@KnowMad IIRC the next major Anniversary is next year in 2024 so maybe it will be released then.
IMO, 1942SE should be deprecated in favor of 1942 Third Edition which should be Anniversary Ed with some of the updated rules for AAA guns, etc. But that’s just my opinion; only Renegade knows what is in store for A&A.
I’ve been seeking around since a while and couldn’t find anything to answer my (basic) question : is there a (balanced) way to use the new units (or at least, their sculpts : tactical bombers and mechanized infantry) in the Anniversary edition?
Not much to say just sharing a map I made. As you can see it is heavily inspired by the War Room map, “hand drawn” and set to correspond to the original AA50 map 1:1.
This map is 100 cm in diameter or about 39 and a half inches.
You can see how it fits the units in the “images” section on BGG!
Okay, but how do you get to Karelia to hold it? It can only buy two units a turn to place there as Russia, and to get from Moscow to Karelia requires going through either Belorussia (a dreaded “$1 territory” that, according to you, should not be fought for) or Archangel. I suppose you could do the later, but if you’re willing to fight for Archangel, why not Belorussia, which directly borders Moscow and is on the German’s critical path from Berlin -> Moscow?
As I mentioned you stack Archangel on R1 and buy two armor. You could buy three if you drop the two artillery down to infantry but personally I like the artillery for Caucasus for the southern defense/push.
Also why TANKs? ART are the more economical purchase for offense because they boost the firepower of paired INF.
2 INF/2 ART = 14 IPC, 4 HP, 8 Punch (offense and defense)
compare with 3 TANK = 15 IPC, 3 HP, 9 Punch (offense and defense)
I understand mixing in TANKs if you’ve hit > 35 IPC (the point you’d be able to build 5 INF/5 ART), but for the bulk of the game I don’t see your income getting that high. If USSR is consistently getting over 35 IPC then you’re “winning” (which lines up with my original post that says USSR should start adding TANKs once they’ve reached a winning position.
Yes, the two INF/ART pair are a better offensive buy but the two armor is a better defensive buy AND more importantly the mobility gets the armor to Karelia on R2.
Going purely by the numbers, INF/ART are better than TANKs odds-wise because they have more punch and more HP for less money. However, when you start factoring in your limited deployment spots for USSR (10-12), things start getting different. At that point, since USSR can generally count on getting their 10 IPC bonus for no foreign units + hold Archangel, it might be feasible to mix in a TANK or two. To me, it’s all about whether USSR’s income is over that 35 IPC level (since at 35 IPC exactly, you can buy 5 INF/5 ART).
As you say, rather than defending Karelia directly, USSR can stack a neighboring territory and go for a counterattack on R2 (when the German Air Force won’t be present). Let’s look into this scenario:
USSR can stack either Belorussia or Archangel to try setting up a dead-zone on Archangel. If they stack Belorussia, you can dive on their stack with extremely variable odds depending how G1 went + how USSR distributed its forces. Assuming that they either stacked Archangel or you just don’t like the odds at Belorussia, you can walk into Karelia here no problem. Using your R1 build, the biggest Russian response I was able to get was 12 INF/2 ART/3 TANK Vs. the German force of 8 INF/2 ART/6 TANK. Of course, the German INF number is variable based on G1, but lets break down the calcs:
12 INF/2 ART/3 TANK Vs. 9 INF/2 ART/6 TANK - 14% USSR win/1% draw/73% German win - Average result = 6 German Tanks survive
12 INF/2 ART/3 TANK Vs. 8 INF/2 ART/6 TANK - 26% USSR win/1% draw/73% German win - Average result = 5 German Tanks survive
12 INF/2 ART/3 TANK Vs. 7 INF/2 ART/6 TANK - 40% USSR win/1% draw/58% German win - Average result = 2 USSR Tanks survive
12 INF/2 ART/3 TANK Vs. 6 INF/2 ART/6 TANK - 56% USSR win/1% draw/58% German win - Average result = 3 USSR Tanks survive
So, if Germany had particularly poor luck in the opening, then USSR can block an advance into Karelia on G2, but even in the scenarios where USSR wins, the odds are effectively a coin flip.
Germany can likely hold Karelia for G2 and G3, but by G4 they may need to withdraw in the face of UK’s naval buildup + how the rest of the game is going. At that point we’re way too far out to make concrete calculations.
Well that is a very interesting opening. Do you vacate Norway completely? What about the fighter that attacked the SZ2 BB? Do you leave it undefended?
Conditionally. It depends on how many INF Germany loses in the Baltic States fight in-particular. If things go absolutely sideways and they lose 2 INF then Norway needs to be 100% evacuated. I understand that this risks losing the SZ2 FTR to a British air attack but they’d need to send either 1 FTR/1 BOMB or send in a loaded transport from Canada + 1-2 FTR). If UK sends forces to Norway it (hopefully) means they’re missing out on either sinking the Baltic Fleet or are delayed a turn in sending their BOMB towards the center of the map (which is a more optimal position for it). Ideally, no INF are lost and you only need to send 1 of the 2 INF to Finland.
If you were to push that many infantry against Karelia than yes, it would take a bit for Russia to take it back. Also, your 4 armor + 1 infantry against East Poland is interesting. I guess you don’t worry about the 16% chance you lose an armor there?
Not particularly. That’s like saying don’t try for Egypt G1 because you only have a ~76% chance to actually take the territory (my math might be bad on that calc because I don’t have the setup in front of me right now), If that chance actually occurred taking/holding Karelia would probably be a bust and you’d have to shift to a different game plan.
Of course, if you are sending that much firepower north than as Russia I would push south to get to Bulgaria and the Russian $10 NO.
That possibility is part of while 4 of the TANKs go to East Poland instead of 100% all-in at Baltic States. If on R1 USSR positions its forces in either a balanced position or with a disposition towards the south, Germany is free to adjust how many troops its sending to Caucasus. Some of Italy’s started forces can also be used to plug the gap, as you don’t need to start spending 100% of their income on defending Rome/France until ~Round 3.
You know AA50’s game flow very well (as demonstrated earlier in this thread in a post I didn’t respond to). Japan is the one who ultimately takes Moscow in most games rather than Germany. The role of Germany/Italy is to make as much money as possible during the early game and then turtle until Japan wins the game. My main gripe with NOs (and your Russian strategy of not actively fighting for space on the board) is that the easy money Germany gets makes this task much too easy.
I think we are in agreement the Allies definitely don’t want Germany taking and holding Karelia and/or Caucasus for any length of time; that is bad news. Our styles are different. I want lots of ground troops to eventually knock them out and your style seems to push for a faster more aggressive strategy that does not have as much firepower in the long run but has more in the short run.
Pretty much. The way I see it is that if USSR can punch Germany in the nose enough times during the opening turns, then their income will be stunted enough that UK/US have an easier time winning the war on their side of the map. Even if this causes USSR to lose enough units over time that Japan has an easier time taking Moscow, the Allies can usually still win as long as they take Berlin on or before the round that Japan takes Moscow.
Thanks for Dagon81 National Advantage cards that he designed for AA50. I took the liberty to put in additional cards to input more fun and challenges for the game with Bloodbath rules. Not for the purists but hopefully it will be helpful for the other players. Cheers!
The 6 main powers will starts with the “Base card that comes with red star” plus 2 random drawn NA cards. Every turn, continue to draw 1 NA card from the deck into your hand. China will be much simpler…Just the “Base card” plus 2-3 random NA cards before the start of the game.
There’s total 20 cards for each Power and 10 cards for China…Total 130 cards.
*do pardon my English grammar in it.
Please feel free to take and change to whatever you want.
I would question some details (why Paraguay? Volgograd is very anachronic, etc.) but it doesn’t really matter in terms of gameplay.
Many of your changes are similar to the ones I am testing on my map (including things like having East Coast one sz further from UK/Morocco), so I’d be very interested to know more about the rules you play this map with.
Thanks… the idea is actually an in-between of Anniversary and Global 40 maps, would agreed that Paraguay seems like abit redundant but i dont understand why you think Volgograd is anachronic thou.
I’m in the midst of finishing up a 30 pages rulebook for this map with reference from Siredblood’s Bloodbath rules. The Battleboard and NOs are done and more or less a finalized deployment chart for 1941 and 1942. @GoekaWar …gives me another few weeks and i will posted it
So for me in A&A 50, I typically don’t play with any special house rules of that nature, I dont do anything to change the properties of the units and what they can do, or any of that nature except for one factor that tends to play out in most games of A&A 50, which is the infamous war between Japan and the Soviet Union that can happen.
So just to give a run down, the way this house rule operates is that neither Japan or the Soviet Union can fight each other and effectively go to war with each other through Manchuria/Siberia. Obviously making landings in the Soviet Far East by Japan is included in this pact as well since it’s the same concept as just attacking them straight on, though either nation can fight each other on the Soviet/Chinese border if/when Japan has reached it.
Now, the reason I came up with this house rule was because of the typical trend I found in playing against an Axis Japan or an Allied Soviet Union and its that it just typically isn’t worth it to go to war with either nation through this border.
To start with Japan invading the Soviet Union, I’ve done this before, and the only thing I can conclude it to be is a genuine waste of time. Merely 1 IPC territories for miles, you’ll be devoting more troops then you’d like to take out the Russian infantry positioned in Siberia, and like I said before you won’t really be getting much done as Japan when it comes to economically boosting yourself. Granted, this does take away units that could potentially be sent our West, but these infantry really aren’t anything the Soviet Union are gonna lose the game over if they aren’t sent back West to help fight Germany.
Now with the Soviets invading Japan, yes it is possible if the Japanese player leaves Manchuria a little too open with the capability of potentially sending some aircraft out East to help support the attack, but the only thing this will be is again, a waste of time and a waste of valuable units. Like what actually happened, the Soviets attacking Japan just wasn’t their fight, it wasn’t in real life and it isn’t in this game either. I mean, you’re devoting 5 infantry and likely a whole aircraft or tank(s) just to take a territory worth 3 IPC’s that you won’t even keep since they’ll just take it right back, and at that point you’re devoting too many Soviet infantry that could better be used against Germany.
To sum it all up, my point is that either of these nations attacking each other through this way is just a waste of time for both and can be incredibly frustrating and annoying for either nation to have to deal with when it comes to one invading the other since it’s not gonna get anything done and they’re just doing it to do it. That being said, I do still think that this war between the 2 nations should still happen if it was to come to a late game fight in either scenario but not initially.
I’ve heard people talk about doing this but I’ve never seen anything concrete. You would have to adapt the zombie cards to the territories in Anniversary. With those new cards and some zombies (you will likely need twice the zombies that come in A&A&Z) you should be good to go.
Thank you for your comment. I guess we think the same way.
Lowering the tanks‘ attack value for two Axis powers and one of the Allies has already changed a lot, because especially Japan has to rely heavily on tanks when marching though Asia. Attacking with „2“ instead of „3“ takes 33% of their power away. The UK usually is less aggressive and needs less tanks. The US can provide that element while establishing in North Africa, Norway or France.
But the idea is still in my mind to enhance UK’s firepower for the later stages.
Research is super fun, but can seriously unbalance the game if a player gets lucky with their first couple rolls. Therefore, we play that the player chooses which tech to research, however better techs have a lower chance of being successfully researched.
The mechanism of researching is the same, you buy research tokens (dice rolls), roll for success, if none hit the tokens are banked for next turn and can roll again at no cost, if successful the tech is gained and the tokens are removed and must be rebought to do more research . The cost of each token (die roll) is increased to 8 IPC (normally is 5). But, tier 1 techs will be successfully researched with a roll of 3 or lower, tier 2 with roll of 2 or lower, and tier 3 with roll of 1:
To balance out how multiple techs are gained, we separated complimentary tech into opposing groups to prevent them from easily being researched too quickly back-back and becoming OP. To research a tier 2 or 3 tech at least one tech from the tier below must be already obtained from WITHIN the branch. Note, the techs are separated into left and right branches.
So to get heavy bombers (left, tier 3), you could research adv artillery or factory prod (left, tier 1) then radar or long-range air (left, tier 2). Then, to get jet fighters (right, tier 3), you’d have to also research 2 corresponding lower tier techs in the right branch, because adv artillery/radar/etc. don’t count towards the necessary lower tier techs for the right branch.