
Russia has 30 IPCs for both 1941 and 1942. Does this refer to starting IPCs or IPC level?
On the US setup, it starts with 40 in 1941 but it drops to 38 in 1942 to reflect the loss of the Phillipines. Shouldn’t Russia be down to 24 as well?
Oh and there’s 2 AA guns on Russia.
You are rigth. Seems they are not able to print correct set up charts. Russians owns 24 IPCs income in 1942.
…and I’m pretty shure they mean “… 1 AA Gun 1 IC” for russia in 1942.
Doesn’t matter! Give me the UK-set-up-chart!!!
-
Agreed
Great … 1942, soviets have 2 aa guns in Moscow but zero ICs there :-P And commie flag covers part of the setup. Income the same for both scenarios, even if soviets start 1942 with less territories. Or a typo or Photoshop magic :-D And zero fighters in both setups :?
There is a figther in Karelia.
-
You would think after this delay they could at least have all the misprints etc. fixed. If there are mistakes with the units….its sad that 100 dollars can’t buy an error free axis and allies game.
-
Relax, guys. They screwed up and posted an old version of the USSR charts. The problems have been corrected in the final version (or so I’ve been told :wink:).
-
As a publisher I can sympathize with minor errors such as punctuation. But if my copy has 2 AA guns in Russia on the set up chart then that is completely absurd mistake. It is incomprehensible that they wouldn’t give Larry are print proof of the entire game and have him approve all materials.
Wow. :-o
-
There is a figther in Karelia.
Good catch! :-) At least that seems reasonable: AA Europe had 1 fig, 1 bomb as starting soviet airfleet
-
Awesome! Keep them coming!
Suggested Topics
