Print Media advertisement for AA50

FYI I tried to register for MARTI dice server with gmail this week and it no longer works. protonmail seems to work well.

@Krieghund:

The Rulebook can be found on the game’s home page on the Avalon Hill website.

Thanks Krieghund!

@axis_roll:

@Ruanek:

I keep hearing about how awesome the AA50 technology rules are, but I don’t have the game so I can’t see them.  Can someone explain the tech rules, please?

Well, the tech rules in AA50 are an improvement over previous editions of A&A, but  I, personally, would not label them as AWESOME.

They look pretty good to me.

Thanks for sharing the info on the Bob Semple tank, that was a fun little piece of trivia to learn about!  I guess it was an attempt to beat plowshares into swords… :-D

Sounds like they’d have been better off trying to convert some kind of car or light truck into an armored car, though, as tractors just aren’t geared right to make into tanks…

As to the Brits & ANZACs and their Matilda’s: I guess it’s kind of nice to get them a different model for variety/ visual appeal, but the fact remains that the Matilda is really a decisive step down in quality vs. the Sherman… and the Brits actually used more Shermans than any other tank.  I’d have been much happier if they’d chosen the Cromwell; it was at least not outclassed by the Sherman (not to mention nearly every German tank…)

Why dont you use triplea for these games?  much easier to use than aabattlemap

Yes, I just wish convoy zones would have been but in the game in the first place like AAE. That was a great idea to get the Battle of the Atlantic in the game. AA50 should have been AAE and AAP combined with a few modifications. Still looks awesome though. I see IL has come up with a convoy system in his AA50 house rules. I think the simplest way to do it would be to be key sea zones and put control markers in them. If an enemy unit enters it you cover it with your marker. Each convoy could be worth 1 or 2 IPC’s. Depending on what worked better. If you get it back then remove the enemy’s marker.

U.S.
Sea Zones - #65, 56, 55, 18, 19, 20, 10, 53, 56 ,50

UK- #1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 28, 35, 46, 47, 42, The East Indies Zones, can’t see numbers from pictures

Italy-#14

Germany -#5

Russia-#4

Japan-#61, 62, 50, 36, 60, The East Indies Zones, can’t see numbers from pictures

I was just reading the end of this thread: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/341599

…and it got me thinking. There a lot of people that would like to see an even amount of attention to both the theaters of war, and I realize that the NOs are now an effort along with VCs to encourage such play… Im just wondering, wouldnt VPs be a great way to force the allies to spread their efforts in multiple directions instead of the standard KGF?
You could do VPs for the axis or allies as a group, OR you could do it as individuals - so if japan gets too large (left alone), it can win the game by itself so to speak… same goes for japan, they cant focus ALL their efforts on the charge to moscow, as the usa could steal all the VPs from the pacific…

Just thinking out loud mostly ;)

@Driel310:

Start with playing with both. If you never play with tech you won’t know what it does to the game and I don’t believe you have a right to give an opinion on tech.

However when you played a few games and don’t like it, then throw tech away. NO’s are must IMHO since the axis won’t stand a chance without them.  :wink:

Totally agreed. You can mod HB if it’s too powerful anyway

I am beginning to wonder if the Heavy Bomber rule that has some people bent so out of shape is in there to compensate for the large boost that attaining National Objectives gives the Axis.  As a guess, it is going to be easier for the Axis to attain their objectives, and more productive to them than for the Allies to attain their objectives, which do not appear to give them anywhere the same boost.