• OK so the big mystery is “solved” and we see what’s coming in August.
    Now Qs:
    1. What will you do with AA42?
    2. What will you play?

    Personally, the only reason I’d purchase AA42 is because the chimps have done their best to ensure it’s the only way to get more playing pieces.
    Lord knows developing House Rules for this edition would be like putting lipstick on a pig.

    Anyway, my intention is to stick with AA50… and Classic when I’m feeling nostalgic or for teaching FNGs.

    What about YOU?


  • Buy it for the pieces and that’s it.  AA50 all the way!


  • I hate not supporting an A&A product but this isn’t worth my time. I’ll be able to download the rules and play them on my Revised gameboard or simply play Aniv. The pieces seems to be about the only thing it will be good for. That the board is smaller is a real turn off. The Revised board was barely adequate as it was.

    It is disappointing they gave us this instead of another game on the lines of BOTB or GCNL.

    So I guess “now what” is to hope for a North Africa or Stalingrad or Kursk game.


  • i will play it and use it to recruit new people to play in the “real” game. the simpler approach will help teach and we all liked revised when it came out, so if you have revised already, great. if not here’s a cheap version for now and start saving your pennies for the aa50 reprint (if that’s really happening)


  • This version will be seriously housed i feel.


  • I’ll stick with my copy of AA50, thank you.

    IF I need to replace my pieces, maybe I’ll consider this.  Though I’m hoping Field Marshal Games has something better by then.

  • Official Q&A

    Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

    If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

    If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.


  • I hadn’t played A&A since the late 80’s, and bought AA50 for my brother-in-law, because he asked for a copy of Revised, and the clerk talked me into 50. We played, and whammo, I became addicted again like I was a kid. Then I found this kicka** site, and I think sometimes I may need a talkgroup to get me off it. I have no complaints about the balance, about all the options, anything really. I think it is the best BY FAR game out there. I really don’t understand anyone being upset about a game that hasn’t been introduced, I’d certainly be willing to try it. Honestly, it may take a while to even go there because AA50 is so cool, and there are so many variables to play. I think the creators have it together, and I bet it will be an awesome game, that in ftf we could maybe even finish in less then, what, say 6 hours? That will really help my friends and I to keep our wives off our backs…


  • @Krieghund:

    They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.

    You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

    +1 for Krieghund

    I’m glad the paper ‘money’ is gone.

    My AA50 ‘money’ is still in the plastic.

    It would be nice if the rulebook gave a player some suggestions how to keep tract of IPC’s.

    I am bothered about the small board and waste of resources on a Russian battleship.

    Do people even use the production chart in other AA games?

    Too easy for mistakes, I always count up a nation’s income each time anyway.

    @Joe:

    …that in ftf we could maybe even finish in less then, what, say 6 hours? That will really help my friends and I to keep our wives off our backs…

    So true.


  • @Krieghund:

    Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

    If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

    If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.

    Because instead of a money grab, AA42 could have been so much more. Yes, the rules in the anniversary edition are popular, and using them is not a bad idea. But the map and the setup is revised (minor changes) which, if you already own the game, is spending money needlessly. Moreover, this stuff about “aa42” not being for us is BS. AA is for a niche market already. Its NOT like someone will see AA42 and buy it, when they passed over Revised. Especially not in this economy.

    Revised came out just a few years ago. But apparently WOTC thought they cant sell any more. But throw in a new map image and a new unit, and suddenly there is a “reason” to buy a product 99% of which you already have.

    No, AA42 was a bad effort. Even Larry knows WOTC shouldnt have done this. And so do we.


  • @Krieghund:

    However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.

    Hmmm, no. Impulsively buying a game that will sit on my shelf would be short-sighted.

    @Krieghund:

    As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.

    Well sir, I never considered them a flash in the pan as I already spent my money and own them. A pretty tidy sum might I add, although clearly a non-event for the designers.

    It’s not a matter of reviling the game.
    Just this “new” product doesn’t bring anything to the table.

    But all is not lost and there is some common ground here:
    @Krieghund:

    You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.

    Ahhh see on this point, I am in full agreement with WOTC and Hasbro: not coincidentally they will not be the target audience for my $35.

    Nothing personal. Just business.


  • @Krieghund:

    Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.  What AH has done here is to create a new entry-level A&A game.  They took the Revised map and threw out the rules, which many people didn’t like a lot of the elements of anyway (hence LHTR), and applied the highly praised and successful AA50 rules.  The result is a new introduction to the game system for new players, as well as a cornerstone for A&A games to come.  They cut more corners than I would have liked, but the lower price may make it more attractive to potential new players.

    If you don’t plan on buying this game because it’s a “step down” from Anniversary, so be it.  I understand perfectly.  However, dismissing it completely out of hand is very short-sighted.  You guys aren’t really the target audience this time around, anyway.  As for me, I’m pretty excited that all of the cool new rules from AA50 weren’t just a flash in the pan.  This edition proves that those concepts will go forward to future games, and there will be future games.

    If you’re upset about the cutting back on components such as IPCs, write to customer service and complain.  That will send the message that you don’t like things going in that direction.  Doing so in a manner that expresses concerns about quality and its impact on your future purchases will get much better results than reviling a game you haven’t even played based simply on component issues.

    No, you’re wrong.  And I’ll tell you why.  Though I believe squirecam and allboxcars put forth the necessary arguments.

    The notion of AA1942 being a “entry-level” game is fanciful – to say the least.  Does someone looking to get into Monopoly start by playing Junior Monopoly?  No, he begins with Monopoly – the real deal – and learns from other players.  I would wager that the transition from AA1942 to AA50 is less steep than in Jr. Monopoly to Monpoly.  After all, the pieces are the same, the rules are the same (mostly), and the territories are the same (again, mostly).  You, Kreighund, praised the very rules found in AA50.  Why couldn’t Wizards just reprint AA50?  I don’t get it.

    If Wizards was worried AA50 was too daunting to new customers, then there were alternatives to this spit pile.

    (Though based on experience, new players are enthusiastic when they see the oversized board and quality game components)

    What Wizards COULD HAVE done was re-release AA50, but packaged with a set of rules tailored for beginnings, intermediates, and junkies.  This could have included optional rules for Technology, National Objectives, Strategic Bombing, and Extra Powers.  What I’m preaching is nothing new.  In fact, MOST strategy games do this already.  See “Conquest of the Empire” for an example of modular rules done right.

    The point is new players don’t like being babied.  They don’t like playing an inferior game when they know a more complete game already exists.  Veteran players don’t like to pay for game that delivers NO VALUE OTHER THAN AS A TRAINING AID TO NEW PLAYERS.  Sorry for the all caps but this point can’t be stressed enough.  Personally, I hate it when I’m told I have to play a “beginners game” because I’m incapable of learning the real thing.

    (History Lesson: Wizard’s actually tried doing this with their cash cow, Magic the Gathering.  They released a beginner’s version of the game entitled “Portal.”  It was pulled after two seasons due to abysmal sales)

    Finally, I don’t agree with this whole “cornerstone” business.  In my mind AA50 is the cornerstone of the A&A Franchise – not this cheap imitation.  Cornerstone in that AA50 will be the game played most often by local playgroups and tournament organizers.  Cornerstone because it’ll be the game discussed most often by fans of A&A, such as the ones on this website.

    PS:  Why should I be forced buy to Wizard’s product before I have the “right to complain?”  Is that not perpetuating a broken system?  No, I should be free to express my disapproval for a product whether I purchase it or not.  To me this 1942 foray screams “Cash Grab” by Wizards and I’ll respond in due kindness.

    PPS:  Keep up the good work Kreighund!  I find your rules clearifications to be extremely informative.   :wink:


  • It has not AA50 rules: even if has the same combat system, it lacks the new super shiny tech system and the NOs, and also lacks the 2 scenarios. AA42 it’s symply a poor mix of Revised gameboard and some of the AA50 rules -> there were few work developing this hibryd. Not valuable for hardore A&A fans nor for newbies (as someone said, they should buy Revised instead, that one at least has tech and paper money)

    However, there’s a great reason for all this hate against WOTC: they killed TripleA, a stupid move, because most players on internet will think three times before buying any new A&A product. WOTC caused severe damage to the gaming community for no real reason, and our only possible retaliate is not buying their new products unless they are a total masterpiece. AA42, sadly is not the case


  • @TG:

    The point is new players don’t like being babied.  They don’t like playing an inferior game when they know a more complete game already exists.  Veteran players don’t like to pay for game that delivers NO VALUE OTHER THAN AS A TRAINING AID TO NEW PLAYERS.  Sorry for the all caps but this point can’t be stressed enough.  Personally, I hate it when I’m told I have to play a “beginners game” because I’m incapable of learning the real thing.

    (History Lesson: Wizard’s actually tried doing this with their cash cow, Magic the Gathering.  They released a beginner’s version of the game entitled “Portal.”  It was pulled after two seasons due to abysmal sales)

    He really does have a point here. I played Magic ‘back in the day’ and occasionally poke my head into the website to see what’s going on and recently found WOTC peeps making this very point. The majority of players come into a game via other players. We never brought players in via Portal. We threw them a deck and taught them how to play. The players who picked up Portal and then tried to play with the crowd became quickly frustrated because they weren’t playing the same game as everyone else.

    Perhaps the number of folks interested all on their own in playing A&A are scared away at the higher price point is greater than we suspect. I’m sure the lower price point will get a lot more sales at Christmas in Toys 'R Us to parents putting stuff under the tree.

    And there would be no need for ‘refreshed’ sculpts if they were just making an entry level game. An entry level player wouldn’t know the difference. The refreshed sculpts are strictly because there aren’t enough entry level players to make this venture profitable without the veterans.

    Companies who take their customer’s loyalty for granted are unwise.


  • @Krieghund:

    Frankly, I’m amazed at all the hate that this little game has generated, particularly since most people haven’t even really seen it yet.

    And the fact that we’ve seen so little of this new “cornerstone” would be who’s fault……?


  • I only own A&A: Pacific, so I can’t comment about the board size (though if it is really too small, it’s a shame). Frimmel may have a point that the price may attract new players - the kind who are not sure about the game and don’t want to shell out $50 to give it a try. The low price may attract as many new players as the relative simplicity (it doesn’t seem any easier than Revised).

    Even though purchasing the phsyical game may not be too attractive for those who own AA50 and Revised (or maybe even Revised alone), I’m curious about the gameplay. The AA50 game is just a tad too big for me - I think Revised offers the right amount of complexity to allow strategic depth while not having to spend too much time on a single move or an entire game. Combining the Revised board with AA50 rules may be an easy move, but if it produces a great game I don’t care.

    What do you think will be the impact of the new rules in comparison with Revised? For one, I think KJF will become easier - the transport rules will hurt Japan much more than the US (trns used to add punch to a fleet, but now they are only a burden).

  • '18 '17 '16 '11 Moderator

    Won’t even use it to replace pieces.

    I have images that can be made into tiles (circa Avalon Hill Bookshelf Games like “Rise and Decline of the Third Reich”).  Bad economy guys, can’t afford frilly things like molded pieces. :P


  • @KGB:

    I only own A&A: Pacific, so I can’t comment about the board size (though if it is really too small, it’s a shame). Frimmel may have a point that the price may attract new players - the kind who are not sure about the game and don’t want to shell out $50 to give it a try. The low price may attract as many new players as the relative simplicity (it doesn’t seem any easier than Revised).

    Even though purchasing the phsyical game may not be too attractive for those who own AA50 and Revised (or maybe even Revised alone), I’m curious about the gameplay. The AA50 game is just a tad too big for me - I think Revised offers the right amount of complexity to allow strategic depth while not having to spend too much time on a single move or an entire game. Combining the Revised board with AA50 rules may be an easy move, but if it produces a great game I don’t care.

    What do you think will be the impact of the new rules in comparison with Revised? For one, I think KJF will become easier - the transport rules will hurt Japan much more than the US (trns used to add punch to a fleet, but now they are only a burden).

    With $12 bombers, KGF will be even easier than before too. And a German navy build will be more difficult, given the less defensive punch to carriers, less defensive power of subs, and inability to prevent allied mass bombing.

    This assumes Anniversary rules, which, with no tech (radar), or escorts (optional rule excluded), national objectives (extra income) or territory limits (as Revised-LHTR), Germany has no defense.

  • Official Q&A

    The Dardanelles and Fighter Escort/Interceptor optional rules are included.


  • @Krieghund:

    The Dardanelles and Fighter Escort/Interceptor optional rules are included.

    well that is an improvement

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

38

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts