Double elimination tournament for both 41 and 42 to start at release of A&A anniversary rerelease.
Signs up here.
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=40246.0
May the dice be with you.
Some set ups availible for AA50
-
I just find the 41’ setups to be ackward. Russia starts with 1 armor and no air fleet? Russia had more armor and airplanes pre Barbarossa then anyone. Then you might say if you gave them that it wouldn’t be balanced. All the setup would have to do to make it more historical accurate and balanced would be to have most of their armor and airplanes on the front line and give Germany a surprise attack on the first turn like AAP with Russians rolling hits on ones. This would make it have more of an historical feel plus keep the game balanced. The setup should be like Russia loses 75% of their armor, artillery, fighters, and Bombers on the first German attack. They have plenty of infantry still left that can hold on so they can rebuild and try to crush Germany. Not, we only have infantry and the Germans attack and then they decide to build armor and stuff. Just like the US, the Russian 42’ setup looks decent.
-
In AAR I prefered the Axis because of their light disadvantage.
If in AA50 maybe the allies are the underdogs.
It seems that we are all “super tactical players” and only the game balance judges about victory or defeat. But this is Bullxxxx.
In 1941 the axis overrun the world. The 1941 set up represents this. Congratulations Larry!
We dont need bids to play A&A. It is a random thing wich country marker you pick out of the box.
And if I pick up the allies in AA50, I will await the axis at Stanlingrad, El Alamein and Midway no matter if outnumbered or not. That is fun!
-
Maybe we are missing something here… MAYBE there is true genius to the double set-ups? The 1941 set-up favors the AXIS and gives the Allies a challenge, the 1942 set-up favors the ALLIES and gives the AXIS a challenge?
Maybe… Im just philosophizing here.
-
Interesting. We could make 2 games matches, changing sides each game, for league games. We could get even draws! :-D
-
The 1941 set-up favors the AXIS and gives the Allies a challenge, the 1942 set-up favors the ALLIES and gives the AXIS a challenge?
This is intriguing and it could actually make sense as well. Between the two scenarios there were some strategic mistakes on the part of the Axis such as too weak reinforcements for Rommel, overextension on the Russian front in front of Moscow and of course a lack of Japanese focus after the first victories in the winter of '41. The most probable chance to win the war would be to rectify these mistakes, and then this thing would be historically accurate as well! :wink:
-
I added up the Russian unit setup to an Abattlemap file. No surprises so far , however…
-
Yes, the Axis did overun much of the Allies in 41’ and I don’t dispute that. Axis and Allies has never been an exact simulation of the war but, has been a broad stoke general verision with a lot of what ifs thrown in. I just feel in the 41’ scenerio Larry missed the opportunity to make Operation Barbarossa “feel” what it was like. The mass slaughter of frontline strength of Russia’s emmense airforce and armor. Give the Axis an advantage at first against Russia in 41’ of course but, also make the campaign generally feel like it was.
-
That may have been something Larry tried. But Hasbro/Wizards may have edited it to make the game easier to play and learn. By lurking both here and on Larry’s site for some time it appears that his main problem has been balancing the play experience and complexity of the game. Just by looking at his tournament rules you can see how much didn’t get into revised to make it the way he wanted. I’m sure that happend in this edition as well.
I do agree though. A larger Russian force, and a German bonus for the frist round or 2 would have been a nice touch.
-
The -42 setup so far attached. Given that the Russians move before the Germans and now have the Arkhangelsk bonuus they look very strong in this setup!
-
The -42 setup so far attached. Given that the Russians move before the Germans and now have the Arkhangelsk bonuus they look very strong in this setup!
My Notes indicate Germany moves before USSR in AA50 1942 setup? Am I in error?
-
The '42 order of play is:
1. Japan
2. Soviet union
3. Germany
4. UK
5. Italy
6. USA / China -
I don’t know in which timezone Mike is, but the Wednesday UK Chart (which is expected to hold some changes) is long overdue. It is Thursday already. :-(
-
Graig,
Since Wednesday is over anyway and thus the UK sheet is overdue care to do the honours and post the UK sheet?
:-D
-
PLEEEEEEEASE! :-D
-
I’m afraid you’ll just have to wait for Mike.
-
The '42 order of play is:
1. Japan
2. Soviet union
3. Germany
4. UK
5. Italy
6. USA / ChinaYes, I see my error. I copied down the IPC list as the turn order-LOL, thanks.
-
Mike’s got the rest of the setups posted now.
-
For the italian setup i am quite disappionted with not havign 1 destroyer in the mix for the italian navy also…… germany has more men in africa and expecially libya what gives?
it is like the aa gun attack do many aa guns expeciallt in the setup for 42
-
Graig,
Since Wednesday is over anyway and thus the UK sheet is overdue care to do the honours and post the UK sheet?
:-D
I stayed up very LATE waiting for this one sheet!! We have the whole picture now… Thank you
-
I found something interesting with the Japanese '42 setup: they only have two carriers whereas in the '41 setup they have three. This would mean that the game starts in june '42 and that the Battle of the Coral Sea has already happened, where Japan lost one small carrier and had two large carriers put out of operation. I also like that its not 100% feasible to launch a strike against Hawaii since the Japs have just 1 CA, 1 DD and 1 sub in range and the fighters and the bomber that could be sent there would be vulnerable from a US counterattack either against a CV next to the Hawaii sea zone or an island. The Japs might want to sacrifice aircraft just to get 1 surface ship to survive so as to block a counter-attack, and the attack is much more risky than in AAR. They also have just 1 TRS whereas in the '41 setup they have 5 TRS!
I really like the '42 setup in the Pacific, its so much more balanced, whereas the '41 setup is a question mark for me and it remains to be seen what it leads to. If a KGF strategy in the '41 scenario will enable the Allies to get ashore and stay ashore in France or Italy before Germany seizes Karelia AND Caucasus, USA will not have to bother about Japan since reaching 13 VCs for the Axis won’t be possible! On the other hand, Germany and Italy combined might be able to hold off even a determined KGF strategy until Japan makes its 3 VC conquests. Time will tell!
Suggested Topics
