Next Axis&Allies game?

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    As has been said, I think the logical next step for AH would be a G40 Global “classic” where you can get the whole game in one box.  Maybe they could add on some extras like money, optional units, a 42 setup (not the awful 42 setup from Smorey), victory city markers, tech token… i.e. make an AA anniversary quality type product.

    Otherwise, I tend to agree AH is done w/AA. Larry seems to have moved on. Although he did say he wished he had a chance to do an eastern front game. That would be awesome.  Sigh…

    We should do a kickstarter campaign to buy the brand.


  • @Karl7:

    We should do a kickstarter campaign to buy the brand.

    A nice idea in principle, though it would have a tricky catch: while it might theoretically be possible for the folks on this forum to collectively own the A&A franchise, how would we handle the issue of collectively deciding what games to produce and collectively agreeing on what their rules would be?  The robust debates that can be found in the forum’s house rules section show that there’s quite a diversity of opinions on those subjects.

  • '17 '16

    @Karl7:

    Otherwise, I tend to agree AH is done w/AA. Larry seems to have moved on.

    Ya, and I get back into it after missing the last 30 years of A&A, and now Avalon Hill seems done with the franchise… oh well, I’m stocking up plenty of units and making extra maps!

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    @CWO:

    @Karl7:

    We should do a kickstarter campaign to buy the brand.

    A nice idea in principle, though it would have a tricky catch: while it might theoretically be possible for the folks on this forum to collectively own the A&A franchise, how would we handle the issue of collectively deciding what games to produce and collectively agreeing on what their rules would be?  The robust debates that can be found in the forum’s house rules section show that there’s quite a diversity of opinions on those subjects.

    The way to do it would be to collectively buy it via a company where all contributors would get shares per size of donation.  The company would then lease the brand to Historical Boardgaming which would then send back to the company a share of profits (if any) that would then be distributed to shareholders pre rata.

    Easy!  (

    Actually, as a lawyer I can say this would technically not be hard at all to set up. The hard part would be the money. I assume AH would not let go of the brand for less than 6 figures.  Probably more dollars than people who actually own or play the game.)

    Further, I guess I would even be easier for Historical Boardgaming to issue shares itself.  But they probably don’t want to incur the legal costs/challenges with doing that.


  • @Karl7:

    The way to do it would be to collectively buy it via a company where all contributors would get shares per size of donation.  The company would then lease the brand to Historical Boardgaming which would then send back to the company a share of profits (if any) that would then be distributed to shareholders pre rata.

    Easy!  (

    Actually, as a lawyer I can say this would technically not be hard at all to set up. The hard part would be the money. I assume AH would not let go of the brand for less than 6 figures.  Probably more dollars than people who actually own or play the game.)

    Further, I guess I would even be easier for Historical Boardgaming to issue shares itself.  But they probably don’t want to incur the legal costs/challenges with doing that.

    It’s not really the legal aspects of buying the franchise I was talking about.  Rather, I was referring to the fact that getting two or more people to agree on any given house rule proposal is often a challenge, and that this level of difficulty rises geometrically with each additional person introduced into the equation.  The same problem has cropped in discussions of which new game HBG should produce, or which new combat unit HBG should produce.  If the A&A franchise was collectively owned and collectively controlled, we’d need to have a collective discussion about where to take it next – and my guess it that it would be virtually impossible to reach an agreement.  The only system in which such a deadlock would be avoided would be a system in which one single person had supreme authority to make (and impose) such decisions, and in corporate terms that translates into one person being the majority shareholder…in which case the whole concept of collective ownership and collective control becomes essentially meaningless.

    Or to put it another way: A&A fans have tended to operate under the principle that, as much as they might disagree with some of the elements of the A&A games he designs, Larry is the only person who has the ultimate authority to decide what is official (and what isn’t) in the A&A world.  This makes sense, since he created A&A.  [By analogy: if the A&A franchise was an order of chivalry, Larry would be the “fount of honour” (“fons honorum” in Latin), the person who by virtue of his position has the exclusive right to confer legitimacy on a title or a decoration.]  In the design process for a game, involving lots of contributors and lots of playtesters (no doubt many of them with strong opinions on the subject), there ultimately has to be someone with the authority to make hard decisions about what option will be used to deal with such-and-such a design issue.  So the awkward question is: in a collectively owned A&A franchise, who would be the new Larry and how would one persuade the minority shareholders to hand over that much power to this individual?  How would one even persuade them to become minority shareholders in the first place?

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    well, the corporate form requires a narrowing of who calls the shots vis an election of directors who then appoint officers…. etc.

    Also, I wonder how much Larry was in on the design of 1940 or other games.  The designer notes make it sound like the 1940 concept was cooked up Wizard of the Coast guys with Larry contributing from the side.  I could be wrong.


  • @Karl7:

    Also, I wonder how much Larry was in on the design of 1940 or other games.  The designer notes make it sound like the 1940 concept was cooked up Wizard of the Coast guys with Larry contributing from the side.  I could be wrong.

    I got a somewhat similar impression from the designer notes – not in the sense that Larry was contributing from the side, but in the sense that WotC came up with the 1940 concept and Larry was then given the task of making it work.  Larry describes the 1940 start date as “interesting”, a word which can be interpreted as having all kinds of meanings ranging from “exciting” to “stupid.”


  • @Karl7:

    Also, I wonder how much Larry was in on the design of 1940 or other games.

    When A&A Revised edition came out in 2004 I remember Mike Selinker took a lot of credit of making it, in his own humblebragging way, and at the same time Larry posted his own house rules at his forum, and named it LHTR, or Larry Harris Tournament Rules, because the OOB rules of Mike had so many flaws. I figure if Larry had control then the LHTR would be identical to the OOB rules. IMHO Larry is the greatest designer, but unfortunately the big companies mess it up.


  • I guess you could call me NEW BLOOD, so I will throw my 2 cents in. I played the original axis and Allies alot with my cousin growing up in the late 80s and early 90s. Then we moved on in life. A few years ago I was walking past a kiosk in the mall with board games and I saw Axis and Allies. I thought " what an awesome idea!" I bought it and me and my cuz got together and played it later that week. I remember thinking, they really screwed this game up. It was 1941. Only after that did I realize that there were other editions. I’m sure I’m not the only one with this experience. Thankfully I kept looking and found the other versions of the game like 1940 global and 1914( I think I’m in the minority but I thought 1914 was a great game). I would love to see a reprint of the anniversary edition. I’ve herd some people say that it is the best version out there in terms of balance, play time and complexity. Sadly, I can’t afford the 300-600$ price tag of a used edition. They could call it something else and many add or take a way a few things and make an anniversary edition for the rest of us. That would be awesome! Just my humble opinion.


  • Since everybody is throwing out their two cents I might as well get mine in.  I am 15 years old.  Axis and Allies all started one day on my 12th birthday. There it was. Axis and Allies 1941. I had no idea what it was, but it WAS everything I love. World War II, strategy, economy, dice, and plastic miniatures that allowed me to continue playing with toy soldiers!  I played 1941 with a few others. I loved it. Then I heard that there were more. 1940 was my dream come true.  I didn’t get it until my 15th birthday. By then I was a mini veteran, having played perhaps a hundred games of 1941 and 1914.  I love 1940 more than any game. My friend has Pacific and I got Europe. We play (with at least twenty other individuals) weekly generally in 4 player games. 1941 has fallen far away. It is too boring now. But it was great the first two years. I still occasionally play more complicated setups and such on it, but it is basically being wasted.  Yes. 1941 got me in the franchise. It worked. And it still does get some use…as someone else mentioned, its pieces are special.  No other set has them. In China’s box there is a P-40. The US, UK, and USSR use them too. The tanks, although only historical for Russia and Germany, are a great add on (for them) and I even used the Tigers and Su-85s? As an addon heavy tank unit.  There are so many other great units as well, that I think I would buy 1941 just to get them. Even if I were introduced to 1940 straight on, I would want 1941 still just so my Chinese could have P-40 Flying Tigers  :-D


  • Whoops. Tried to quote Black Elk here, but my noob status shines through.

    Hello everyone. I’ve browsed this and several other A&A/board game forums for years, but I’ve never posted til now  :-o

    I love this series of games. On a rainy summer day about 13 years ago my cousins and I discovered my uncle’s old Classic Edition of Axis and Allies. We had been playing Risk for a few years and were starting to really outgrow it (we were all around 13 years old at the time). This game opened our eyes - we didn’t know that there were better strategy board games than Risk, but this launched us into a while new world.

    Since then, we collectively purchased Revised (2004) A&A50, and 1914 and we rotate through playing them. We’d LOVE to get the two pieces of Global '40, but at this point we have all come to realize that it’s probably a bad idea: we live in different states, only seeing each other (for more than a day or two at a time) for about 2 weeks around Christmas time. We generally find time to play at least one full game then, but purchasing Global for the purpose of playing it once a year (or less, if we feel like playing a different version at times) just doesn’t seem worth it.

    We have discussed several times the idea of a virtual version of these games for us, but we have mostly resisted the temptation until very recently (playing with a real board/pieces is such an important part of the experience for us!) But we are now testing out the Vassal game engine online and an app called simply “1941” for our phones/tablets.

    I HIGHLY recommend the app. It’s not called Axis and Allies, nor is it officially linked to A&A, but the resemblance is obvious and it’s a really fun game. They have two setups (1941 & 1942) with several rule variations for each setup. The mechanics took a little getting used to (strategic bombing and combined bombardment with amphibious assaults were particularly puzzling), but once you figure out how to play, it’s a ton of fun. And super easy! It’s essentially a PBE game: you play your turn and the game sends a notification to the other person to play theirs.

    I would love if board games came with a stronger and more direct digital connection. Having to scour the Internet for A&A-based games is a bit off-putting and if the digital version was directly released with the board games, then updates to rules and such would be way easier to disseminate - the game/app would simply inform you that a new update was available for download (and you could implement the changes for your actual board game accordingly).


  • I will have to try out that app.

  • '22 '20 '19 '18 '17 '16 '15 '14 '12

    One thing I’ve been wondering is why can’t you buy WofTC stuff including Avalon products directly from the company?  Did they screw themselves by signing all sorts of restrictive distribution agreements with wholesalers?

    Seems like a big mistake if they did. Probably contributes a serious percentage cost to the end product. Imagine buying 1940 2nd for $50 right from WofTC. Or replacement pieces right from them.

    Who knows, maybe they are trying to shutter the A&A brand so their distributors let go of their contracts?  Maybe too savvy for them.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

37

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts