For those who have played both AAR and AA50, which do you like better?
ogrebait last edited by
I’m still getting used to AAR, but considering “upgrading” to AA50. For now, I would like to focus on one version or the other. It sounds like AA50 is more balanced and presents more options for strategy. On the other hand, AA50 also sounds like it may be more difficult to master and that there are fewer potential opponents to play with.
I would appreciate the perspective of those who have experience with both games.
Thanks in advance!
tin_snips last edited by
i find AA50 to be the better game. more so because at this point there’s still plenty of new stratagies to come up with, where as AAR feels very linear to me
topped off with the fact that AA50 looks better with a larger board, and has more country-specific pieces 8-)
Comassion last edited by
I like AA50 better. We actually succeeded with a Kill Japan First strategy in the 1941 scenario, which I didn’t initially think was possible, which made for an exciting pacific game, for once. I love the inclusion of Italy, and the way research is conducted means that people buy it and inevitably a couple players will get technologies, which makes every game different.
AA50 is a sight better than Revised in my opinion, and is worth the money. I can’t think of any changes from Revised to AA50 that I wouldn’t consider an improvement.