Alpha 4 is due next month



  • It is inevitable!

    You heard it here first!

    This is absolutely ridiculous!



  • @mantlefan:

    April Fools?

    Or is this a critique of the game keeping getting changed?

    Yes  😄



  • HAHA, April Fools in September

    For real, though, this wont we the game they play next year at GenCon, so I won’t play it that much between now and then.



  • I personally think he will come out with another game of this size and scope with a 1942 start date instead of constantly redoing this one. Make more green that way.


  • '12

    @Shakespeare:

    It is inevitable!

    You heard it here first!

    This is absolutely ridiculous!

    Lol, it may not come out next month, but I bet there will be another version eventually.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Look at the OOB and the Alpha Rules, and the back and forth… quite a mess.

    Infact - WHAT AN ABORTION LARRY.



  • @Gargantua:

    Look at the OOB and the Alpha Rules, and the back and forth… quite a mess.

    Infact - WHAT AN ABORTION LARRY.

    Thanks for the contribution.

    OOB had issues; now they’re mostly resolved.  The game is a lot more balanced now, and every new change is fairly minor.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Has anyone counted how many “extra” Units the allies have recieved in AA?

    Just add up the hit points, and the unit value,  and so he got MORE of this “new” unit.

    Minor changes are minor changes…. changing the FUNDAMENTAL RULES OF THE GAME since 1984, is not a “minor” thing.

    I do prefer the new system - in theory, but not the way it’s been implemented for Global.



  • @mantlefan:

    @Ruanek:

    @Gargantua:

    Look at the OOB and the Alpha Rules, and the back and forth… quite a mess.

    Infact - WHAT AN ABORTION LARRY.

    Thanks for the contribution.

    OOB had issues; now they’re mostly resolved.  The game is a lot more balanced now, and every new change is fairly minor.

    I don’t think the potential elimination of sealion as a viable (not just possible) strat is very minor.

    Maybe not, but it was necessary.  When it was relatively simple to knock out the UK in 3 rounds there’s a problem.  People are saying it’s still viable - just not as early (perhaps G4 now).  I haven’t played with the new rules yet.



  • @Shakespeare:

    It is inevitable!

    You heard it here first!

    This is absolutely ridiculous!

    No offense, but I think it is in man’s nature to improve things, its like an eternal struggle to reach the ultimate optimal game, and for each step the game gets better. Just look at classic chess, how many changes do you think it had the last 2000 years ? And people still play it. With your attitude, you should ride a horse, not a car, because you are against improving things.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Do you get more chicks riding a horse?


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    A lot of the new allied units are in places where they will never come to bear in the game, so why count them?  (W. USA, E. USA, England….)

    Removing Sea Lion as an “I win” move on G3 is not minor, but was necessary in my opinion.  (Not I win the game, I win London.)  Removing the NO from England was probably an unnecessary factor in having people consider Russia before England.

    There will probably be an “official” rule set to replace all the Alpha rules with what Larry thinks is important. (However much we might want certain changes and we all probably want at least one change.  Jimmy and I would like Neutral blocks, I would like another destroyer or transport for Japan, given the rule you cant get close to America anymore, I dont see why this wouldnt be permitted, strategics doing +2 again, etc, etc, etc.)



  • @Cmdr:

    , I would like another destroyer or transport for Japan,

    Then use the classic bid system. Tell your buddy that if you play Japan you need to start with one more tranny in the set up. Easy as that. Bids have been part of A&A since 1984.



  • @Cmdr:

    Removing the NO from England was probably an unnecessary factor in having people consider Russia before England.

    Hitler did not want a little island, he wanted big Lebensraum in the east. To conquer a tiny island was not the main National Objective of the Nazies in the real war, so why reward them if they do it in this game ? Germany may of course conquer UK with Alpha+3 rules too, but UK is not the big trophy any more. The rich soil in Russia is the prize.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    The rewarding them for doing it in this game is because it is a capitol.  I think E. USA should be a German objective too. (Granted it is significantly harder to get than London!)  Rome should be an allied one, as with Berlin and Tokyo.


  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    ANY south American territory controlled by Italy OR Germany, should Provide an NO.

    Theme:  National Prestige, or world wide effect, or whatever.

    The NO’s, should provide the Axis with different venues of attack, to maximize the excitement and world wide action of the game.

    ARGENTINA, should be Pro-Axis, and +5.

    It’s not going to be hard for the Americans to smash this however… lol.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Oh, I dunno about that Garg.  I’ve caught a few people with their pants down around their ankles in the Gulf of Mexico.  A dozen submarines in SZ 101, take Panama, W. Indies and giggle as none of America’s ships can get there. (If they build a destroyer, just sink it iwth the dozen or so submarines.)

    I would never claim this is typical!  But there is a serious blind spot with people about the Atlantic US.

    Seriously, the biggest change I would make would be to kill the frazzin Continental US NO.  Replace it with an NO stating that all allied capitols are in friendly hands.  ALL OF THEM.  Far closer to reality in my opinion.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    Oh, that’s in place of the France NO where you have a british and american dude standing in France goin “dang, I could walk to Frankfurt and get a dog, but I have to sit here in Paris getting chewed out because I want Ketchup on my Freedom Fries!”



  • @Razor:

    @Cmdr:

    Removing the NO from England was probably an unnecessary factor in having people consider Russia before England.

    Hitler did not want a little island, he wanted big Lebensraum in the east. To conquer a tiny island was not the main National Objective of the Nazies in the real war, so why reward them if they do it in this game ? Germany may of course conquer UK with Alpha+3 rules too, but UK is not the big trophy any more. The rich soil in Russia is the prize.

    You may be right, but in this game, Hitler is replaced by me!  So why should my decisions have to follow Hitler’s, he was a maniac anyways.  My point is that options=variability=replayability=more fun!  That’s pretty much my equation in a nutshell.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @JimmyHat:

    @Razor:

    @Cmdr:

    Removing the NO from England was probably an unnecessary factor in having people consider Russia before England.

    Hitler did not want a little island, he wanted big Lebensraum in the east. To conquer a tiny island was not the main National Objective of the Nazies in the real war, so why reward them if they do it in this game ? Germany may of course conquer UK with Alpha+3 rules too, but UK is not the big trophy any more. The rich soil in Russia is the prize.

    You may be right, but in this game, Hitler is replaced by me!  So why should my decisions have to follow Hitler’s, he was a maniac anyways.  My point is that options=variability=replayability=more fun!  That’s pretty much my equation in a nutshell.

    Bah, the Nazi’s assassinated Hitler years before Russia/America/England got into Germany proper and replaced him with a doppleganger. Gee, arn’t you up to date on your conspiracies?  Eh?

    No seriously, London is an objective because it’s a capitol.  That’s the only reason I want it as one.  I want Washington and Rome to be ones too!



  • Britain may not have been an original goal of Nazi Germany, but after it entered the war it became one, at least until they basically lost the Battle for Britain (the air campaign).  Really, any enemy capital would be an objective in a war, and that’s basically how it went in WWII.  The Allies went for Rome and Berlin (and would have gone for Tokyo), and the Axis went after London, Paris, and Moscow.  It’s pretty symbolic and prestigious and stuff to take an enemy capital.


  • '15 Official Q&A '11 '10 Moderator

    Just thought of something from reading another thread, but this is a good place to put it….

    Once Russia declares war on Japan and invades Japan, I think Japan should be able to invade Amur from Korea or Manchuria without penalty.  Do you?


  • Customizer

    @Gamerman01:

    Just thought of something from reading another thread, but this is a good place to put it….

    Once Russia declares war on Japan and invades Japan, I think Japan should be able to invade Amur from Korea or Manchuria without penalty.  Do you?

    I think that is the case already.  I’m pretty sure that the Mongolia penalty for Japan attacking Amur from Manchuria/Korea is only if they attack Russia first.  If Russia has already attacked Japan, then Japan is free to attack Russia in any territory from any territory.  At least that makes sense to me.



  • You are correct, and Larry just stated that in a post.


  • 2018 2017 '16 '11 Moderator

    @Gamerman01:

    Just thought of something from reading another thread, but this is a good place to put it….

    Once Russia declares war on Japan and invades Japan, I think Japan should be able to invade Amur from Korea or Manchuria without penalty.  Do you?

    Good, I was wondering about that.

    I think in addition to Mongolia, Russia should get the 12 IPCs as well. 😛  But I’m a loon for keeping Japan out of Russia.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 39
  • 82
  • 42
  • 4
  • 22
  • 10
  • 39
  • 6
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

81
Online

14.5k
Users

35.1k
Topics

1.4m
Posts