Playtest report and conclusions

Sorry if I sound like a teacher now ;), but doesn’t your build depend on your overall strategy (and units available).

10Inf sound like a good build if there is such an allied (Russian) infantry supremacy.

Also 10 inf give you a lot of cannon fodder for both attack and defence.

i have done games where Germany lost the game in turn 1 because it won its initial games, but had to choose tanks as casualty even during attack and then Russia attacked back and could kill many of the remaining good german units.

I am an old style (pre revised AA gamer) and grand strategy said: Attack with a mix of INF Tanks and  FTRs, but make sure that you have enough inf to survive the counter attack.

Revised is even more dangerous. drop a few Atry in and infantry (withouit) is even a good attack force.

I will hold final judgement until I get my copy of AA50 and have done a few trial games, but friom what is known national advantages and the posibility of reducing ones building capacity will certainly alter the flow and feel of the game.

Avanti Savoia :D

@Craig:

@cousin_joe:

@Craig:

Most of the time we spent playtesting was done under constantly changing maps and rules.  As such, we actually only did a small portion of our work with the final map (which then changed a bit after that), the NOs were a bit different from what they are now, some of the rules changed slightly, and the tech was not like this at all.
Craig

Hey Craig,

Just out of curiosity… are you able to say what the tech was like when you were playtesting?

I will have to go back and look at my info to make sure exactly what we did, but I will say that the the present system of two charts was arrived at after we were done playtesting.

Also, were there ever any convoy raiding type of rules/NOs, and were the ICs ever tried at a lower price than 15IPCs?

Convoys/Convoy Raiding was never used, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t discussed. :-D  NOs came into the mix late and there wasn’t any thought of a Convoy NO.  Actually, the ICs were 20 IPCs!

Thanks.

Thanks for the reply.  I’d definitely be curious about the Tech

Too bad Convoys never made it in.  It would have helped to create a lot more action in the Atlantic and Pacific.

Wow, I can’t imagine ICs at 20IPC.  It seems like there may have been concern that ICs in certain locations could be too powerful.  The one that immediately jumps to mind (and these gentleman have already brought up), is the France IC.

Once Germany is cashing out at 40-45IPC, the France IC almost becomes a must.  What’s great about it though, is you can plop down destroyers for stalling, or even an insta-Navy if UK is caught napping.

Doesn’t the French IC weaken your march towards the Russian Front?

I’ve found that even if Germany is making 50+ in cash, it still hasdifficulties bringing up infantry towards the russian front…

I’ve been toying with the idea of an IC in Poland, but it really seems like an awkward position, vulnerable to Allied Amphibs…

Any thoughts on this ?

I think many strats from AAR will be relevant in AA50, but not all strats, and certainly not to the same extent.

IC in France is probably a bad idea, also because you have to buy an AA gun too, to give a minimum of SBR protection to newlybuilt ICs.
IC in Poland could be ok, but Poland can be reached from the Baltic seazone, so yeah, thats a bad idea.

Generally its a bad strat to place IC in any territory that is worth less than 3 ipc. This fact will probably apply for AA50 as well as AAR.
And the production limit for Germany doesn’t bother me at all, if I can place 5 tanks + 5 bmrs each rnd, then I’m a very happy axis player  :-D

The total ipc value for the power(s) you are controlling is much more important then the 10 units max limit.
UK also have a limit of 8 units maximum.

If SUBs were actually viable, France would be automatic for IC placement.

With SUBs not doing any economic damage, and basically automatically killed by any attack force with a DD then maybe it’s a little less of a sure thing

If Germany is cashing out at 45-50IPCs though early on, and facing a KGF (which they most likely will be), then yeah, France is good for producing your 15-16INF/TURN while you wait for Japan to take out Moscow… yawn  :roll:

@cousin_joe:

If SUBs were actually viable, France would be automatic for IC placement.

With SUBs not doing any economic damage, and basically automatically killed by any attack force with a DD then maybe it’s a little less of a sure thing

If Germany is cashing out at 45-50IPCs though early on, and facing a KGF (which they most likely will be), then yeah, France is good for producing your 15-16INF/TURN while you wait for Japan to take out Moscow… yawn  :roll:

I disagree. The reason of subs not being viable for Germany is not that they cannot do economic damage. It’s because allied fleet can simply toast them by pure numbers. It’s a trouble with having a so small Atlantic ocean, ther is no place where subs can hide from fleets.

And I’m not sure about the very possibility of doing a ignore Japan strat, at least with NOs

@Funcioneta:

@cousin_joe:

If SUBs were actually viable, France would be automatic for IC placement.

With SUBs not doing any economic damage, and basically automatically killed by any attack force with a DD then maybe it’s a little less of a sure thing

If Germany is cashing out at 45-50IPCs though early on, and facing a KGF (which they most likely will be), then yeah, France is good for producing your 15-16INF/TURN while you wait for Japan to take out Moscow… yawn  :roll:

I disagree. The reason of subs not being viable for Germany is not that they cannot do economic damage. It’s because allied fleet can simply toast them by pure numbers. It’s a trouble with having a so small Atlantic ocean, ther is no place where subs can hide from fleets.

Convoy raiding subs can be protected by other surface vessels.  Being able to do convoy raids would still make these ‘protected’ subs useful:  They would be soaking UK for cash.

This would make naval investment by Germany more viable as their return on their investment is higher than throwing subs out there to be killed.

Subs should have some badass ability, like the ability to snipe off transports without being fired upon.

Or economic damage, i don’t care.

@axis_roll:

@Funcioneta:

@cousin_joe:

If SUBs were actually viable, France would be automatic for IC placement.

With SUBs not doing any economic damage, and basically automatically killed by any attack force with a DD then maybe it’s a little less of a sure thing

If Germany is cashing out at 45-50IPCs though early on, and facing a KGF (which they most likely will be), then yeah, France is good for producing your 15-16INF/TURN while you wait for Japan to take out Moscow… yawn  :roll:

I disagree. The reason of subs not being viable for Germany is not that they cannot do economic damage. It’s because allied fleet can simply toast them by pure numbers. It’s a trouble with having a so small Atlantic ocean, ther is no place where subs can hide from fleets.

Convoy raiding subs can be protected by other surface vessels.  Being able to do convoy raids would still make these ‘protected’ subs useful:  They would be soaking UK for cash.

This would make naval investment by Germany more viable as their return on their investment is higher than throwing subs out there to be killed.

Now you only can build a german sub in baltic or in English Channel/Marsella if they buy a Vichy IC. Both places can be toasted still by pure numbers. Too much german fleet means super-soviets.

A Italiansub merrily stacked with a Italian fleet near Italy should not be able of killing any UK convoys (unless Malta, but Malta is not on AA50). A sub auto-killing allied IPCs, even if the sub is far of any convoy rutes (as in german NA from AAR), is pretty unrealist. The only realist rule would be convoy routes, but there is few chance of germans reaching there, not talk about holding them