Would You Purchase A Reprint of "Classic" Axis & Allies?

  • Customizer

    I would love to see an AA Classic reprint with a double-sided board, complete with classic and new pieces.  What do you think?

  • Liaison TripleA '11 '10

    My gut says NO.

    As 1942 SE is basically 1942, which is basically Revised, which is basically Classic.

    But… this double sided board thing has struck my interest… and if they BALANCED the original to perfection, I would consider it.

    A NEW PIECE to solve the Tech Crisis would also be required, and would change everything.

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

    Yes definitely!

    I want a larger map, but with same look as classic.

    New pieces incorporated.

    Classic was the most balanced in terms of setup, though a bid was required ( 2 infantry for axis)

    The map between Russia and Germany was kinda stagnant ( Eastern Europe). Some minor improvement might be done there.

    Id like a set of painted pieces and really thick player aids and tokens.

  • '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 '12

    Of course.  We are all AA whores right?

  • @hkytown1:

    Of course.  We are all AA whores right?

    damn right

  • Customizer

    LOL yeah I was thinking that it would be cool to have a classic board on both side except one side would include Italy and maybe France with a simple 40 set up and a classic 42 set up. you could also just do the 41 style pieces reminiscent of the classic generic style pieces with the addition of French and Italian colored pieces.

  • To fully understand the game as it is today, one need to explore the game evolution. Yes, I would buy a reprint.

  • No.  I already have an original I got for Christmas back in the 80’s so I don’t need another.  Besides, they’d change something and screw it up…it always seems to work that way when they “reissue” something.  For example, when they came out with the “Classic” 1959 risk game it only resembled the original.  It was far from a copy of the original.  I passed on that one too.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    I have 3 factory sealed, mint condition “Classic” sets.  I do not either want to purchase one, nor do I want them to go back into print.  Let em die out, I wanna sell mine for $1500 each!

  • 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    If the reprint had only the old Classic pieces, in the old Classic colours, no.  If the old pieces were in the current colours, maybe.  If it had new pieces, yes.

  • Moderator 2022 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '13 '12

    Until I saw all the hype and got carried away
    and could no longer resist.
    A&A whore that I am.

  • No. I already have a very nice and complete classic. Also I have Europe (1999), Pacific (2001), D-day and 1942 2nd edition. Now I’m waiting for the exchange rate for USD to be more favorable, so I can buy 1940 Europe and Pacific, both 2nd editions.

    I know saying this is just like cursing in a church, but I feel well stocked having all those, and can’t see why I should want to buy a remake - or any more A&A games.

    (Yeah, I know, I’ll probably regret and reverse this statement of me in a few years time  :-P)

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

    Yes as a nostalgia version with painted pieces and larger map.

    However, the Karelia standoff needs to be resolved. That is a static part of the map until one side decides to risk the game on attacking EE or kar.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Nope, don’t want to see a reprint.  I have 5 mint condition, factory sealed boxes that I am retaining in hopes of selling for a profit on ebay one day, if they reprint it, I’ll lose equity. 😛

  • 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14


    Yes, I know this thread is ancient by now, but I still would!
    I would definitely buy a Classic reprint.

    Unlike some of the others here I don’t want any substantive changes. As options new stuff might be cool, but the original core game should come included. What I would prefer is a throwback map, with a legacy printing of Classic, with the rules for each edition reprinted in the manual. In addition to the standard editions, this updated legacy manual could include other potential set ups or interesting optional rules information. I would like a board that had the exact functionality of the original, only some minor aesthetic tweaks, allowing it to be the same, but also with “official” optional adjustments if desired.

    To Jens point about collectibles… I don’t see a conflict, because there is a way we could still get “Classic” reprinted, without cutting in on your investment. Make it the same, but brand new! 😉

    Here’s how…

    **I would reissue the game with a new Legacy box cover, featuring new Artwork.
    *A larger map, (perhaps double sided, as has been suggested elsewhere.)
    *Micro Sculpts: new smaller unit sculpts
    *A large detailed manual covering the history of the Classic game, with cool art.

    Everything else basically the same as classic, for the nostalgia factor.**

    The micro sculpts are the key for me! Classic micro sculpts!!! I would buy it in a heartbeat 🙂

    Micro sculpts would give the game a total different level of collectors appeal, and is something that A&A has never tried before. If the sculpts were say 20-30% smaller, but the map was slightly enlarged, it would combine to create a real sense of scale. The selling point of course would be tons of micro units! And the ability to play the game under various different editions with different special scenarios.

    Rules explanations in the manual should include 2nd and 3rd edition, plus the standard scenario options. It could also include a new “Legacy edition” series of rules or scenario options to expand the Classic experience, with newer rules or concepts from the more current games.

    I would absolutely buy something like that. My dream would be a Reissue that had a Revised or AA50 style map on the front, and Classic on the reverse, for a total package 60th Anniversary Edition game that actually contained Classic, and something like AA50 in the same box.

    What I’d hope for is the actual Classic game contained in some broader retrospective 60th Anniversary gameboard.
    Basically call it AA60 with a complete set of micro sculpts…
    Sculpts which could work for Classic, but might also expand the Classic board with a more advanced unit roster or Italy, or options along those lines, that get closer to the current incarnations of A&A.

    Every unit that can be purchased in the unit roster should be made of plastic! Non negotiable for me. Cardboard markers for actual units are annoying. Wouldn’t you rather have plastic factories? That’s a rhetorical question, of course you would! I also favor Paper money. Please! The IPC tracker is the worst, and if its a Classic reprint, it should have the feel of the classic. With nice thick set up cards, good solid units, tiny units (lots and lots of little plastic sculpts) and cash IPCs you can hold in your hand. This would all be highly fantastic.
    The more I think about it the more a classic reprint with micro sculpts is exactly what I’d want from an AA60th anniversary game.

    I would build it around a set of generic unit sculpts like this…

    Red: Russia
    Gray: Germany
    Tan: Britain
    Yellow: Japan
    Green: USA
    White: Bonus/Optional
    Black: Bonus/Optional
    Blue: Bonus/Optional

    Include 3 more generic sets of sculpts in White, Black and Blue. These could be used to option in Neutrals, or additional player/nations like Italy, China, France or the Commonwealth, for alternative or modified Classic style scenarios. These could include generic White, Black and Blue roundel control markers for use in such scenarios.

    That would provide a total of 8 total unit sets (5 standard, 3 bonus). The idea for the bonus sculpts/control markers in generic white, black, and blue, is that you could use them however you liked. They’d be a special extras, not needed for standard Classic, but which could be used in the special “legacy” scenarios.

    These unit sets should include all the Classic unit types:
    Infantry, Tank, Fighter, Bomber, Transport, Sub, Carrier, Battleship, Factory, AA gun.

    But could also include a few of the most popular “special” units from the later games like artillery or destroyers or others as well. If each unit set was generic I think that would be optimal, since everything would be micro, the color differentiation and ability to recognize unit types at a glance would be even more important. I picture a bomber with the wingspan around that of the current fighter sculpts, and infantry about 2/3rds the current scale, ships and other units likewise tinier, but with more sculpts total. A larger board (upscaled but modeled on the exact classic style) and smaller units (downscaled to provide for epic tiny armies!) Basically my dream board 🙂

    Ps. this actually gives me an interesting idea… Lets say for argument that HBG or FMG released a generic game board.

    A mapboard with a new projection of the world, featuring familiar Classic territory and sea zone divisions.

    Generic Micro units at 2/3rds scale in the following colors: Red, Gray, Tan, Yellow, Green, White, Black, Blue
    Generic control markers in those same solid colors.
    No rules, or trademarked designs of any sort.

    Could that be done?

  • 2021 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10


    Micro sculpts would give the game a total different level of collectors appeal, and is something that A&A has never tried before. If the sculpts were say 20-30% smaller, but the map was slightly enlarged, it would combine to create a real sense of scale. The selling point of course would be tons of micro units!

    It wouldn’t be a selling point for everybody.  The problem with this approach is that the smaller the sculpts are, the less detail can be put into them.  Beyond a certain size (and detail) threshold, it would serve no purpose to try to give different shapes to the different national versions of a particular unit type, and you would therefore end up with a game consisting entirely of genric sculpts, which for me personally would translate into “no sale”.

    A related problem is that, at such a small scale, it could be hard to tell the difference between various unit types (like cruisers and destroyers).  Tall Paul has mentioned that he has to code his HBG sculpts in various ways so that players (especially novice players) can tell the difference between the unit types, despite the fact that they’re large in size and nationally distinct in shape.  Even with the OOB pieces, it can take experience and/or a good eye to tell the difference between a cruiser and a destroyer unless you’re leaning over the game board just above the pieces, since their shape and size is similar.  The problem would be even more severe with micro-sculpts.

  • 2022 2021 '19 '15 '14

    Well I have no real objection to generic sculpts, ala the Classic original. The point about unit confusion, especially with ships, could be easily handled with a generic set.

    I suspect the difficulty in differentiation you mentioned is actually because they are nationally distinct by shape, (not in spite of it), instead of being generic universally by basic unit type-size. I mean that is always where confusion enters into the game in my experience. ‘Is this a cruiser or a destroyer or a transport or what is it?’ When they all look the same at the same size that problem is removed. But even then, I think you could preserve a decent amount of detail and produce something that would satisfy the needs of the gameplay.

    The problem right now is that the ships are all scaled in essentially the same way from some actual historical ship at a set scale with less regard for the gameplay needs. I don’t care for example, if a German battleship was proportionally smaller than a British one or vice a versa, or if the destroyer from one nation was basically the same size as a cruiser from another. In the game they should all be at set sizes, by basic type. If the level of detail and accuracy in the unit sculpts is so exacting that it becomes disruptive to the gameplay, then that is point where I stop caring about detail and accuracy. I’m sure almost everyone here is a diehard sculpt junkie who will not accept anything less than national sculpts. I like national sculpts when they’re done well, but what I don’t like is when National sculpts become so hard to distinguish from each other. That has everything to do with the relative proportions by unit type, and less to do with the overall scale of the units.

    All ships of the same type should share the same length, width and height. For example:
    Battleships should be visibly longer and wider than Cruisers, Cruisers should be longer and wider than Destroyers etc.  Likewise Aircraft of the same type should share the same wingspan etc by type. Each nation should have a clearly identifiable set color, (distinct chroma/saturation/and esp. color “value”), so that it is really easy to identify Nations under all normal lighting conditions.

    Your team (the national sculpt team) has won out on every release of every A&A board since the 80s. How about throwing my team a bone for a change? 🙂

    I’m anticipating the response “what about the 1941 starter board?” But even 1941 is not fully generic, its generic by side, and anyway the unit roster is stripped down. Its not micro, and there are barely enough units to play, certainly not without chipping out everything. The whole point to me would MORE units, more of the unit sculpts themselves fitting in the box, because they’re tinier.

    But even if you retained National Sculpts and just blurred the size a bit, or chose National sculpt units for the basic types that looked more similar by nation/side and less distinct from one another in shape (e.g. Battleships, Cruisers etc. all look essentially similar by nation by type, and definitely all fill the exact Length/Width requirement. So they are always the same length and width exactly, no matter what sort of distortion to relative scale is needed to achieve this. As an example of where this fails and confusion occurs, I’m thinking of Italian battleships and cruisers in aa50, which looked virtually the same except for the back, and were both basically the same width. Germany’s transports likewise are always wide relative to the transports of other nations. I would prefer more distortion so that the basic units by type are roughly the same, regardless of the loss on detail by national scultp 100% accuracy, with the emphasis on color saturation/value instead.

    We’re talking about Classic after all. I think people forget, especially as we get older, what it was like to play the original with those generic sculpts. It was hugely significant in helping the learning curve. The original Classic release was a totally generic sculpt release, and it worked brilliantly, because the units were all very clearly distinguished by type. It was easy for players to see what was going on at a glance, as everything was consistent, the only variable being color. This is how I would handle Micro. The novelty would be the tiny size, and the fact that you could field a ton of them without needing chips. And you could port them into other standard games, provided it included a more expansive roster, for tiny units on familiar big maps.

    There are plenty of other releases to suite the needs of National Sculpt collectors and Model enthusiast. How many more do we really need at this point? (I know the answer is always “more!”, and “never enough!” hehe, but I mean honestly we are kind of at a saturation point now aren’t we?) Why not try something new for a change, and adjust the scale down? Micro is way more interesting to me than Macro (or the sort of upscaled highly detailed models of some tactical wargames) I’m more interested in the boardgame experience from the perspective of the new recruit. But even among model fanatics, everyone enjoys the super tiny. What you lose in detail you make up for in the fascination with the small. 🙂

    A&A has been exploiting this for years. It gave us scaled down army men (of the sort you’d have played with in the 1960s, you know like these… that my uncle gave me when I was little) just quite a bit smaller for A&A, and it has been a success. I think we could go at least 25% smaller (probably down to 50% even) and still retain the core functionality. There is currently no strict scale anyway, by that I mean Ships are at one scale, Air at another, Heavy equipment, Infantry, they are all already different. Ships in relation to ships, and Air in relation to ground, should be approached with the same suspension of disbelief we use for ground to ground units. I don’t see why you couldn’t just shrink every current basic unit in half, and still be able to easily distinguish them, provided the shapes and sizes of Air and Ships were more consistently differentiated by unit type. You could probably get more detail in it than one might think, printing technology and available materials get better every year. Soon we will be able to print these things pigment directly, so it’d make even micro painting something that might work here.

    9 hold the line.jpg

  • Customizer


    I have 3 factory sealed, mint condition “Classic” sets.  I do not either want to purchase one, nor do I want them to go back into print.  Let em die out, I wanna sell mine for $1500 each!

    I disagree. Classic is dirt cheap and so heavily produced it’s like “sealed Monopoly”. Even a sealed AA50 edition is really, really pushing it at $1500. Take a look on Ebay. Even AA50 can be had $250-$500.

Suggested Topics

  • 4
  • 2
  • 3
  • 9
  • 4
  • 22
  • 3
  • 4
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys