• @nuno:

    Like I said before (at FoE),
    often the players that engage in the development of these rules variants
    do it because they can’t overcome the strategic/tactical problems they’ve been facing…

    So you just slammed EVERYBODY that’s ever developed a house rule / variant?

    You ARE a piece of work:  Anyone without your similiar way of thinking is wrong.

    You have a long way to learn how to play well with others.


  • @nuno:

    Like I said before (at FoE),
    often the players that engage in the development of these rules variants
    do it because they can’t overcome the strategic/tactical problems they’ve been facing…
    Thus instead of improving their (mediocre) tactics/strategies to overcome them
    they choose to impose their distorted rules/simulations to warrant success
    of their “tactics/strategies”…of what they see as good strategy/tactic…

    The final result is a product that conforms to their (limited) tactical/strategical capabilities/knowledge,
    thus can’t/doesn’t represent a tactical/strategy simulation of (high) quality.

    When I saw (at FoE) the tactical/strategical quality of the player involved in the development of these rules I immediately discarded the possibility of reading them to not lose time with them.
    From what I see here I guess I can confirm that I wasn’t wrong.

    I helped develop Enhanced rules mainly because I saw that Revised fell short or becoming more than a Russia to Moscow.  I’ve played THAT game for 15+ years, thank you, and I wanted something different.

    Revised can be so much more than a spiffed up Classic KGF game.

    I still do play Revised/LHTR rules in tourneyments and do quite well thank you.  I have more fun and options with Enhanced.  I never slam others for playing Revised.  I offer them the chance to try other rules that build on the Revised rules they are playing/enjoying.

    Have you even TRIED to play with (A&ARe) Enhanced rules?  Until you do so, you have no basis to criticize something you’ve never tied.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    U-Boat Interdict in Enhanced is too strong.  You can cripple the Allied income with a very modest investment without reprisal.  That’s too strong.  But you have to understand, I think SBR is too strong too.

    SBR should be limited to 50% of a territory’s worth PER GAME TURN.  That means you could only do 5 IPC damage to Germany from the time they collect income to the time they spend their income again.

    Likewise, U-Boat interdict should be limited to 50% of a territory’s value per game turn and submarines have to CHOOSE what IC they are blocking, they do not get to block all in range.

    That means, at BEST, Germany could intercept 4 IPC from England and 6 IPC from America.  Hurtful, yes, crippling?  No.


  • I ike t oplay Revised as it is. But I also started to play Enhanced, and I like its rule.

    SBR now may do Germany a maximum of 20 ICP LOSS (10 max in British turn, 10 max in British turn), so Uboote interdiction is very strong, I agree with Jennifer.
    But it is costly!
    German have to buy Uboote on a regulare basis, and this has consequences on the land units buying. And this is a problem. An I like to have problem to solve in a game. So I agree with Axis_roll, Enhanced is interesting because raises new problems to solve. I am not saying, and neither Axis__roll said that, which Enhance is better, or easier or more beautiful than Revised. But for sure it is interesting and funny to play!


  • @axis_roll:

    I helped develop Enhanced rules mainly because I saw that Revised fell short or becoming more than a Russia to Moscow.  I’ve played THAT game for 15+ years, thank you, and I wanted something different.

    Gdn right.  March to Moscow / March to Berlin, yawnz0rz.

    Revised can be so much more than a spiffed up Classic KGF game.

    I still do play Revised/LHTR rules in tourneyments and do quite well thank you.  I have more fun and options with Enhanced.  I never slam others for playing Revised.  I offer them the chance to try other rules that build on the Revised rules they are playing/enjoying.

    Have you even TRIED to play with (A&ARe) Enhanced rules?  Until you do so, you have no basis to criticize something you’ve never tied.

    You know, I tell my parole officer the same thing.

    _Have you ever tried smoking crack?

    Have you ever tried lighting your head on fire while dancing naked around pictures of Jessica Alba?

    Mm hm.  That’s what I thought.  You’re totally The Man, man.  Loosen up, live a little.  Introduce me to your daughter._


  • Have you ever caught the hair “down there” on fire while jumping skyclad over a Beltain Balefire?

    It has not happened to me personally, but I DID get to see it happen once.  I took precautions to make sure it never DID happen to me :-P

    Beat that crack smoking parole officer!  LOL

  • 2007 AAR League

    boy this got weird ….


  • Like I said before (at FoE),
    often the players that engage in the development of these rules variants
    do it because they can’t overcome the strategic/tactical problems they’ve been facing…
    Thus instead of improving their (mediocre) tactics/strategies to overcome them
    they choose to impose their distorted rules/simulations to warrant success
    of their “tactics/strategies”…of what they see as good strategy/tactic…

    This is the typical product of someone who was bested by another and cant let it go…. Something like Agent Smith used to do. They have no understanding of how they are perceived by others and constantly need to find new harbors to find a new audience that may listen to their troubles. Eventually they ( this new audience) find out whats going on as well…

    The final result is a product that conforms to their (limited) tactical/strategical capabilities/knowledge,
    thus can’t/doesn’t represent a tactical/strategy simulation of (high) quality.

    More Hyperbole…

    When I saw (at FoE) the tactical/strategical quality of the player involved in the development of these rules I immediately discarded the possibility of reading them to not lose time with them.

    And yet you found yet another excuse to comment on these people who DON’T WASTE YOUR TIME. oK
    From what I see here I guess I can confirm that I wasn’t wrong.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Not all variants are worthless.  But I’d like to see more games with tech and national advantages before I see games with new variants.  At least familiarize and master some of the more esoteric parts of the game before complaining the game is too vanilla and reinventing the wheel.  IMHO.


  • I would like to have som standards in A&A. Or 2-3-4 alternate options for gameplay rules.
    I think this game is already complicated… :-)
    Thats why I prefer the triplea version.
    Can’t do any wrong moves, except the transport unloading bug. And a few others, but this is same for alle players.
    Everything is the same for all, u can’t “forget” or make “mistakes”, that isn’t allowed.
    The LHTR should either be mandatory/original or excluded.
    Someone should make a good A&A PC game with only one set of rules, or maybe several. And then the online gaming would be handled much better than now.
    But with several set of gamerules it should not be possible to mix this rules.
    I.e. in triplea the TTL should not be an option it should be included like the 4th.ed. rules.
    With boardgame u can everything u want to… of course everyone try to follow the rules but that isn’t easy.
    I played with some friends a few weeks ago and they didn’t even notice the change of rules from the classic version!!  :lol:
    With classic it wasn’t all that complicated once u get used to it, but the revised 4th.ed. it’s really easy to make mistakes, that is when playing the boardgame variant.
    And other mistakes than the rules I do all the time…
    I like to play one variant at a time, and learn to play it well. Like revised 4th.ed.
    And when, or if I become really good, then it’s time to move on.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    TripleA is loaded with errors though, most notably among the technologies and don’t forget it has no support for national advantages.


  • I support TripleA.

    TripleA for Prezident!


  • TripleA is the best there is right now.
    But it would be much better if someone made a commercial PC game.
    Triplea is freeware and it has its restraints.
    With a A&A PC game it should include all variants, like LHTR, 3.rd.,4ht.ed. etc.
    Guadalcanal, Revised, Europe, BOTB etc.
    Online gaming inlcuded.
    And GOOD AI to play against.


  • @Lucifer:

    TripleA is the best there is right now.
    But it would be much better if someone made a commercial PC game.
    Triplea is freeware and it has its restraints.
    With a A&A PC game it should include all variants, like LHTR, 3.rd.,4ht.ed. etc.
    Guadalcanal, Revised, Europe, BOTB etc.
    Online gaming inlcuded.
    And GOOD AI to play against.

    Just WHO will be paying for the cost of developing this program that you want?

    Dun dun dun.

    That’s right, nobody, which is why this wonderful program is going to take a lot of time to appear - assuming it ever does.

    I hear TripleA is going to implement LHTR sometime, when the programmers get around to putting it in.

    As far as GOOD AI - well, I’ve got some ideas, but they require a lot of time, and don’t pay anything, so, well - lol.  Maybe in a coupla months, if nothing comes up, I can write up an algorithm.


  • @newpaintbrush:

    Just WHO will be paying for the cost of developing this program that you want?

    Avalon Hill?
    Whoever holds the copyrights.

    It’s fully possible to make much better game than triplea.
    How much will it sell……I don’t know.
    I guess Halo 3, Civilization 8, sells better than A&A.

    A&A is not completely different from chess. And chess is quite popular.
    I don’t know how many A&A players there are in the world.
    But if all are counted, also boardgamers, CD version from 98?, triplea, then I’m sure there’s big enough market to
    make it profitable.


  • @Lucifer:

    Avalon Hill?
    Whoever holds the copyrights.

    That’s sort of my point.  The people that hold the copyrights aren’t interested in making a computer game off it.  Think - the development cost will be far more than for Risk, or for Monopoly, because of the cost of writing the far more complex AI.  Plus Axis and Allies is less popular.

    It’s fully possible to make much better game than triplea.

    ZOMG U LIE! . . .

    Of COURSE it is possible to make it better, it’s just a question of who’s gonna pay for it.
    How much will it sell……I don’t know.
    I guess Halo 3, Civilization 8, sells better than A&A.

    Mmhmm.

    A&A is not completely different from chess. And chess is quite popular.
    Say there are about 700 chess player for every one Axis and Allies player.  That’s what makes them “completely different”; market size!
    I don’t know how many A&A players there are in the world.
    But if all are counted, also boardgamers, CD version from 98?, triplea, then I’m sure there’s big enough market to
    make it profitable.

    Hasbro so far has begged to differ.

    What we need is some kinda petition.

    (edited for colorz)

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    My tripleA supports LHTR, to some extent.  Dunno about yours.

    Anyway, you’ll never make an intelligent AI to play against.  Just give up on that.

    But making the variants should be simple enough, just expand upon Axis and Allies : Iron Blitz, try to iron out some of the errors, add the new maps, add the new units and sell it for $59.99.

    It’s easy money for the manufacturer’s since most of the code is already there.  You just need to copy paste some code, change some variables and design new maps.


  • If there was the possibility of selling an A&A videogame I think that Hasbro did not have lost it!

    AI is a challenge, the last years have seen great improvements, for example Deep Blue, one day we will have a AI player fro triple A that may defeat medium experienced player I think!


  • I would move normally, except that I would also take the Caucuses.
    I have only played on TripleA, so I can’t compare it with other ‘on line’ systems.
    Concerning the NA and tech advantages, it seems pretty clear that a nation can pretty well gear themselves to a victory with the right combination of advantages, if their opponent, (especially a newbee) fails to know just what the counter NA or techs  are.
      :-D I think I have a good solution, but wait  :wink:, I have to do my copyright first.
      I don’t mind sharing ideas with everyone, but when it comes to a lot of hard work by me and my partner, (my wife) well work should be compensated, play should be free. If anyone disagrees, then you probibly don’t understand the concept of free enterprise, supply and demand, and that the mother of invention is the need for something better.
    And besides, I am in dire need of some extra income.
      Anyway, I hope you will consider my project with an open mind.
      Respectfully,

    C.I. :-o


  • @Jennifer:

    My tripleA supports LHTR, to some extent.  Dunno about yours.

    In the latest tripleA version the LHTR is included.
    But u can’t land fighters on sz at end of turn and then move them to the newly built AC.
    And u can’t build fighters and place them on AC.
    LHTR, NA, is not supported by the current java version of tripleA.
    A lot of others stuff is also missing in the tripleA compared to rules, variants etc.

    I’m happy someone made the tripleA version so we all can play A&A against anyone who’s online, but it’s not like
    tripleA is “good enough” as it is now.
    This is the freeware cons and pros.
    It’s not for sure that even if Hasbro didn’t (yet) make a PC game of A&A with different versions it would not be profitable.
    We don’t know that before it’s done. And only then we would know if A&A PC game would sell big enough to pay for
    development costs. And it doesn’t have to include good AI, but then I would definately buy it and use it instead of tripleA.

Suggested Topics

  • 5
  • 30
  • 14
  • 12
  • 55
  • 30
  • 4
  • 17
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

42

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts