National objectives



  • @Imperious:

    If you people write up more information about who sold what to and from Sweden, then you need to make a History thread for Sweden. I unintentionally thought i was moving Timerovers History post to the History section, but i just moved the entire thread by accident. Everything is corrected. Any more stuff not about the thread will be deleted. Too much stuff to sort thru when it has no material issue to topic under discussion.

    How do you do it Imperious Leader? Is this your full time job? (If you don’t mind me asking) There must be thousands of things you have to deal with daily. You should get some serious paid vacation for all your work in my opinion.



  • @Obergruppenfuhrer:

    @Imperious:

    If you people write up more information about who sold what to and from Sweden, then you need to make a History thread for Sweden. I unintentionally thought i was moving Timerovers History post to the History section, but i just moved the entire thread by accident. Everything is corrected. Any more stuff not about the thread will be deleted. Too much stuff to sort thru when it has no material issue to topic under discussion.

    How do you do it Imperious Leader? Is this your full time job? (If you don’t mind me asking) There must be thousands of things you have to deal with daily. You should get some serious paid vacation for all your work in my opinion.

    The guy doesn’t sleep…


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Robots never sleep


  • Official Q&A

    @Lynxes:

    Japan

    Manchuria+Formosa+French Indo-China=5 IPCs

    Actually, this is Manchuria, Kiangsu (which contains Shanghai) and French Indo-China/Thailand.



  • Thanks for all the info Krieghund. I believe that the only big unknowns are the National Objectives. If we knew them all it would be all we need to analyze the game. I am sure EVERYONE here will be buying the game regardless so I really don’t see a need to hold back on the rest of the info.

    WOTC only seems interested in veterans of AA to buy this game since I don’t see any advertisement or anything. I could put up a cardboard sign on my street lamppost and it would be more of an effort than WOTC does. I LOVE AA games, I started playing Original AA in 1988, and I find it ridiculous that I didn’t find out Revised existed until Christmas 2006. How many more people would love these games if they knew they existed? Probably 90% of the people I asked if they have played or heard of the game had no idea.



  • I didn’t know about Revised until accidentally running into Gleemax this summer, heh.


  • 2017 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Probably 90% of the people I asked if they have played or heard of the game had no idea.

    Thanks to WOTC marketing this will remain the case for the foreseeable future.



  • He, here in Spain, I discovered this game because a friend brought to our warhammer store and we played a game (it was AAEurope). It was a copy he bought by a 3rd party with a rules translated by that 3rd party  😄

    You can imagine I would not discover anniversary edition if not by this forum  😛

    And WOTC contine spamming us with Magic expansions each 3 months  😛



  • WOTC also made D&D 4th edition, and they destroyed my favorit RPG game… Litteraly destroyed it. They did so many things which was incredible stupid…



  • @Greand:

    WOTC also made D&D 4th edition, and they destroyed my favorit RPG game… Litteraly destroyed it. They did so many things which was incredible stupid…

    Stupid is, stupid does.

    WOTC must ……buuuuurnnn  :evil:



  • Edited with a new US Nat obj leaked by Squirecam on another thread!



  • @Lynxes:

    Edited with a new US Nat obj leaked by Squirecam on another thread!

    Yeah, you put up some good guesses.

    As to the list, I took a quick look. USA will not get a bonus for Italy. Italy gets a bonus for Italy, but I dont think any other country does. USA does get a bonus for France, as you have stated.



  • A couple of other notes.

    Your bonuses are too high. Most countries only get 5 IPC for territories held. USSR has one that’s 10, but everyone else just gets 5.

    The countries dont always need to have all territories for a bonus, just some. For instance, USA needs all of central west and east usa for a bonus, but Japan needs four out of 6 for a bonus.

    The question that I think needs to be addressed is along those lines though, Say you need one of 3 territories for a 5 IPC bonus. You get 2 of them. Is there an additional 5 IPC bonus??

    I dont think the rule was written that way, and I dont think that was intended either, but it is an interesting question.

    Finally, when I said Italy gets a bonus for Italy, that’s true. But not Italy alone, it needs other territories as well for the bonus. Just did not want you to be misled by anything I said…



  • Well, it’s guesswork, but I edited now according to your clues…  🙂



  • @Lynxes:

    Well, it’s guesswork, but I edited now according to your clues…  🙂

    Well, you have done a great job. Guessing or not.

    Again though, Italy was mixed in with those others, not meant to be a distinct bonus.

    Italy only has 2 bonuses, one involving sea units as you stated. I did not mean to Imply Italy gets a third bonus.



  • Now since AA50 comes with no convoy zones, I think this national objective bonuses should involve sea zones. Maybe one land territory, and some adjacent sea zones, to represent the income from ship lanes and international trade, and benefits of using ships and not trucks or trains. But as it is now, you get bonus for holding land territories only, and that is doo bad. Just my opinion.

    I remember Griffy talking about “Wet territory”, and this was important sea zones that would benefit the controller. So if you had a naval unit in this spesific sea zones, you got a bonus IPC income.

    My suggestions on how it should be:
    Italy should get bonus for Italy territory and the adjacent sea zones in Med.
    UK get bonus for Canada, sea zones 1,2 and 3 plus UK
    US get bonus for Panama and sea zone 20 and the one on other side, dont remember nr, 60 something.
    USSR get bonus for Karelia and sea zone 4
    Japan get bonus for Borneo and adjacent sea zones, East Indies and adjacent sea zones, and so on…

    you get the idea



  • @Adlertag:

    Now since AA50 comes with no convoy zones, I think this national objective bonuses should involve sea zones. Maybe one land territory, and some adjacent sea zones, to represent the income from ship lanes and international trade, and benefits of using ships and not trucks or trains. But as it is now, you get bonus for holding land territories only, and that is doo bad. Just my opinion.

    I remember Griffy talking about “Wet territory”, and this was important sea zones that would benefit the controller. So if you had a naval unit in this spesific sea zones, you got a bonus IPC income.

    My suggestions on how it should be:
    Italy should get bonus for Italy territory and the adjacent sea zones in Med.
    UK get bonus for Canada, sea zones 1,2 and 3 plus UK
    US get bonus for Panama and sea zone 20 and the one on other side, dont remember nr, 60 something.
    USSR get bonus for Karelia and sea zone 4
    Japan get bonus for Borneo and adjacent sea zones, East Indies and adjacent sea zones, and so on…

    you get the idea

    The map is too small to have convoy zones. That sais, Italy does have sea zone control as part of a bonus. At least that’s something…



  • @Funcioneta:

    And WOTC contine spamming us with Magic expansions each 3 months  😛

    Wizards has a very high profit margin on the Magic expansions.  Considerably higher than the board games.

    @Greand:

    WOTC also made D&D 4th edition, and they destroyed my favorit RPG game… Litteraly destroyed it. They did so many things which was incredible stupid…

    If I play AD&D at all, I still use 2nd Edition.  Since I live close to Lake Geneva, I knew a lot of the TSR people before it was purchased by Wizards.  I use to help run GenCon when it was UofW-Parkside and Milwaukee.

    @squirecam:

    The map is too small to have convoy zones. That sais, Italy does have sea zone control as part of a bonus. At least that’s something…

    I am working on adding Italy to A&A Europe, and have Italy receiving IPC for controlling the sea zones surrounding it as well as the Aegean.  Italy was and is heavily dependent on coastal sea commerce and fishing.



  • @timerover51:

    Wizards has a very high profit margin on the Magic expansions.  Considerably higher than the board games.

    Totally true. The thing I don’t understand is how is there still people who bites and buy more Magic stuff (saving pro gamers who earns money playing Magic, of course)



  • I see the UK is pretty much all guesses at this point…

    So from my notes, I reveal an objective that should spurn alot of discussion, depending on how it is interpreted…

    UK gets 5 IPC if allies control any territory originally under Japan’s control.

    Discuss…



  • /squirecam

    Edit, again! This UK objective is quite interesting, but will probably only be applicable in the late game. But of course it again reinforces that Japan must keep their starting areas, improving the historical slant of the game.



  • This dont feel right. So if you take Borneo, first you get 4 IPC income for the island, and then a 5 IPC bonus income, just for fun. But if you take Madagaskar, you only get the 1 IPC income from the island, and no bonus.

    It should be this way :
    The player who controll all sea zones in Mediterrean get 5 IPC bonus.
    This bonus is to reflect the benefit of being able to use the ship-lanes in Med.
    Italy had shipping and trading in Med. UK also had shipping and trading in Med. Why will only Italy get bonus from Med ? This new bonus rules seem so lame


  • Official Q&A

    Since Squirecam has been so kind as to provide this new information, I will confirm it (as well as the US one he provided earlier) and elaborate.

    This UK 5 IPC bonus applies if any Allied power controls a territory that was originally under Japanese control.  As for interpretation, any time the original control of a territory is referred to in the rules, it means the control at the beginning of the 1941 scenario, regardless of which scenario you’re playing.  The map is printed with the '41 scenario starting ownership, and some of them are overlaid in the '42 setup with NCMs.  This avoids weird situations like Germany being the original owner of West Russia and Japan being the original owner of the Philippines in Revised.

    I will also provide a “bonus” update:

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    (Hong-Kong+Burma+India+Netherlands East Indies+Borneo+New Guinea+Solomon Islands+Australia+New Zealand=5 IPCs)

    This one is totally incorrect, and should be deleted.



  • @Krieghund:

    Since Squirecam has been so kind as to provide this new information, I will confirm it (as well as the US one he provided earlier) and elaborate.

    This UK 5 IPC bonus applies if any Allied power controls a territory that was originally under Japanese control.  As for interpretation, any time the original control of a territory is referred to in the rules, it means the control at the beginning of the 1941 scenario, regardless of which scenario you’re playing.  The map is printed with the '41 scenario starting ownership, and some of them are overlaid in the '42 setup with NCMs.  This avoids weird situations like Germany being the original owner of West Russia and Japan being the original owner of the Philippines in Revised.

    I will also provide a “bonus” update:

    @Lynxes:

    UK

    (Hong-Kong+Burma+India+Netherlands East Indies+Borneo+New Guinea+Solomon Islands+Australia+New Zealand=5 IPCs)

    This one is totally incorrect, and should be deleted.

    Thank you…

    While I knew the bonus, I didnt say anything before because I did not know the correct interpretation of the rule. Obviously, you “could” have interpreted it as 1942 control vs 1941. But I think the correct interpretation is to use the “1941” control, regardless of the scenario.

    Secondly, assuming China takes Manchuria, would UK get this bonus? China is an “ally” for this, correct? (I assume it is)



  • @Adlertag:

    This dont feel right. So if you take Borneo, first you get 4 IPC income for the island, and then a 5 IPC bonus income, just for fun. But if you take Madagaskar, you only get the 1 IPC income from the island, and no bonus.

    It should be this way :
    The player who controll all sea zones in Mediterrean get 5 IPC bonus.
    This bonus is to reflect the benefit of being able to use the ship-lanes in Med.
    Italy had shipping and trading in Med. UK also had shipping and trading in Med. Why will only Italy get bonus from Med ? This new bonus rules seem so lame

    Italy does not get a bonus just for the med. It needs to keep allied shipping out of the med + have territories. Its a logical bonus.

    But the allies want to “prevent” Italy from getting the bonus, so it is important to them too. First stop the bonus, second take back africa and third take Italy. It’s very historical.

    Finally, UK’s objectives are not all confirmed yet. Dont you think UK might just have a bonus for holding some med territories??


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 1
  • 16
  • 5
  • 41
  • 173
  • 4
  • 30
  • 2
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

79
Online

14.4k
Users

34.9k
Topics

1.4m
Posts