OK, so this whole debate arises from the rule that tells you to place one of your control markers under your AA gun if you move it into a territory controlled by a friendly power, correct? There is no corresponding rule that says that if I capture your AA gun when I capture your territory you should place one of your control markers under it. So, we have one fairly rare circumstance when I can capture your gun when it has your marker (in your ally’s territory) and another far more common one when I can capture your gun when it doesn’t have your marker (in your territory). In neither case am I directed to retain the existing marker or place a new one.
In addition, the rules indicate that if you or your ally recapture the territory and AA gun, the ownership of both goes to the capturing power, or to original owner of the territory if it’s liberated. No mention is made of returning the AA gun to its original owner.
Doesn’t that indicate that I get to keep the AA gun completely free of any strings tying it back to you? And wouldn’t that include technology?
The reprint could have re-organized the setup charts, which are not very rationally laid out and appear to just wander around the area and put the units in a different order in each list. In the better organized versions, the lists are alphabetical, or some snake around the land then the sea–but it would be more rational to have some uniformity to that, rather than just a messy list without any rhyme or reason.
As to the tournament rules, the game is VASTLY different in that setting than OOB. The NOs add a ton of money, the tech adds a lot of randomness. I think the tech favors the allies because they are well-positioned to invest in that starting on turn 1, and would probably make better use of most of the random outcomes than the Axis.
I find both games to be quite imbalanced, towards the Allies. There are no other maps where fighters can fly in one move from US to London, then from London unblockably to Moscow (over the top, 4 moves). There are more layers of buffer territories for moscow–almost as many territories in the “maze” as global. In the 42 scenario, the Germans just punch themselves out really quickly trying to fight in the russian maze. And the 5$ tanks are a big boon for Russia because it can fight Germany on even terms. You might argue that goes both ways, but in most of our 41 and 42 games, Germany has to buy DEFENSIVELY, all game–not just $5 tanks. The Allies have easy choices of what to buy–tanks for russia and fighters for the other two powers, until Russia is absolutely untakable. India without a factory is a lost cause. Both setups are an easy 5-turn KGF, OOB.
In the tourney, its a 6 turn game with less than a 6 bid for either side. The Allies won 1-2 more games than the Axis did, in 2018, under these parameters. I think the only way this is possible is for the Axis to grab Sydney, India, Karelia, and then hold those, plus the original Axis cities. They can lose 1 and still win a tie, I believe.
Not having watched the invitational games in detail, that’s the only conclusion I can draw from the available data.
This is an odd reply to a question about the rules being reprinted…
It would make a lot more sense if you just put a “house rules” sub-forum in each category, instead of continually moving the threads around.
I can’t imagine a topic worth discussing, in any section, that isn’t going to verge on a house rule at some point. Besides the current House Rules is section is all over the place anyway, and rather hard to navigate, since stuff gets dumped their from all over the rest of the site.