• Well, it’s (semi)-official now: the GENCON pic '41 scenario set-up is wrong. Bad for us who play-tested the GENCON set-up, but maybe great for the game. Let’s start a thread to get the information quicker! My five cents for what’s missing in the start-up, and this is guesswork:

    1. 1 inf extra in each of the China up-front areas.
    2. 1 Japanese transport in Sea of Japan.
    3. 1 ftr in Moscow.
    4. 1 UK DD in EMD.

    All this would seriously change the game in the Allied favour, but play-testing with the GENCON set-up really has shown the Axis to be very much stronger than in all earlier editions of A&A and this is not what was intended I think.


  • @Lynxes:

    Well, it’s (semi)-official now: the GENCON pic '41 scenario set-up is wrong. Bad for us who play-tested the GENCON set-up, but maybe great for the game. Let’s start a thread to get the information quicker! My five cents for what’s missing in the start-up, and this is guesswork:

    1. 1 inf extra in each of the China up-front areas.
    2. 1 Japanese transport in Sea of Japan.
    3. 1 ftr in Moscow.
    4. 1 UK DD in EMD.

    All this would seriously change the game in the Allied favour, but play-testing with the GENCON set-up really has shown the Axis to be very much stronger than in all earlier editions of A&A and this is not what was intended I think.

    Ok, what was wrong with the 1941setup picture?  Why is it semi-offical?  whats the source.  I just came online is it in another thread?

  • '17 '16 '15 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    yea where is this from?


  • ok,
    just saw Craigs post in the play test thread.  Confirmed, something is wrong with the BBG 1941 pictures from which, we built the AA50PlayersAid maps. 
    Hes checking, to see if he.s allowed to give us specific detail, as to whats wrong.


  • Although it does seem the axis have a lot of winning power I hope the differences aren’t that big. And a fighter in moscow is considered very big IMHO.es.

    A DD in the east med would mean egypt is a no go on G1. Also a big change in favour of the allies.

    We’ll have to wait I guess, but still we enjoyed the games we played a lot.  🙂


  • I had a sneakin suspicion… 🙂

    If we dont get a confirmation on the real setup by the 23th, we should all join forces, make a grand unified strategy on how to get it  :evil:

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    At least we poor Russian girls get a fighter!


  • Ist gut, Ja-LOL.

  • 2007 AAR League

    I’ve said a few things about what I felt was strange/in error , in this thread:

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12584.15

    Anyhow, if there are only a few pieces that need to be added, and no pieces deleted, I would hope for the following (based on three games playing the GenCon setup), sorted from in order of importance to play balance:

    1) Addition of US naval units in the Pac!
    I’m afraid we’ll see few/no US Pac games, unless this one turn out to be true…

    2) Addition of starting Infs to China
    'Nuff said…

    3) Some more addition to UK navy
    Don’t quite know where, but maybe the Pac…Just feels a tad bit weak, right now.

    4) Some more land units added to WUS and EUS
    Not of very big importance. I just think that there are an Inf left out in WUS and an Arm left out in EUS…

    5) Redistribution of Infs on The Jap Pac Islands
    Don’t know, they just feel wrong now…
    1 Island empy (Iwo)
    1 Island has 1 ftr (For)
    1 Island has 1 inf (Oki)
    1 Island has 3 inf (Car

    Actually, that’s just about it…
    1 & 2 are important. The rest are minor issues.
    Hope I’ll be correct  🙂


  • @Perry:

    I’ve said a few things about what I felt was strange/in error , in this thread:

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=12584.15

    Anyhow, if there are only a few pieces that need to be added, and no pieces deleted, I would hope for the following (based on three games playing the GenCon setup), sorted from in order of importance to play balance:

    1) Addition of US naval units in the Pac!
    I’m afraid we’ll see few/no US Pac games, unless this one turn out to be true…

    2) Addition of starting Infs to China
    'Nuff said…

    3) Some more addition to UK navy
    Don’t quite know where, but maybe the Pac…Just feels a tad bit weak, right now.

    4) Some more land units added to WUS and EUS
    Not of very big importance. I just think that there are an Inf left out in WUS and an Arm left out in EUS…

    5) Redistribution of Infs on The Jap Pac Islands
    Don’t know, they just feel wrong now…
    1 Island empy (Iwo)
    1 Island has 1 ftr (For)
    1 Island has 1 inf (Oki)
    1 Island has 3 inf (Car

    Actually, that’s just about it…
    1 & 2 are important. The rest are minor issues.
    Hope I’ll be correct  🙂

    Ok, Perry
    I started a AA50GroupSpec1941PerryCHG2 map with your suggestions over in the 1941 Scenerio child thread/is this the 1941setup at the map link previously provided.
    I used the info from here, and your post overthere.


  • A DD in the east med would mean egypt is a no go on G1. Also a big change in favour of the allies.

    Not quite. You could still attack with a bomber and your transport with some chance of success, but very risky. Actually, this is the change I would be most happy with. It would also make sense since in all other A&A games UK has had ships in the Mediterranean Sea. It was the naval presence at Alexandria that hindered Rommel from getting supplies and to win that battle of El-Alamein, and this would very much improve the historical feel of the game! Actually, the British had something like 4 cruisers, 1 carrier and 3 battleships at Alexandria in early '41 at the time of the Battle of Cape Matapan and this should translate into something! Link:

    http://www.naval-history.net/WW2RN09-194101.htm

    If you don’t attack Egypt as Germany on turn 1, you would be forced to attack the UK fleet outside Gibraltar with subs and aircraft to protect the Italian fleet from attack and then you wouldn’t be able to wipe out the British Home Fleet. Another good change. If you survive with the fighter in Egypt, you might also strengthen India’s defenses.

    PS. A cruiser at India would also make sense, given that HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse were at Singapore in '41. Then Japan would think twice of attacking with just 2 fighters vs. cruiser and destroyer and if they don’t, those two infantry in Transjordan could ALSO be sent to India. DS.

    PPS. Check this table of the Pacific at-start ships, at bottom of this page:

    http://www.naval-history.net/WW2RN11-StartPac.htm

    Considering the amount of cruisers in the Pacific in '41, UK and US should have one each and Japan two (Italy had 21 cruisers at the start of the war, Japan 40, USA 21, UK 35 and Germany 7). Battleships and carriers seem OK but Japan should have one more destroyer at least. DDS.


  • Good they fixed the german kill egypt like 90% of the time!

    This is really good.  Because as the allies the strategy was not a 50/50 it was a win for the axis (i would keep my egyptian fight still in africa somewere never in india!


  • I believe there are several people who miss their AA50 setup charts, so if we could please have the -41 setup first, and then later some time someone can post the -42 scenario to reduce any more confusions about the setups.

    Then the moderators will put this information where it belongs: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6226.0

  • '19 '15 '14

    Thank goodness 😄

    I was starting to seriously worry about the set up, so I’m taking this latest development as excellent news.


  • @Lynxes:

    A DD in the east med would mean egypt is a no go on G1. Also a big change in favour of the allies.

    Not quite. You could still attack with a bomber and your transport with some chance of success, but very risky.

    Without the bomber taking part in the Egypt attack odds go down so rapidly, any sensible man wouldn’t attack. Since UK is inbetween Germany and Italy the African campaign for the Axis is near to a lost cause.

    Of course I know my history and that the ships of the UK were a real problem to Rommel, but still, in history the axis also lost. And we don’t want that every game now do we?  😉

  • 2007 AAR League

    I was about to start a poll on “do you think the -41 setup favors the Allies or the Axis”. Good thing these news on the real-setup got inbetween!

  • '10

    @Lynxes:

    1. 1 inf extra in each of the China up-front areas.
    2. 1 Japanese transport in Sea of Japan.
    3. 1 ftr in Moscow.
    4. 1 UK DD in EMD.

    That makes sense. I think the Germans take Gibraltar and the Italians Trans-Jordan.

    No Problem for Italy to get the 5+5 Bonus in game turn 1.

    Thanks


  • I figured this much. Well thanks anyway for trying Craig.

    The games we tried are not lost. First of all they were fun to do and they learned us a lot about the game mechanism. When the real setup is public, we just have to tweak our findings a bit.


  • @Lynxes:

    1. 1 inf extra in each of the China up-front areas.
    2. 1 Japanese transport in Sea of Japan.
    3. 1 ftr in Moscow.
    4. 1 UK DD in EMD.

    If we assume that Larry made mistakes when setting things up a logical mistake would be imo to forget the bomber in Japan.

  • '10

    Why should there be a bomber?

    Japan got 8 figthers!

    The allies have to build their tanks and artilleries, too. Look at the russians…

    So japan is forced to build bombers and ships.


  • The real setup should favor axis more than our speculation setup, the BGG setup favor allies with OOB rules. A Russian ftr + a few more allied units must be compensated somehow. Its not enough to remove the extra US bmr. I don’t think an extra Jap trans is enough either. Maybe Italy is stronger than we thought. It seems like Italy is practically useless if allies go KGF, Italy should perhaps get another transport + an inf and/or a tank? If the real setup favors allies more than the BGG setup, then AA50 is even more unbalanced than AAR.

    All this is without NOs, Craig Yope pointed out that the game balance cannot be judged by using techs, maybe this principal applies also when using the NOs? It shouldn’t be this way IMO, the NOs seems really interesting, I’m sure NOs will be used by competitive players also, tech is the only aspect in which the game designers failed again, just like tech failed in Classic and Revised.


  • I’m not convinced about “failed” tech status. AA50 is the best tech system we have until now. You spent money and you get something for sure, even if it is not the thing you wanted. What is so bad about HBs? If you think they are not balanced, mod the tech to make HBs a 5/1 that get a +1 on SBR and enough  🙂
    And rockets. How many countries can use it too much? Germany now will have only 2, not 3 as in Revised, so their impact will be lesser and anyway many here think that Germany needs a boost, and a new aagun costs 6 IPCs now. USA and UK can ferry some aa guns, but those are mainly out of position. Soviets? Well, if they send more than 5 or 10 IPCs in the game to tech, they can be easily toasted by Germany or Japan.

    I think the main issue here is about a unbalanced tech, no the very tech system. Mod the toxic tech and that will work

    I just don’t want lose the techs in AA50 as in Revised for on-line play. In Revised, they were not a very powerful weapon. They were mainly crap, but still they were, first underpowered because of Sea Lion complaints and then forbidden because of HB complaints

    Man, If USA spents 30 IPCs on tech and then 45 on HB, and then send the Pacific fleet out of the Pacific, just send tons of guys to Alaska and Canada and make them pay for creating a Godzilla  😄


  • @marechallannes:

    Why should there be a bomber?

    Japan got 8 figthers!

    The allies have to build their tanks and artilleries, too. Look at the russians…

    So japan is forced to build bombers and ships.

    I am not saying the bomber should be there. I am just saying when setting up the board, it is easy to forget the bomber on Japan. And we are assuming here that Larry forgot to set up some units.
    When our playgroup forgets something to place it has been units on Japan many times. They are more easily overlooked. Same goes voor IC’s and AA guns.


  • The real setup should favor axis more than our speculation setup, the BGG setup favor allies with OOB rules. A Russian ftr + a few more allied units must be compensated somehow. Its not enough to remove the extra US bmr. I don’t think an extra Jap trans is enough either. Maybe Italy is stronger than we thought. It seems like Italy is practically useless if allies go KGF, Italy should perhaps get another transport + an inf and/or a tank? If the real setup favors allies more than the BGG setup, then AA50 is even more unbalanced than AAR.

    I think NOs will be standard play for the game, whereas some will choose techs and some will not. So, given NOs Axis are way too strong in the GENCON set-up.

    After looking at the AAP map and the actual historical naval situation, I expect the following additions (now only naval):

    East Med: 1 UK destroyer
    East Indies: 1 UK cruiser
    Caroline Islands: 1 Japanese cruiser
    Sea of Japan: 1 Japanese destroyer & transport
    West coast: 1 US cruiser


  • @Lynxes:

    I think NOs will be standard play for the game, whereas some will choose techs and some will not. So, given NOs Axis are way too strong in the GENCON set-up.

    AA50 OOB is really flawed if its not somewhat balanced, at least as balanced as AAR, which is only slightly unbalanced    🙂

    I certainly agree with you regarding the NOs, I think almost all players will use them in the beginning.
    I will initially prefer to play with NOs myself, but I like testing out different options, so I’m pretty curious about the game balance with/without NOs.
    Probably, because the BGG setup may be very close to the real setup, allies have advantage without NOs, and axis will have advantage with NOs, but we don’t know that for sure yet…

Suggested Topics

I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

64
Online

15.1k
Users

36.0k
Topics

1.5m
Posts