I guess by the responses I have read it is unanimous, Italy is better as a seperate entity mainly due to the added possibilities that it creates and the overall strategy changes it allows from both sides.
The other thing I really do like is that with 6 countries it is axis then allies turns rotated so as to not have two allied turns back to back. It is harder to double team that way.
Thank you every one for your thoughts. 8-)
So I know this isn’t exactly vanilla AA50, but I thought it would be cool to develop a 1943 varient for the current set up. I posted some thoughts on the TripleA boards, but I thought I’d post something in here too, just in case anyone has any cool ideas.
One idea would be to set the game in 1943, before Sicily and the Italian surrender.
This would give us a starting set up that looks something like this:
- Climax of the battle of the Atlantic (March 16-20, when German U-boats sank 27 merchant ships)
- Start of the Pacific island hopping campaign (Guadalcanal, New Guinea, Solomons etc.) and beginning of US sub war.
First major German reversals in the East (Stalingrad/Kursk.)
First wave of serious bombing raids against Germany, and the Doolittle raid on Japan.
Rommel, Monty and Patton, all duking it out in North Africa.
-And, most importantly, the “Second Unified Front” in China begins to take back ground from the Japanese. Increased aid to Mao and Chiang, US air bases in China etc.
Sounds like fun to me :mrgreen:
If we did go that route though, I think we should make it our goal to keep the map stuff essentially the same, and only tweak the starting unit positions. So an increase in production (+1 ipc to everything) would be out of the question, but we could still put some more starting factories down on the board. Romania for Germany say, or India, Australia, or Egypt for UK. This would allow for a more seamless board adaptation, in case anyone wanted to play an 43 game using our set up conditions.
So basically the idea, is to use all the same materials and rules, the same core set up, but just tweak it to suite a modified time line. So instead of an early Barbarossa feel, we could set up a round 1 Kursk battle (lots of German and Russian tanks converging on E. Ukraine) things like that.
Basically just to kick ideas around at this point. First we’ll want to play 41 and 42 to death
I made a thread on this and hardly anybody responded.
Do you want to develop this scenario?
I wanted to make a 1940 ( after france falls in June - starting with the battle of Britain) and 43 scenario ( featuring Kursk as its centerpiece).
I got my map with the icons for 1942. I suggest one of us starts tinkering with that setup, but if you have a go at it let me know where your getting the intel from. I have many sources.
Also, you understand that a few house rules will need to emerge.
The turn order would need to change so Soviets move first, but keep the same order. ( especially if you include Stalingrad)
Germans should get some kind of Heavy tank and a small IPC bonus to build these tanks.
I would include auto technology where some nations have some techs and on certain turns others appear.
Axis victory conditions would be different.
Possible winter rules for Germans
Polesti oil fields for crippling German industry.
Where’s the other thread?
I was thinking we’d probably go slow at the begging to give the 41 and 42 scenarios their time in the sun. But sooner or later the die hards will probably be down to try something new, based on the same model.
An optional add on scenario for 1940 and another for 1943, would be a cool way to round out the game. Provided no changes have to be made to the map, and its all just rules or unit positioning adjustments, it should be pretty easy to do. What would be ideal, is if we could come up with some cool ideas and then test them out using Battlemap and TripleA, as a way to gather feedback more rapidly. The first thing to do would be to playtest the hell out of 41 and 42, to determine what sorts of things we might want to adjust. Then use the 43 and 40 set ups to make the necessary changes.
I think 1939 and 1944, would be a lot harder to do, but I suppose they might be possible. 1940 and 1943 are pretty close to the OOB timeline though. They should lend themselves to the game pretty.
with 1940 or 43 you don’t need to make changes on the map france falls before the start of 1940 scenario
1939 is very problematic to design w/o extensive changes.
1944 makes no sence unless it leads to a USA/ USSR confrontation and ww3 –-“Patton’s fantasy”
1943 scenario would definitely be easier to set-up. at least working this one out first means that all the countries are still at war with each other
working out non-aggression pact for germany + russia, and american neutrality, would be something you’d want to tackle after being comfortable with re-placing units and territory control over the board (which is pretty much the main thing needed for a '43 campaign)
TG Moses VI last edited by
I am excited about a 1940 rendition of the game – more so than a 1943 version.
At least in 1940 the war was not yet lost by the Axis.
It would be compelling to see how a fair and balanced handling of American and Russian neutrality would work. The Germans/Japanese should have the option of launching a surprise attack (similar to AA:Pacific at the start of the game) or letting the Americans/Russians intervening into the war on their own behalf (based on some probability).
A worthwhile dilemma for the Axis would be whether to risk launching a surprise offensive now to catch USA/USSR off guard and commit those powers to the game early OR not attack at all and risk the USA/USSR entering the game automatically with a fully mobilized army.
Also UK and China should be beefed up considerably to handle the early game.
Actually that sounds Swwwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeettttttttttttttt!!!
Lets divide up the labor:
I work on the set up using my map that already has the icons… approval by committee then follows after playtesting.
somebody make the rules for 1943. Remember this is July 1943 start date. just prior to Kursk or we doing something from say Jan 1943 to reflect a number of trapped Germans in Stalingrad?
a third person researches the techs to assign who gets what and when. Each game turn is about 6 months, so make accurate research and provide links taking each technology and addressing when it was available for each nation
Another person look at the victory conditions for this. Obviously at 43 the Axis are losing so this must be the allies win by turn X thing, and or ? come up with something outside the box. Think something creative.
Turn in your results by 1 week from today by posting here. Use mediafire.com for links. Type up your ideas so they are in a file that can be accessed.
Sounds good. For the specific 43 ruleset though, I think we should design most of that to be optional. I Rhink priority for play balance should should be given to the starting unit arrangement, or additional NOs first, and then have the add on rules to go on top of that. I dig the Kursk start date for the intensity, but a Stalingrad siege might be kind of cool. Germany starts in Caucasus? That would be certainly be wild hehe, but maybe Eastern Ukraine would be better. Not sure at this point really.
Also, I don’t know if you checked the tripleA site lately, but we have some Imperious Leader style relief Tiles for the AA50 map now, inspired by your design. The core baseline map is still the same (since that would be a total pain to alter right now) but it definitely looks cooler now than it did a week ago. I think WOPR will probably work on it some more, but its semi functional. Still have to wait on the code changes though, before it will work without the edit mode.
I think 43 has a lot of potential. Even though the Axis are on the decline, we could still have a really dramatic opening round, with the possibility for an Axis comeback. Some 43 style Victory conditions or NOs would be cool too, and we could use them to bring things closer to a 50/50 type scenario.
I think this will be good times, especially if we can get everyone behind the idea. A week might not really be enough time to plan though. We should allow it to go threw a couple rounds of testing and adjustment, like a Beta thing, before settling on a final arrangement. Never hurts to get the jump on things though.
it was mentioned above that germany could be given some kind of ‘heavy tank’ rule. would this be a tech that has to be researched, would it become unlocked by a certain round, or would they just get it from the start?
Germany should have them for Kursk. Thats was Hitlers high hopes of defeating the vast numbers of Soviet equipment with qualitatively superior Tiger 1 and Elephant designs. Plus we could include a small number of SS panzers that have a bonus in battle.
perhaps heavy tanks take 2 hits or they fire preemptively?
SS panzers are 4-4 units costing 7 or 8 ( you can only built one a turn) and they get a +1 in combat or a free retreat in combat, or if they roll a 1 they choose the unit they kill?
If the game starts at Stalingrad it would be only a small matter of the Soviet player killing a number of units on his turn…anticlimatic battle because in Jan 43 they had no more food or ammo left. They surrendered on Feb 1st 1943.
But a start date of early 43 would still have the Italians in Africa near Tunis, which might be fun to attack the US player ( kesserine pass)
This was my 1943 map:
Sorry this is the old version (with the heavy lines), but I seem to have lost my A&A maps sometime this year. Oh, well.
This was my December 1942, with the Germans having occupied the Don bend in Operation blue:
What we need is rules and setup. not map. Lets get to work.
Setup would eventually be offered on edited scans of the OOB setup sheets. So please if you work on these keep the same format as the original cards so its easy to transpose…
Territory: listing of units. use Microsoft word format or office.
I like the idea! Though I don’t like extra rules, just make it the way they made 1942 and 1941: different set-up, and different order of play. I like 1943 because this time, it’s not the Axis who will hit the first turn, but the Allies will also get to deal a few blows. Ofcourse, the map should be balanced, which will need some extra units in the back ranks of the Axis to recover from the hits…
1. Russia (recaptures Stalingrad + kills 5+ arm near Kursk)
2. Germany (intercepts American + British DD’s and trns with 3+ subs in the Atlantic, recovers from Kursk and Stalingrad, Rommels in Africa)
3. USA! (starts Island hopping: for the first time in A&A history, USA gets to do something early in the game )
4. Jpn recovers from the Island hopping + embarasses China
5. UK (Pattons in Africa, goes SBR with 2 bmrs on Germany)
6. Ita (joins the battle in Africa, fortifies France)
Hmm, I might devise a little ABattlemap set-up for this
Owkey, tinkered around a little, made up a historically totally inaccurate map, but with some nice moves in the opening round
-USSR recapture of Kursk and Stalingrad in R1
-Germany can get Egypt at G1, but then UK can reclaim it, but Ita is also in the field
-German U-boats are going to do a lot of damage in G1
-US gets Ngu back in turn 1
-US+UK ready to go SBR the hell out of Germany
-IC in France to represent atlantic wall + give a little boost to Germany
-Siberia is empty: those forces went to recapturing Stalingrad
It’s merely a scratch, so please correct/improve historical accuracy/balance/fun/playability.
can you get this as a JPEG or PNG? (something anybody can DL or look at here without loading up some program)
Im sorry but this is too much like 1942. The axis are too strong. I am working on this and will post by tuesday.
Great start everyone
I think we should try not to focus so much on the 1941/1942 set ups as something set in stone, and focus primarily on the gameplay of the 43 scenario itself. What I mean is, lets think of 43 as an opportunity to fix issues with the other two set ups, instead of piggybacking more stuff on top them. And if a departure from the other set ups seems like it might add to the gameplay, then maybe it could be seriously considered. Does that make sense? For example:
Should Germany have a battleship in sz 5?
I feel like they really should have had one in the 41/42 set ups, so can’t we give them one in 43? You know it would make the naval game more interesting.
Should the USA have a large starting fleet in sz 56?
Given how easy it is to backtrack from 56 to the Atlantic, I think it would be better to have them pretty much all the US ships based in sz 53 or sz 46.
I think we should ask questions of that sort and really try to weigh out the pros and cons of an idea before committing to it. Remember that there is no rush for this thing. The 41 and 42 scenarios should be enough to keep us all entertained for several months, so we have plenty of time to plan for 43. HolKann has some good ideas here, and I’m sure Imperious Leader will have some good stuff too. No pressure at this point though, since we’re still in the brainstorming phase
germany should definitely have a battleship in a 1941 setup. symbolises their larger fleet before the destruction of the bismarck and the containment of the tirpitz
I got one on my set up. IN Baltic representing Tirpitz
This is not complete and i don’t believe in the viability of a “Stalingrad” because to include that is too much 1942 and we already got that. Its not useful to make a scenario thats just before and after one battle.
This setup is July 1943, but i suspect is actually earlier because Torch has landed and the Axis are still in Africa ( they were swept out in march 43) so this is a period of feb 1943 actually.
I have not playtested it yet
BY this time the following get these techs as follows:
Improved artillery- each art may now support 2 inf to attack at 2 ( Soviets, Germans)
Rockets- Your antiaircraft guns are now rocket launchers. In addition to its normal combat function, during the strategic bombing raid step of your Conduct Combat phase each turn, each of your antiaircraft guns can make a single rocket attack against an enemy industrial complex within 3 spaces of it. This attack does 1d6 damage to that complex. ( Germans on turn 3)
Each of your bombers can act as a transport for up to one infantry, but it must stop in the first hostile territory it enters during a turn and drop off the infantry, ending its combat movement. The bomber may still attack during the Conduct Combat phase, but it cannot make a strategic bombing run in a turn that transports an infantry unit. The infantry unit may retreat normally to a friendly adjacent space during combat. ( Germans, USA)
Increased Factory Production
Each of your industrial complexes can produce two additional units beyond its listed IPC value. For example, Germany with 10 IPCs can now produce 12 units. Also, when repairing a damaged industrial complex (removing damage markers), you can remove two damage markers at a time for the cost of 1 IPC (half price). (Germans, USA, Soviets)
During your income phase, roll 1d6 and collect that many additional IPCs. ( USA)
Each infantry that is matched up with a tank can move two spaces along with the tank. ( Germans, USA, Soviets)
Radar- Your antiaircraft gun fire now hits on a 1 or 2 instead of just a 1. ( UK USA)
Your fighters are now long-range fighters and your bombers are now long-range bombers. Your fighters’ range increases from 4 to 6. Your bombers’ range increases from 6 to 8. ( USA Japan)
Your bombers are now heavy bombers. You roll two dice for each bomber when you attack or make a strategic bombing raid. On defense, your bombers still roll only a single die. ( USA on turn 4)
Shipyards- cheaper naval costs (minus one SS, TRS, DD, minus two CA, CV, BB) ( Japan, USA)
Your sea units are now cheaper to build. Use these revised costs.
Super subs- The attack value of your submarine is now 3 instead of 2. The defense value of your submarines remains at 1.
( Germany on turn 4)
Jet fighters- The attack value of your fighters is now 4 instead of 3. ( Germany on turn 3)
Im sorry but this is too much like 1942. The axis are too strong. I am working on this and will post by tuesday.
Seen the gigantic USA fleet? The emptyness of Siberia? The toughness of the Chinese?
=> This will be totally different from 1941/2 because USA + Chi will play a meaningful role in the Pacific. Also, remember that the order of play is:
Russia, Germany, USA, Japan, UK, Ita => the Japanese fleet and the German army will get some heavy blows before they start out, I’d rather give the allies the advantage.
Nonetheless, this map isn’t good/balanced/historical, but it’s just pointing out some of the possibilities (like doing a stalingrad/kursk and some island hopping on the first turn).
Your map looks OK, I like the 4 inf in China part And also the US fleet in Pacific and the US having conquered Libya (that’s really different from previous maps, like it double!) But what’s the Order Of Play? And why is Burma still Brittain controlled? (looked it up in Wikipedia, and Japan and UK were battling it out along the Indian border).
I do hope there are some nice opening battles in your map, but need an OOP for that…
Looks pretty cool so far. I especially like the set up in India.
I think it would be cool if Germany had the capability to reinforce the Afrika corps via the med though. Historical arguments aside, the game is usually more entertaining if Germany has a more lasting presence in Africa. I’d say the USA fleet in 56 is still a little large. Again discounting the importance of San Diego for the home fleet, I think 56 is just too close to Panama for comfort. If more of those ships were based at Pearl it would make a pull out move to the Atlantic more difficult. Other than that though it feels pretty sweet. I especially like the new location for the Flying Tigers in China
Couple general points
1. The opening round should be playbalanced using low luck rules. Personally I don’t like Low Luck and will always remain a dice man, but a set up balanced under LL will also be balanced under standard dice rules… with added benefit that the set up won’t go bust for LL players later on. Basically this is to prevent an overly one dimensional LL game like you usually see in Revised. Play testing with LL is relatively simple to do with tripleA, so it should be no problem. As soon as we know what the starting set up is going to be, I’ll go ahead and build a new AA50-43 xml file for beta testing purposes. I’m sure we could do the same with the other programs as well, to ensure broad based feedback.
2. After the initial set up is determined, we should allow for a period of review (say 2-3 months of serious playtesting and feedback) after which point we can take suggestions and make final adjustments to the set up, in case any game breakers slipped through. Its important that we allow for this sort of public review, because you can be damn sure we won’t catch everything that our players will. By taking a more open and flexible approach to the set up design, we can ensure that it will be as balanced and entertaining as possible. This should also help us to reduce the necessity for a bid, or at least it will make sure that its a low bid, if we do end up needing one.
3. Scripted Attacks, these should be avoided whenever possible. What I mean by “scripted attacks” are those sorts of moves (like the J1 attack on Pearl in Revised, or the G1 attack on the British Battleship in sz 13) where the advantages to attacking are so obvious that it becomes an unavoidable engagement. Not that we don’t want to have interesting battles in the first round, just that we should make sure that these aren’t so overwhelmingly one sided that they become a given. We should avoid major round 1 battles where the outcome is just a foregone conclusion (60-75% or more) and especially we should avoid battles which are supposed to be a given, but which can tank the entire game if they go poorly (the Primo example being the German attack on Egypt in Revised.) Instead we should try to put things into more of a 50/50 arrangement, so that a wild swing in any single battle, is less damaging to the overall set up. Does that make sense?
4. Finally, we gotta get you a thumbnail sized map to work with Imperious Leader, that PDF is just gigantic hehe
Great Work everyone. Lets keep kicking the ball forward