@Colonel-Mustard Yeah,7 out of 8 times you would’ve been able to retreat as planned.Some famous military guy once said"No plan survives contact with the enemy"If USA and UK were going hard after normandy and denmark,that should give Italy a chance to grow strong and help stop the western allies.
#1 rule Always protect your capitol.
Bad news
-
That officially sux bawls.
For real.
Officially.
It’s an early sign–and no doubt not the last–that instead of getting the polished chrome we hoped would be Eur 40, we will have another game like Pac 40… riddled with production flaws, poor quality control, and more backsliding in terms of value-for-money.
-
I can understand you guys are upset about this but I am willing to bet that probably 95% or better of you guys that post on this website have multiple Axis and Allies games like myself. That being said you can just combine all your pieces into one stockpile and move them from board to board when you play. Since Pac 40 came with no money I used the money from the Revised and old Europe board to solve the problem. Same with using some of the Revised and Anniversary pieces to bolster the Japanese in Pac 40. Yeah it sucks they are making pieces more uniform and their are flaws that come with a game, things get lost sometimes in the chain of communication between designers and producers. Oh and Italy was already headed down this route with every piece practically being another axis powers unit, except the infantry in the Anniversary edition so this isn’t new news.
-
No dude…I missed that sweet gravy train that was A&A 50th anniversary. This was the only way to get some Italian peices
-
I figure it is kind of weird that WOTC, who make strategy games, do so piss poor planning.
You have to remember most of the folks at WotC are Magic and D&D experts. Avalon Hill and Axis and Allies was forced on Wizards by their parent company Hasbro as a cost-cutting effort to reduce staff/facilities. The results of this unpopular move speak for themselves.
I think WOTC need a new crew. People that actually play A&A.
I’m sure there are a few, but the other brands have priority on their time. Again the proof is in the pudding.
-
Why is the P38 so unpopular?
Because it’s not a typical naval aircraft nor did it excel at dogfighting (especially in the European theatre). It was much better suited to long-range interception, tactical bombing, and reconnaissance, was never used as a carrier plane, and probably only successful in the pacific because as it had no convergance zone (all guns in the nose, not wings), it could quickly dispatch the lightly armored japanese planes at a distance before it had to get into a turning fight (where it was not as capable as the typical single engine monoplane and most especially, the japanese dogfighters).
The hellcat in AA50 was a much more appropriate carrier plane and dogfighter, but to the layperson it might look like the avenger, so the iconic yet completely inappropriate P38 stands in.
-
P38 looks like crap. Its nothing in terms of the primary American fighter. The thing looks like two planes stuck together. Using that silly looking thing to convey the primary American front line fighter is like replacing the German fighter with this:
Both of these planes flew but nobody wants that junk to represent the fighters for these nations because its not in anybody’s thinking to say “yes when i think of a classic American ww2 fighter i think of that p-38”
Rather humans think of the Mustang or Hellcat, or Dauntless or like 25 others before the P-38.
Thankfully they changed the Stuka to a Me-109 which also makes sence. Stuka can now be the tactical bomber for AAE40
-
I think the reason they used the P-38 model was because it was the only fighter to be produced in large numbers from Pearl Harbor to VJ day. Mustangs didn’t appear until towards the end of the war. Also, the top two aces of WWII flew P-38’s.
-
I still would have rather seen a Mustang as the US fighter.
-
True, it is a more attractive model.
-
Honestly I really like the P38, I assumed it was picked as it was in the war and perfectly recognizable as a US plane.
-
9,200 planes produced, starting in March, 1942.
P-38J specs: 420 MPH, four 50 caliber machine guns and one 20 mm cannon, all nose-mounted9,500 planes produced, starting in April, 1942.
P-39N specs: 375 MPH, four 30 caliber machine guns, two 50 caliber machine guns, and one 37 mm cannon13,800 planes produced, starting in June, 1940.
P-40E specs: 362 MPH, six 50 caliber machine guns12,500 planes produced, starting in October, 1942. Entered service mid-1943.
F6F-3 specs: 376 MPH, six 50 caliber machine guns15,700 planes produced, starting in March, 1942.
P-47D specs: 430 MPH, eight 50 caliber machine guns15,100 planes produced, starting in June, 1942.
P-51D specs: 440 MPH, six 50 caliber machine guns11,700 planes produced, starting in July, 1942. Also entered service mid-1943.
F4U-1D specs: 425 MPH, six 50 caliber machine gunsof the major fighters produced by America the P-38 ranks as one of the least common planes in terms of numbers. The choice was wrong and any other plane would have been more appropriate. Consider that P-38 was not even a carrier based fighter. all other fighters look fine on a carrier but the p-38 looks ridiculous.
-
I am going to have to agree with IL on this one. Good riddance to the P-38.
-
in AA50 italian got only infantry, tanks and aircraft dedicated the rest of miniatures were from germany set so nothing too scandalous in this version we have just infantry and italians with germany tank and aircraft.
I’m disappointed cause i’m italian but i hope the game is cool :lol:
-
Stay on topic.
Like this guy who is replying to somebody:
@Panz3r:in AA50 italian got only infantry, tanks and aircraft dedicated the rest of miniatures were from germany set so nothing too scandalous in this version we have just infantry and italians with germany tank and aircraft.
I’m disappointed cause i’m italian but i hope the game is cool :lol:
I’m not Italian but I’m still disappointed.
Hey no IPCs, the battleboard becomes a strip, ICs become chits…. well, that was bad enough but to start cutting back on the playing pieces that pretty much are the heart & soul of A&A…Is there a player amongst us who wasn’t drawn to this game initially because of the sculpts? It wasn’t the cumbersome chit-fest of ASL nor the soulless, indescript tokens of RISK…
Oh this will be a cool game I’m sure…
but this kind of a cost-saving measure strikes at the very essence of the game, no? -
I’m not really Italian or disappionted. I think it’s pretty cool Italy is a seperate player, but, aside from that, I’m far more curious/concerned about game design, and honestly, I couldn’t even guess at what an Italian tank or artillary piece even looked like from WW II. Though I did hear that their fighters were pretty nice.
-
Corsair would be my favorite US aircraft…and it was a carrier plane!
Actually, “imperious leader”…that German plane you attached to your reply is the Do-335…a very good concept, and the ones that were produced(22) performed well…474 mph(350 with one engine) at 21,000ft, 1 pilot, 38,000 ceiling, 1x30mm, 2x20mm, plus 2,200 pounds of bombs. If it ever had come into serious production 1942 rather than 1944(Goring delayed it for two years) it could have changed a lot of things for the Germans.
-
Yes but to have that German plane as the icon German plane is foolish, as much as having the P-38.
All the pieces are supposed to be the quintessential iconic image that most people associate with each nation.
For Germany the stuka is an ok choice, but thankfully the Me-109 replaced it because obviously it is a better fighter, whereas the Ju-87 is a tactical fighter bomber.
The P-38 is nothing close to anything iconic for American fighters. Many others were produced in greater quantities and saw more action. Its basically too experimental in design, which is the example i made with that German fighter. The game does not need ‘experimental’ looking planes to be the iconic ones.
The japanese battleship should have been the pagoda style “kongo class” battlecruiser, rather than the Yamato, which they made only 2 completed ships plus a carrier conversion and a hull ( type 798) for a forth.
I would rather they delay the AAE40 game until they can get the Italian tanks and they hire somebody who can actually check the set up to locate any shortage of pieces that can’t achieve a basic setup and count accordingly. Also, somebody needs to go to best buy and buy a spell checker for $25.00 bucks and stop being so cheap.
They need to do this right and no mistakes and no errata. This means no more Cal Moore.
-
To restate my views on fighter pieces:
Single engine fighters for normal version, twin engined models for long-range fighters. Then you can immediately see fighter flying range even if you’re not up to speed on each country’s aircraft.
e.g. Me109 and Me 110 for German fighters.
Similarly, twin and four engines machines for standard and long-range bombers.
-
@Craig:
The choice of the P-38 is all about distinctiveness of the part.
Why else do you think that they originally chose the Stuka for the German fighter. It wasn’t about historical accuracy! :roll:
While I would rather have a different mold for the US fighter, there is something to be said for have a piece that is instantly recognizable. My friend is knowledgeable of the different aircraft, but is also color blind. The P-38 part is a nice, additional layer of information to have when surveying the gameboard.
The color of the piece alone should distinguish which country. Color blind people can apply decals.
-
How about this plane for the UK?
The P.12 Westland Lysander Delannewas a result of experimenting the Lysander as a turret fighter, with twin tailed Delanne tandem wing and a 4-gun Nash & Thomson power operated tail gun turret replacing the empennage
Suggested Topics
