TripleA still up and running! Many players online.

  • I do agree that winning against an opponent that obtains a the “right tech” working around the tech requires ability but on the other hand winning obtaining the “right tech” requires more luck than ability.

    So I have the possibility for winning a potentially more harder game but at same time I may lose in a fast manner.

    Tech is like an House Rule I think and Larry Harris has rightly classified it as optional in Anniversary.
    With my playgroup we like a lot the National Adavantages in Revised (that I would like to have in Anniversary… Italian tank that may retreat from battles… :mrgreen:) that we usually assigned with dice. Obtaining Dive bombers or Panzer Blitz for Germany was almost overkill. Winning against them was really enjoing. Also they are more like House Rules.

    Then, HR may like or not but they are not mandatory and IMHO is not right to think that a player that choose to not use a HR is a worst player of another that use it.

  • The only thing tech does different is even more randomness, this is exactly the same issue as in the LL vs ADS discussion. In the long run, the best player will win.

    The biggest difference is that you need to play more games with ADS and/or tech than in LL, but the best STRATEGY A&A player will win in the long run. So stop lying about good or bad players, b/c the greater or lesser randomness will even out in the long run. And Larry Harris have said that he hates tech.

    If I was the game designer I would not force LL as a mandatory rule, and if players still wants to use tech then it is a good idea to keep it as an optional rule, but this is not about skills, is about what we like and what we don’t like, and many players don’t like tech so we play w/o it. I you claim that players who prefers no tech is not so good as tech players, you better prove it, or stop lying. It’s the same as claiming soccer players are better players than basketball players b/c there is more randomness in soccer, and it is the same as claiming that the best players will not will in the long run!!!

  • Hi Commander Jennifer,

    first, this post is about closing tripleA by Hasbro which sucks. They are afraid people not going to buy their games but simply play AaA online. They did not consider that friends next door will never play it online, they just meet and play. But if you don’t have someone to play with, why buy that game ?? The online version is a good opportunity to find players and just play. It’s a shame for Hasbro after years of experience with Axis & Allies and its potential buyers to not have foreseen this trend and missed to place their own online product.

    as a second point: You are completely wrong. Better players tend to not play with technology, because that kind of game play requires 100% strategic skills and better players have that know-how.
    As an easy example: a complete stupid player researchs some overwhelming techs, such as LRA and HB, simply builds bombers and kick the crap out of Germany and Italy. Tell me what special skills does that kind of gameplay require? Absolutely nothing! Every idiot can play like that ( I am not saying that people that play like that are idiots, i say everyone can simply play like that!). Compare this with an US player having a strong fleet against Japan, cleverly uses the starting planes from all his ACs doing some action and land on some allied-controlled islands, while newly build fighters land on the now empty ACs after some action. Or playing the Allies combined, such as UK captures an island, while US is landing masses of fighters on it, preventing Japan from recapturing that island. This is skilled gameplay, not researching heavy bombers. - My Opinion -

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

    ….and IL, Tech is not broken.

    I didn’t say it was. I said the choices are something like ‘food fillers’ for lack of better choices. Its like a meatloaf made with ingredients that could show a bit more creative input.

    Advanced Artillery, Mechanized Infantry and a few others are ‘tricks’ to avoid directly adding these units to the game as new pieces, but ‘invented’ by taking the existing ideas and adding nothing really in terms of a new idea that leads to a new dynamic strategy.

    NO reality has these technologies in a game. Both existed in WW1. If you look at the actual major technologies that were important and first used in WW2, both of these would NEVER make the list.

    However, Atomic Bomb should be on the list, as well as ASW, Wolf pack, and various others that SHOULD have been these choices. I swear to god that Mechanized Infantry were supposed to be in this game and were left out at the last minute when WOTC determined that development costs would overrun budget. So somebody probably said: “Hey just make it a Technology!” and this cheesy way of fitting it in came about. I think that its inclusion was a test run of the idea to see how it worked because they didn’t play test it but wanted to try it.

    To me games should not be a testing ground for ideas in a weak form so that a more practical version may appear in future games. Of course this is only my insight in this design and i can be entirely wrong. But i do know if i had this in any of my house rules i might get a baseball bat in the back of my head for being so ridiculous.

  • @Subotai:

    …you better prove it, or stop lying.

    Please learn the difference between fact and opinion, and also drop the hostility it accomplishes nothing

  • This is about TripleA being shut down.  Not tech, don’t we have enough of those threads already?

    Secondly, if they started with TripleA where will they end?  BattleMap uses the same exact map, could that be shut down?  Could IL’s deluxe map he made be forced off the net?  Etc.

    Doesn’t really matter though, i’ll still use tripleA and now I will not purchase the new game they are making.  Period.

  • Customizer

    yes, every thread on this forum seems to get hijacked at some point into either a discussion about tech, nos, dice, strats, rules, etc.

    even if you do not use TripleA, please express your solidarity with other A&A players and other forum members by SENDING HASBRO AN EMAIL PLZ

  • I haven’t read all of this thread, but in case anyone hasn’t said it…

    Maybe they shut it down because they are about to sell a better version themselves?  :?

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

    Maybe they shut it down because they are about to sell a better version themselves?

    Hello? Thats exactly what it must mean. They remove the competition so they can maximize the success of their product.

    Except for the fact that when they release a new boardgame they do absolutely nothing to support it, so this could be some kind of ‘chimp reaction’ from stale bananas. WOTC chimps often do radical things for no good reason because somebody pulled their chain too hard or a chimp fell out of its tree.

  • Hasbro did not support the CD-rom from 98, so they probably are not going to support an A&A game if they make it.

    It’s easy to make something with better graphics than TripleA, and it’s a question of money, just hire a bunch of coders then the official game will be much better than TripleA. But there is good reason that many of us prefer TripleA before GTO, and that is that imo, the only thing which is better at GTO is better graphics. TripleA has tons of options compared to the GTO version.

    And it’s doubtful that Hasbro will manage to shut down TripleA, the only problem at the moment is that the development process is stopped b/c it can’t be hosted at sourceforge until the copyright issue has been solved, or fixed, but it can be hosted elsewhere. This hole thing pisses me off, Hasbro is not interested in making a better product than TripleA, so they use a lawyer and send a letter, instead of hiring coders to make a better game than triplea, I myself and other players will chose whatever game or software platform we think suits our needs most.

  • 2007 AAR League

    We need to get the lobby going again.

    they can´t really ban a lobby, even if we only uses a IRC channel it would suffice. then we just set up a normal direct connect game.

  • @Imperious:


    Advanced Artillery, Mechanized Infantry and a few others are ‘tricks’ to avoid directly adding these units to the game as new pieces, but ‘invented’ by taking the existing ideas and adding nothing really in terms of a new idea that leads to a new dynamic strategy.

    NO reality has these technologies in a game. Both existed in WW1. If you look at the actual major technologies that were important and first used in WW2, both of these would NEVER make the list.

    Well maybe they could have done both - had it as tech - and create pieces which could only be used after the tech was acquired. I always thought they should have done that with jet fighters from 2nd Ed. on.

    You could have a helicopter tech! (God knows what it would be).

  • PS: It does suck about triple A. If anything because a lot of people spent a lot of time putting all that together and now it’s been f**ked.

    It’s just important to stay informed about where things go from here. Where there’s a will there’s a way. There must be ways for the willing to get around legal restrictions.

    We wait and see.

    PPS: I doubt an A&A game is going to come out from Hasbro. In reality - whenever I looked at Triple A they had at most a few 100 downloads. It’s hardly a market for a commercial game is it?

    That’s why I don’t understand Hasbro - they seem to be being rather petty about it all. It’s not like there’s copies of AA50 not flying off the shelves while triple A downloads are hitting their second million. (I live in London and got my AA50 from NEW ZEALAND for chrissakes).

    Hey ho.

  • It’s fully possible that there will be software version from Hasbro, but I didn’t hear anything yet, so I don’t believe it until I see it.
    And if we look at history, Hasbro/wotc did not spend a lot of resources on A&A, even if the boardgames look fine. I have very strong doubts that an official A&A game will be better than TripleA, and that is not b/c TripleA is very good, it’s b/c Wotc/Hasbro don’t care about A&A.

    At least they should make GTO as good as TripleA, even if I don’t like the layout. An official software A&A game must have all the options of TripleA, plus the graphics of GTO, and all A&A variants, not only Revised, b/c thats the only thing GTO can offer right now, and it took several months before they implemented bids… :roll:

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

    Dear Wizards Forums Account Holder-

    We are contacting you because you have not logged into your forums account in over a year. Due to a change in our accounts system, your account may be deactivated.

    You must reactivate your account by 11:59 p.m. PDT, on Tuesday, July 21st in order to protect it.

    Please disregard the below email that you received today regarding your forums account. This email mistakenly went out to active members instead of inactive members.

    Your account is still active in our system, and you do not need to take any further action.

    We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused.

    In light of the recent actions regarding the removal of Triple A, this chimp action can only make sence in a continuing series of stupid chimp antics and chimp behavior. I post at these forums at least once a week. Its like a chicken with a head cut off.

  • If it wasn’t for the forthcoming release of AA42 I could suspect that Hasbro/Wotc wanted to kill A&A completely…!

    Most of the members on are mostly, or also playing the boardgame f2f in local playgroups, but many of us prefer the software versions of A&A, be it Abattlemap, GTO or TripleA. The most important things we have in common, is that we love A&A, preferably Revised and AA50. That’s the most important matter here, not if it is boardgame or software.

    We agree on some matters IL, and we disagree on other issues, but we both love A&A.

    TripleA will not be removed, but the developing process have been halted.
    TripleA helps A&A evolving, as does the hundreds or thousands of local f2f playgroups across the world.

    Wotc/Hasbro are really into a strategy of sabotaging A&A seriously, imo.  Where will it end???

  • Just pray they don’t release a new version each 3 months as they do with Magic, making the game unplayable for all saving 24/7 players  :lol: They are walking in that direction, making random changes to the rules (Nerfed Industry tech) and changing the faqs each month  😐

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

    We agree on some matters IL, and we disagree on other issues, but we both love A&A.

    we don’t agree on LL. I only really favor it for AA guns firing at multiple planes. Yes AA must be protected and evolve to greater things. Yes we fight for this!

  • Thanks for the email links Veqryn, sent emails off to all those bastards at WoTC and Hasbro.  The amount of apathy on these forums is astonishing; Hasbro threatens a DMCA takedown to a freely hosted fanservice of one of their lesser sold products, and the majority of people just flame it into oblivion and even suggest that the program sucked anyway and deserved to be shut down…  When Hasbro comes after your AABattlemap and Mapview programs next, don’t expect much support from me… 😢

    Let’s get everyone on the same page here, dammit!  Refuse to buy any Hasbro products and let them know that what they are doing is infuriating their fan base by clamping down on fan-made freeware!  If they had made a superior product that was worthy of  attention that’d be one thing, but threatening copyright infringement on a freeware game that has a total of 300 users worldwide is ridiculous.  Most of you out there apparently don’t even like TripleA, even though somehow it was popular enough to have been shut down.

    Definitely NOT buying AA1942 after Hasbro has completely eliminated any chance of me having fun with the Axis and Allies franchise anymore.  People in town don’t play the boardgame, they can’t stay around for 12 hours to play one game, plus you can’t save those games anyway to pick up later.  TripleA was the easiest way for me to find matches in their online lobby and ran generally flawlessly for me.  THEY HAD A WORKING VERSION OF AA50 THAT I WANTED TO USE FOR THE TECH TOURNEY.  So F*** you, Hasbro, never buying one of your products again.

    Hopefully we’ll get somewhere with this, Veqryn, as we apparently are the only ones who give a rats ass.  I just can’t understand the total lack of support from the Axis and Allies Community, as they apparently will use ANY thread to pointlessly debate about Technology rules while Hasbro gleefully pulls the rug out from under them.

  • This is interesting because Hasbro sold the ELECTRONIC rights of all the Avolon Hill games to Atari several years ago. This is why there never was an electronic version of Squad Leader released and why Atari put out the atrocious RTS version of Axis and Allies a year or so ago. So if I am correct Hasbro dose not even have the legal authority to shut down trippleA.

  • Sometimes I get carried away in discussions on what rules we like to have and not to have in A&A.

    But TripleA will not be shutdown for long, not if there is enough interest in it.

    I put up TripleA for downloading so it is still available, but it is sad that it cannot be hosted on sourceforge anymore, b/c it means that the development process is stopped or slowed down.

    @a44bigdog, can you link to documentation or a web site for this, b/c if you are right then the lawyers of Hasbro made a mistake, which probably isn’t the case, but it’s interesting to check it out anyway.

  • Not right of the top of my head Subotai. Such comes from discussions of Multi Man Publishing putting out the Advanced Squad Leader rulebook in PDF format a few years ago when it was out of print.

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    The example of a bad player getting LRA+HB and winning against a good one is EXTREMELY improbable.  First, you have to miraculously get both technologies early enough in the game for them to be some use to you.  If you are up against a good player, that really limits your time frame.  Second, you have to know how to use them, if you are a bad player, that is very improbably.  Third, you have to be able to get them where you need them, if you are against a good player, that is improbable.  Fourth, you have to still build ground units since even LRA HBs only defend with one die at 1.  A single tank could, theoretically, take out a dozen HBs if the tank is attacking.  Fifth, you’re good player has to make a number of mistakes, even if he does not go technology, in order for the bad player to win.

    More likely, you have two bad players, one who went tech, one who either did not, or did and didnt get good ones.  Or you have two good players, one who got the techs but faces someone who also got them or knew how to neutralize them.

    Remember, in previous incarnations of the game, a technology was a HUGE boon to the side that got it.  In this version, every technology nerfs a different technology.  It’s balanced.

    Lastly, I say that it is my opinion that players who are not as good as others at the game, refuse to play with technologies because it adds depth to the game, a depth they cannot handle.  If we have player A with a 7 wins per loss ratio who loses to player B with a 1 win to 7 losses ratio because player B played player A in a tech game, then I have to think maybe the better player did win, and the worse player lost.

    Hasbro will not release a game of this.  I think they only released the CD Rom before so they had ammo in court against Dogs of War.  That way they could tell the judge “hey, we have a game, they are infringing on our copywrites by giving this one away!” That’s why it was never really supported and was buggier than shizzit.

  • @ Jennifer, how delusional can you possibly be??? It’s not about tech or no tech, the players who wins a series of games is better than the players who loses that series of games! You disagree with this statement??

    The question is how many games between 2 players is necessary to determine the better player. Maybe 10 games, maybe 20, but probably not more than 30-40 games.

    This is not a law of nature, but very close imo. The players who wins many more games than other players, regardless of what setting is used, being LL or ADS, tech or no tech, Revised or AA50, optional rules or no optional rules is better than the players who loses more games than he/she wins.

    Are you seriously claiming that the weaker player will win a series of games, and not the better player? That is the conclusion you are making with your statement. I chose to define this as stupidity, and delusions, b/c if any player plays against any other player in a series of games, it’s the total result that will matter, not if said players prefer tech or no tech.
    The depth that tech adds to the game is randomness, aka good and bad luck, aka good and bad dice rolls, but this will even out in the long run, that is, a series of games. I have a hard time believing that you are a math teacher. Plz stop lying about aspects that is close to the laws of the nature.
    I’m repeating the only possible conclusion about your statement, if you do not see this yourself, your statements claim that it is not the better player who will win in the long run, but the player(s) who prefer tech!!!

  • this thread is sure having a tendency to go off topic…

Suggested Topics

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