• '20 '18 '16 '13 '12

    I gotta say, I wasn’t very excited about this one until I saw how different the map was. I figured there may just be token differences between this and the other 1942 game but I seem to have been proven very wrong.

    However, in all my excitement, I can’t help but feel a touch of melancholy. Why? You may ask. We have jut been given another more interesting but still simple version of the game that will keep us busy in ways that the new 1941 version never could.

    Well, I must say, upon reading Larry’s liner notes my suspicions have been confirmed: this is the closest thing were going to get to an anniversary reprint.

    Until now I thought of the AA line of (global) games as elegant and complete. We had the new (now old) 1942 edition standing on the latest end of the time spectrum and the simplest end of complexity. 
    Move back a year and things got more interesting, Japan had not hit the USA, barbarosa was about to be executed and Italy still had the power to change the war. This was Anniversary (or the old 1941) where we were introduced to NOs, more powers (china and Italy) and a bunch more territories. 
    Go back one year more and you have all the complexities of global 1940. Where we need even more divisions of powers to capture the feel of the conflict. More units, more facilities, more territories, more rules and (generally) more fun. So complex in-fact, you can split it into two seperate games. Wow!
    This completed our trilogy of increasing complexity as we go back in time.

    Now Larry describes this new 1942 edition as the goldilocks of the bunch. More complex than 1941(new) but still no global 1940. (not to big, not too small, just right). Which seems to me that it’s attempting to replace Anniversary as the new middle complexity game.

    Now I haven’t played this new one yet but by the looks of it, it’s 1942 on steroids. Which is a far cry from Anniversary in my opinion. Time will tell, but on first glance I much prefer the old trio of 1942 (old) 1941 (anniversary) and 1940 (global). Obviously this is a preliminary assessment and only a lot of playtesting will indicate whether it measures up to Anniversary, which I purport it hopes to replace. But on first glance I would much rather have a whole generation of new players getting exposed to the masterpiece that was AA Anniversary rather than this new hybrid.

    Thoughts?

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Well Kyle, you know what I think?

    You’re thinking about this too much…

    Time to get a haircut and a real job. 😛

  • '10

    I would add the new 1941 to the discussion, but agree that it should be the introductory and fourth game in your old trio. I like the idea of the new 1941 to be an intro, but i think it might be too big a jump from that to the new 1942. I think the new 1941, old 1942, Anniversary and global make for a nice progression, though it’s now four games instead of 3.

  • '20 '18 '16 '13 '12

    @Gargantua:

    Well Kyle, you know what I think?

    You’re thinking about this too much…

    Time to get a haircut and a real job. 😛

    Hey, I have been away from Internet for the last 2 weeks and there is nothing to do in this town! It’s also been like 10 months since my last FTF game. This is all I’ve got man!

    Haircut soon, but that whole “real job” thing is at least 2 years down the road. 😉

  • TripleA

    canuck12 i think you are correct, 1942.0(this nomenclature works well when you say it aloud) has taken over for anniversary.

    up till now.

    beginner          spring 1942
    intermediate anniversary
    advanced global 40

    now

    beginner  1941
    intermediate 1942.0
    advanced global 40


  • It should have went….

    Beginner : 1942 (the new 1941 should be a 1942 setup)
    Intermediate : 1941 (the 1942 2nd edition should have been a 1941 start)
    Expert : 1940

    So as you wind the clock back, the games get more complicated.
    Instead it bounces from 1941, to 1942, then back to 1940

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Yea it is a Anniversary reprint of 1942 2nd edition

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    Revised was listed as an Anniversary game (20th).

    And 1942 is basically a revised revised.

    Of course, only a real fan would know that.

    So yes. 🙂


  • @Gargantua:

    Revised was listed as an Anniversary game (20th).

    And 1942 is basically a revised revised.

    Of course, only a real fan would know that.

    So yes. 🙂

    A&A Revised (2004) was the 20th Anniversary edition of A&A Classic (1984) from Milton Bradley and A&A 1942 (2009) was the 25th Anniversary edition of the original MB game.  Of course, the very first version of A&A was produced by Nova Games.  I can’t recall the exact date.


  • I do think this might be close to a reprint of anniversary - it is darn close - nice big board, anniversary (and G50) rules - only thing missing really is Italy (and I guess China, but US has more representation there anyways).

    I really think that for those who cannot get a copy of AA50 and those that feel G50 might be a bit much, this is a perfect fit.

    MM

  • '19 '15 '12

    Sorry if I am missing something, but could I get a link to the map and rule book? Thank you.


  • @Yelrae:

    Sorry if I am missing something, but could I get a link to the map and rule book? Thank you.

    Here is the link…

    http://smo63.fatcow.com/pdf/19422ndedrulebook1.pdf

    There is a picture of the game board (map) on page 8 of the rulebook.  DJensen said he will be posting a preview of the game board and setup sometime this evening.


  • Canuck12,

    Unfortunately, you may be right, but it is much better than it was…and even though, it does bring it much closer to AA50, it will never be AA50.

    And on that note, and not sure if you guys have heard me say this before regarding AA50, unless the Germans bomb Pearl Harbor  :lol:  AA50 won’t be reprinted.  At least that is what I have been told by those that know a thing or two about AA.

    It was intended to be a limited print run for the 50th Anniversary of AH, that that is that.  I guess you could look at it being the “Black Lotus” of the AA world for all you MtG players out there…

    Peace,
    Gregory J. Smorey
    Axis & Allies Event Organizer/GM - GEN CON/Origins/Spring Gathering
    www.headlesshorseman2.com

    “The best luck of all is the luck you make for yourself” - MacArthur

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    unless the Germans bomb Pearl Harbor

    I can have that arranged.


  • Yes it is essentially that.  Hey I’m OK with that.  Its much better than first edition and in some ways better than Anniversary- a little simplier.  Nat.Obj/Tech, extra rules left to the G40 which is probably where its suppose to be.

    Greg, AA42 2nd edition IS your premier tourny game.

    1. It fits your tourny format the best.
    2. No NatObj or Tech or extra rules- simplied for tournament format.
    3. No 41/42 versions like AA50 to argue over which to play.

    Its like the game was made for your tourny rules.  I would bump the time up to 6hrs though.  You’ll get 8 rounds of play with that- that’s very very solid.  Hope this turns out for you over the next couple of years.  With limited copies of AA50, that with slowly fade over the next 5 years especially if this game exceeds expectations which it might.

    G40- love that game- its just not made for a tournament- takes longer to develop so you have to play a lot of rounds or you don’t do it justice, but at the same time people don’t wanna stay to play that long in a tournament format however.  That’s why this game is perfect for the AA community online.  Its just better for that game.

    AA41 has great potential for tournaments also.  Actually looking forward to playing this one too.

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    AA41 fits tournaments better. You can get in alot of games and have semi and final be AA42 2nd.

    Playing more games in a fixed amount of time get you more accurate results of determining who is the best player and the lowest common denominator game should be used to determine who has greater skills.


  • @questioneer:

    Yes it is essentially that.  Hey I’m OK with that.  Its much better than first edition and in some ways better than Anniversary- a little simplier.  Nat.Obj/Tech, extra rules left to the G40 which is probably where its suppose to be.

    Greg, AA42 2nd edition IS your premier tourny game.

    1. It fits your tourny format the best.
    2. No NatObj or Tech or extra rules- simplied for tournament format.
    3. No 41/42 versions like AA50 to argue over which to play.

    Its like the game was made for your tourny rules.  I would bump the time up to 6hrs though.  You’ll get 8 rounds of play with that- that’s very very solid.  Hope this turns out for you over the next couple of years.  With limited copies of AA50, that with slowly fade over the next 5 years especially if this game exceeds expectations which it might.

    G40- love that game- its just not made for a tournament- takes longer to develop so you have to play a lot of rounds or you don’t do it justice, but at the same time people don’t wanna stay to play that long in a tournament format however.  That’s why this game is perfect for the AA community online.  Its just better for that game.

    AA41 has great potential for tournaments also.  Actually looking forward to playing this one too.

    Yes, it is gonna be eventually.  We have to see how well players respond to it at GEN CON, but yes, It will be…I have already changed the format for this from 1942 to 42 2nd ed.  I think it will do well…oh, and we can’t go to 5 or six hours this year just because times and event parameters have already been set.  I see it going to 5 more so than six.  Again, guys, you got to remember, we got to fit it into a time frame to get all games in whatever setup we come up with.

    I really don’t see it eating into AA50.  Though only time will tell.  I think the biggest problem with AA50 is that the limit to who has to game has been reached.  Outside of the few stray copies someone might have out there, the players field is now limited.

    Oh, reminder, I will be giving a Larry Harris signed still shrink wrapped AA50 game at GEN CON.  For anyone playing in any event at GEN CON, I have a door prize give away on Sunday and I give away tons of games AA shrits, etc. and my last copy of AA50 will be given at that time…so…

    As G40, I still have hope that we can have a good tourney at GEN CON. Yes, it might be suited better for online play but I still want to give it another shot…

    As for 1941, I will only be using this as a begineers game at this time.  If we get enough novice and casual players interested, we might have a tournametn in the future, but it will only be fore those that are not as versed in the AA gaming field…

    With this being said, I can see us having a novice tournament, A Masters (based on 1942 2nd Ed.), an AA50 event and depending on how G40 goes, maybe one for that.  Regardless, that is the way I see it…

    Peace,
    Greg Smorey
    Axis & Allies Tournament Director/GM - GEN CON/Origins/Spring Gathering.


  • @Imperious:

    AA41 fits tournaments better. You can get in alot of games and have semi and final be AA42 2nd.

    Playing more games in a fixed amount of time get you more accurate results of determining who is the best player and the lowest common denominator game should be used to determine who has greater skills.

    I really don’t seeing this happen.  If it would, it would be for novice and amatuer players only.

    That is one of the problem I believe we have had recently.  People are kind of tired of losing continuiously to the same 3 or 4 teams.  If you break out the events, to level of play, then it would draw in more people.  The diehards in the Masters and the AA50 event while 1941 for the more casual players.

    Peace,
    Greg

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    How do people get chosen for the brackets?


  • @Imperious:

    AA41 fits tournaments better. You can get in alot of games and have semi and final be AA42 2nd.

    Playing more games in a fixed amount of time get you more accurate results of determining who is the best player and the lowest common denominator game should be used to determine who has greater skills.

    we have a&a tournaments down here in south florida and we used the 1942 game for the first round or two…but now that we have 1941 and 1942 2nd…we will be seeting up our tourneys this way…

    finals–G1940 2nd edition
    semi-finals–E1940 2nd edition and P1940 2nd edition
    quarterfinals–1942 2nd edition
    all rounds before quarters will now use 1941

    i have the AA50 and i still believe it might the BEST version of the game period…but im hoping the 2nd editions of europe and pacific dethrone it

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Yea you can fit like 4-5 AA41 games in a day or just 2 AA42. So in terms of determining a winner in a single elimination tournament, AA41 is a much better choice. Then you graduate to AA42 in say semi and Global for final.

    That brings alot more people into the fold since AA41 is meant to draw new people into the game and you got them playing 4-5 games. Tournaments should cater to getting new blood into AA and if the intimidation of say playing global or AA50 keeps people away, AA41 is the cure bringing everybody into the lowest common denominator of the AA franchise.

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 5
  • 10
  • 4
  • 3
  • 9
  • 3
  • 2
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

30
Online

16.3k
Users

38.0k
Topics

1.6m
Posts