So the Q was for Global 3rd Ed, but while we’re at it… I just got 3 to add

1. A legacy version of the base game (midscale board), that is simply called “Axis and Allies” ie don’t include a start date year or an edition number in the name for that one. It should present as the basic starter set. Provide unit set ups for a couple dates like AA50 did, but do that in the manual instead. The idea being that it’s easier to re-print or revise or download material for unit set ups in a manual than on cards/boxes. So you could do 1942 as the default, but also 1941 or 1943 say, just by referencing a page in the rulebook.

2. Axis and Allies Global - Sell it as a single complete game, rather than 2 separate theater games. For packaging maybe have 1 box be for the maps the cards and all the paper stuff, and then have units sold separately? I think the players that are most interested in the more advanced game just want G40, rather than Europe and Pacific 1940. By selling the sculpts separately there is less need to divide the boards by theater, and then it can build on the starter unit set included with the base “Axis and Allies” game mentioned above.

3. Include a small Art book/History of the Axis and Allies game and it’s creator, including the images from all the cover boxes and such. Legacy style! I just think that would be a nice touch and cool to see.

So you just bought the Axis and Allies game 1942 second edition, the latest 5 man world theater game… Congratulations, good call!  

Perhaps you’re returning to A&A from one of the older games, or maybe this is your first time. Either way, now that you’ve studied the map, got the pieces all laid out, and have finally puzzled your way through the rulebook, its time to dive in and start thinking about the Russian opening! Maybe you’re pre-gaming it, looking to get a match with one of your friends face to face, or are playing WW2 v5 in tripleA vs the HardAI, to get a feel for the map. We’ve all been here at one point, looking at those Russian units and those 24 ipcs and trying to figure out the best way to make use of them. Right about now, you might be thinking to yourself that the Soviet starting position looks kind of ugly, what should you buy? and what is it you’re supposed to do with these Russians units anyway? ha!

Well, here are some ideas about various openings that you might find helpful for the 1942 sec edition game when playing as the Soviets. What follows assumes OOB conditions, (if you know what a bid is and how to play with bids these conditions can be changed), but often times, if you’re starting up a new game with newer players in your group, explaining what a bid is can take more time than its worth, and this is already a fairly involved game. Instead, you, as the more experienced A&A strategist and the one who bought the board, can just let your buddy play Axis while you take the Russians. Sure it’s a challenge, but you’re up to it right!

But what to buy in the first round? This Russian planned economy gives you 24 ipcs out the gate, and this doesn’t allow a whole lot of room for error. Maybe infantry is best? Lets consider it for a moment…

At a cost of 3 ipcs a pop, 24 ipcs gets you 8 infantry, and we know that boots on the ground are always important for the Russians right? I mean just throw more bodies at the problem, that’s one ready solution isn’t it? And surely infantry have the best defensive value for the cost of any unit, and provide the most hitpoints for the least amount of money. Another way to think about it is the total power that your purchased force can project: the cumulative attack value and defense value of the units in the force and how far it can move.  We often call these attack or defense ‘points’, or ‘pips’ for the purposes of fast calculation, and try to think about how much attack or defense power the units can bring to bear.

24 ipcs in infantry = 8 hit points, with a total attack value of 8 points, total defense value of 16 points, and it can move 1 space.

In two out of four dimensions, the 8 infantry buy does pretty well. 8 hit points, or hits that you can absorb, in terms of “fodder” with cheap infantry to protect your more expensive attacking/defending units. On defense 16 points, since each individual infantry unit hits at 2 on defense. Taken together, that’s a solid 2 hits on defense reliably, and probably 3 hits or more if the infantry is grouped together and all “dug in.” Rolling a lucky deuce or two, and that kind of infantry stacked together can be quite potent!

But in the other two out of four dimensions, the 8 infantry buy is somewhat lacking. 8 attack points doesn’t sound all that bad at first, but when you start to crunch the numbers, you find that this only gives you a reliable 1 hit, and a “long shot” (1/3 chance) to grab a second hit on attack. And this only when the whole force is attacking at once. Sure there’s always a chance you might roll a bunch of ones, but its not a great chance, and there is of course a chance that you could completely “dud” in your attack. A lucky “one” is just harder to come by than the “lucky deuce” when you’re playing a game with six sided dice. This sort of thinking and logic has given rise to a style of play called “Low Luck” which you may want to familiarize yourself with at some point, just for reference, but similar principles apply in a normal dice game, when you’re trying to figure out what the likely chances are that you’ll get “X number of hits” in a given round of combat. Basically what you’re doing is adding up all the “hits at” values for each unit, the number you end up with shows you how many hits you’re likely to achieve with these units when rolling the six sided dice, by dividing that number by 1/6. This gives you the likely number of hits on average in a dice game, or the auto hits in an LL game, and any remainder left over can likewise give you a sense of how likely it is to pick up an “extra hit.” For a regular dice game these are just rough averages but they’re helpful when thinking about the attack/defense value of the force you’re buying.

Finally there is the aspect that involves movement or range, which for infantry is just 1 space from where they are placed. Now when you look at the map and the production spread for Russia, you’ll see that with an 8 infantry buy, some of these units won’t be able to get into the fight immediately, because the factory in Caucasus can only produce 4 units at a time, and the factory in Karelia is indefensible in the first round, and inf units placed in Moscow will be two moves from the front during the second round. So having surveyed the situation on the ground, for the purposes of attack, buying 8 infantry doesn’t really get you the full 8 attack points the very next round. Instead you end up with just 4 attack points “at the ready”, from the infantry out of Caucasus, and the other 4 infantry units placed in Moscow will take at least one more round to move out “into position.” To defend against German counter attacks in the second round you still get 16 on defense, but from the perspective of an early Russian offensive, the 8 infantry buy nets you just 4 attack points and 4 attack fodder hitpoints “at the ready” in the second round.

Now lets look at some other ways you could spend that same amount of money for different units beyond just “all infantry.” These are all max placement buys, where you spend every ipc with no remainder left over. Listed below with the total hitpoints, total attack points and total defense points for each buy, and finally the number of units with effective range to the front, for immediate counter attack, and the max attack power they can project the following round (during the opening salvo of the combat phase).

Potential Builds:

Buy: 4 infantry and 3 artillery =
Total: 7 hitpoints, 13 attack, 14 defense
Range: 4 units to the front (1 inf, 3 artillery from Caucasus).
Projected Power: +8 counter attack points against Ukraine.

Buy: 6 infantry and 1 tank =
Total: 7 hitpoints, 9 attack, 15 defense
Range: 5 units to the front (4 inf from Caucasus + 1 tank from Moscow).
Projected Power: +7 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 3 against Karelia/Belo.

Buy: 2 infantry, 3 artillery, and 1 tank=
Total: 6 hitpoints, 13 attack, 13 defense
Range: 5 units to the front (1 inf and 3 art from Caucasus + 1 tank from Moscow).
Projected Power: + 11 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 3 against Karelia/Belo.

Buy: 6 artillery
Total: 6 hitpoints, 12 attack, 12 defense.
Range: 4 units to the front (4 artillery from Caucasus).
Projected power: +8 counter attack against Ukraine. But this build is sometimes more about the +12 against Caucasus itself, when you plan to give up the factory and then re-take it the next round.

Buy: 4 infantry and 2 tanks =
Total: 6 hitpoints, 10 attack, 15 defense,
Range: 6 units to the front (4 inf from Caucasus +2 tanks from Moscow).
Projected power: + 10 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 6 against Karelia/Belo.

Buy: 3 artillery and 2 tanks =
Total: 5 hitpoints, 12 attack, 12 defense
Range: 5 units to the front (3 art and 1 tank from Caucasus + 1 tank from Moscow).
Projected power: + 12 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 6 against Karelia/Belo

Buy: 2 infantry, 2 artillery, 1 fighter
Total: 5 hitpoints, 11 attack, 12 defense
Range 5 units to the front (2 inf and 2 art in Caucasus + 1 fighter in Moscow).
Projected power: +11 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 3 against Karelia/Belo *extra advantage in light trading of territories/total unit value over time, provided by the third fighter.

Buy: 2 infantry, 3 tanks
Total: 5 hitpoints, 11 attack, 13 defense
Range: 5 units to the front (2 infantry and 2 tanks in Caucasus + 1 tank in Moscow).
Projected power: +11 counter attack points against Ukraine, or + 9 against Karelia/Belo.

Now that’s a lot of numbers I’ve thrown around, but when you see them all laid out, you’ll notice that when you opt to buy more expensive units, what you’re doing is trading Russian hit points and defense points, for Russian attack points and a greater effective range on counter attack. There is some flexibility here and a little room to pick and choose, depending on how aggressive you want to be with the Soviets, but there is a point at which it’s simply no longer worth it to exchange hit points/defense, for power projection on counter attack. I would suggest that if you go lower than 5 hit points in the opening round purchase with Russia, its likely that you will lose control of Moscow to the Axis during the endgame (if your opponent is fairly competent.) Even 5 hit points is rather low, and what I would consider a “gambit,” meaning that you’re counting on a fairly lucky roll with your Russian openings and counter attacks to make up the difference on hitpoints by killing German units and just losing a couple pawns.

A 6 hitpoint purchase will allow you to project some power with counter attacks in the second round, without giving up too much defense later on. This is what I would consider an aggressive Russian purchase, meaning that you will have a decent offensive capacity if the rolls go your way, but still retain an alright defensive capacity if the rolls go poorly. The 6 hitpoint purchases are all about threatening counter attacks against an early German stack in Karelia or Belo. Trying to buy yourself one more round of trading territories, before you have give them up to the Germans.

A 7 or 8 hitpoint purchase is what I would consider fairly conservative, meaning that you plan to play a primarily defensive game with the Russians, giving up ground early in exchange for a slightly better defense later on, and relying heavily on the Western Allies to make up the difference for you.

Why does all this matter? You might rightly ask.
Well basically, because what you buy with Russia will determine how many attacks you can realistically run in the first round, with decent odds of success, and how quickly your friends the Anglo-Americans will have to send you assistance to prevent your capital from being captured by the Axis.

–--------

Now that we’ve thought about purchases for a minute, lets look at the Russian production spread, and see how the starting factories factor into things.

Karelia: Forget about it!   There’s just no way you’re going to keep the Germans from taking this territory in the first round. Seriously, its a lost cause. Even if you took Belo and Baltic states, even if you somehow managed to sink the German  transport in sz5 with a risky double fighter attack, even if you took W. Russia light, and then blitzed all your tanks to Lengingrad on Non Combat, even if you bought 2 fighters and placed them in Karelia… its just not going to happen. Sadly the Germans will still have you beat, and the Total Unit Value (TUV) trade is terrible, not to mention costing you the whole Eastern front in the process. So just resolve in your mind right now, that Karelia is toast for the time being. Eventually you might be able to liberate it, but holding this factory at the outset is hopeless. The best you can do is trade the territory back and forth for a couple rounds, and keep the Germans from using your own factory against you! And that’s the real key, because what you’d really like to avoid here, is Germany stacking the territory on the first round. In addition to all the German units in the neighborhood, the Japanese can even reach Karelia with their Tokyo Bomber (6 moves) to put an extra defensive pip on the territory. That’s a lot of Axis units for the Russians to overcome!

It means that you either need enough units of your own stacked against it, or you have to shave off some of those German units in your opening attacks to prevent them from going north. The latter option is particularly risky, since its hard to predict how many hits the German defender might put up in W. Russia itself, let alone Belo, or Baltic States. There’s also Caucasus, that other all important factory territory you have to consider in your opening…

Caucasus: Don’t forget about it!
Now that Karelia is off the table, and you’re firmly resolved to just grin and bear the loss of that northern factory for a while, its time to look at that other factory down south! Caucasus is arguably the most important Russian territory after Moscow and W. Russia, not because you need the production per se, but because its very important to deny this production to the Axis. Letting the Axis gain control of a factory that boarders your Capital is just an all around nightmare for the Allied war effort, so you should do everything you can to avoid this for as long as possible. Fortunately, unlike Karelia, it is possible to defend Caucasus in the first round. Its also possible to trade this territory and recover it quickly, owing to the fact that the British are in the area and can lend a hand with their tanks/fighters if need be, but its still a good idea to keep Caucasus under your thumb. Even if you can’t hold it forever, you at least want to threaten it on counter attack with enough force to prevent the Germans from stacking there and then flying in Japanese fighter cover. Once that happens, it becomes very hard to control the center of the gamemap and your Russians will be more or less pigeon holed into an entirely defensive “turtle up” posture. This is something you might be able to manage during the endgame, once the Western Allies have some units nearby to help prop you up, but its a disaster to let happen in early rounds. Caucasus is the main objective of most Axis drives early on, and what they will try to do is force you out of this territory (often by making you choose between Caucasus and the Capital Moscow.) For your part, you’ll want to push this decision out as far as possible. The best way you can do this is to either stack Caucasus itself, or stack W. Russia and Moscow with enough troops, that any German units that move into Caucasus will be immediately destroyed the following round on counter.

Finally, Moscow: the Center must hold!  
Losing Moscow early on, is basically losing the whole game. During the endgame it is possible to trade Moscow for an Axis capital, but in order to even get to the point where something like that is possible, you need to hold Moscow for a pretty long time. Lets put it this way, if you give the Axis a shot on the Russian capital anytime before round 7, things are probably going to end badly for Allies. So what does this mean? Well basically it means keeping Axis units more than 1 move away from Moscow, while at the same time keeping Allied units close enough that they can reach Moscow in 1 move if they have to. And frequently, it means sending US/UK units (esp. aircraft, but also ground) into Russian territories to ensure this.

OK, that was all background and a fairly long winded way to arrive at…

All the Russian Openings!

The rest of this thread below will be for descriptions of specific Russian openings, from basic/general stuff to the more complex, and I invite anyone else here who has thoughts on the subject to post those here as well. TripleA saves would be nice if you want to share examples. I’ll start us off with one of the more popular…

If I had to make a wish and just get one flagship A&A scenario, I’d like to see a map on the scale of G40, but set in 1941 with only 6 factions.

I think the big 6 is better than the big 5, if only because it allows for parity by sides Axis vs Allies and to alternate by sides each turn.

I don’t really want to see Italy get nixed, because Axis is in the name after all, but I think it makes more sense to have Germany and then a faction called ‘European Axis.’ This set could provide some unique sculpts and roundels that could be used for basically all the smaller Axis aligned countries, Italy at the head maybe, though not just Italy, but Finland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania whatever. Basically you do some purely decorative design elements like mini flags, and then a more generic sculpt set with specialized flavor, like say a couple alt infantry or air types, stuff like that to cover the bases. Then have this player ‘nation’ catch-all faction come between the turn blocks on the Allied side. Basically removing the piggy back into the next round for team Allies, so both sides are more even that way.

On the Allied side you could obviously do the same with China, but it might be interesting to just see the Allies framed in the same way, again where the material for the smaller factions is done up with the decorative map elements with specialized flavor but folded back into one of the big 3 turns. So basically Anzac folds back into Britain, China folds back into USA. Or France into USA, or either of those into the Soviet turn block to maybe make it more interesting? I guess whatever makes the most sense from a “game seat” position might be good there. I can see advantages to maybe randomizing it too, like which of the Big 3 gets which of the Little 3 might be a thing that is determined by a roll or something on team Allies, just for flavor? But anyway, main idea being to keep the turn blocks down to a 3v3 exchange and no more. Basically 3 outs per game round. I just think that’s a good way to go.

The reason I like 1941 over the high water mark 1942 opener, is that mechanically the game always has the Axis side expanding early as the way to get a rough parity by sides going into the second and third round. That just feels more appropriate to 41 for me. Like if you have it open with a bang and the Axis side achieving that high water mark in the early rounds it feels more like the march of history, rather than starting from that high water mark and then vaulting like Shamu even higher, expanding massively into uncharted territory right at the start. You know where like Italy rules Egypt and Japan crushes into Siberia and India or whatever, because that’s how far they need to go to get into break even territory hehe. Like it’s all well and good if the game gets there after many rounds, but just not to have the balance tip too hard like that right away. Better, if the Allies are going to be on their heels in the opener, to pick a date where that vibe hums. Also helps I think with the sense of progression of game-time in the player’s imagination. Early enough for a total war start with some space to operate, but not so early that you have players waiting on the sidelines forever before it gets interesting.

I like a big map, with more unit types, cause it’s hard to go backwards there at this point. I’m used to Artillery and Mech and such and they’re fun units, but trying to keep everything else as simple as possible so that has some room to breathe and isn’t eclipsed by too much other stuff going on at the same time. More starter set focus. It can always morph from there into Expansion territory with add-on materials and more nuanced rules. I think I’d be a little bummed if it was just a bunch of re-releases without any revisions. Like I could imagine a vintage 1984 reissue, but that’s not really what I want. Basically I want “Classic, but Global” if that can just somehow be a thing heheh

Yeah I really like the idea of the whole med too, honestly. I noticed when trying to find a closer crop, that anytime I tried to zoom in further, it felt pretty claustrophobic and I wanted to scroll beyond the edge, like ‘wait - why stop here?’ Lol

I think I’m too used to seeing maps of the full Med to really get past that. Also it’d be a nice touch for new Roman empire ambitions, even if that ship had already sailed by the likely start date. This would be the board where Italy really makes sense as a player nation to me, like the reason to justify the existence of all those sculpts. Whereas in AA50 and Global, it’s more of a stretch to get them in the mix in a satisfying way. I think a somewhat larger board than the previous tactical games, so they could do the full stretch from Casablanca to Beirut would be pretty cool!

This one shows a fair bit of distortion. Europe was already warped/enlarged, so you can see Spain is a bit beefy from trying to make France/Normandy larger lol, which wouldn’t really be needed for a board with the Med focus. The other side of the Med is more compressed than it’d need to be here. But basically taking the rough G40 divisions for the TTs and SZs, and then subdividing some of those again, like 2, 3, maybe 4 times? Just to get a sufficient number of tiles and a dynamic playpattern going. Stretch-rotate or crop in tighter at the top, like right at Marseille/Milan/Istria, with an transalpine cut at the Po, but aiming to get the whole med in there somehow, with a lot more Sea Zones than shown below, clearly… hehe.

Sneakily foreshadowing a Stalingrad follow up by showing a bit of the Balkans? The theme could still be Torch, but something with a theater wide view on the Med would offer a lot of options if it crept on the margins a bit.

I dig the anti tank and sp artillery idea too! I played a D10 game that had them in the roster and they were fun. This scenario would be a cool one to see a jeep, and an infantry gun, and self propelled artillery. Perhaps an Armor advance towards the end where some even more boss tank types first come online. An apt scenario to do a heavy armor unlock or something.

This one has a lot of promise! More than the reprints/re-issues, with the ‘North Africa’ game we’ll really get to see what Renegade’s bringing to the table. I’m excited to check it out!

Ps. Random aside, but there were something like what, 10 million horses deployed in WW2 just by Germany and the USSR alone? I don’t know that we ever get that in our WW2 set piece sweeps. Except for the opening of the film Fury I guess lol. Might be cool to see one for some kind of general/logistics type bonus sculpt, where we can imagine him headed up the mountains towing a big gun in the endgame hehe.

pps.

Basically just blowing out the regional theaters of the Europe 1940 board, and doing each with a bunch more TT/SZ tiles. Maybe you put them all together like Voltron for the ultimate A&AE advanced board.

If they did the stretch on Europe a little different so you could make one larger board from the smaller theater scale maps.

Here’s an example using Turner’s, but imagining the stretch/warp so that center dividing line is more like the Rome Berlin Axis, doing the squish and pull for a nice spread.

Also, I’m curious, if they’re targeting a 2024 release date, if they already have the game basically roughed out in concept form? Like if they’re already alpha testing and play balancing something? I wish they’d use tripleA for that, like at least for an informal in-house testing type thing for their design team peeps. It could be done with a fairly quick turn around I’d imagine. Digital playtesting is pretty fast. They could probably clock triple the number of test games during the same period, even if it was closed playtesting for just their employees or whatever. It’s a cool tool, and something the A&A community sorta organically willed into existence with just the heart and love of the game, but it hasn’t really been used before for a real alpha test of a new game I don’t think. Although that would be kinda rad. Like it’s basically the role the thing was designed to play, as a map/game creator’s resource to trial the rough drafts. They could use the map creator tools to create a quickie templet, then use that to iterate in alpha. They don’t need to publish it that way, but they could test it like that. Since they can alter board states via edit and save stuff out locally.

Have Beamdog do the polished version with the UI that peeps are used to from A&AO with all the branding for the competitive digital play, after the honeymoon launch/CON FtF period, but by holding a digital AP run before the physical product goes to the actual printers, they could see if there are any big issues and shore em up way early. Like long before it hits the presses, after which point revisions have to be issued via errata. Just do the FtF and digital testing concurrently in-house to catch the breakers and shore it up. They could do that basically soon as they got their map ideas and unit roster ideas dialed. Like just pick someone on the team and have em learn the quickie creator tools to do the xml stuff hehe. Wouldn’t look as pretty, but it would work for the alpha drafting at least, presumably with rules similar to what we’ve seen up to the G40 level. Probably a pipe dream, like normal trend seems to be the opposite direction, but still, maybe Renegade will go renegade, and actually lean into it for a change? That would be so cool! Worth mentioning at least

Like a Xvart catching a fireball, I didn’t see that one coming hehe, but I gotta say its pretty exciting!

If you’re like me and your bookmark takes you straight to the forums, you might not have caught the announcement on the front page, but lools like we’re getting a digital version of this one.

I’ll be especially interested to see how the Axis advantage is handled, whether through some formalization of the bidding process (which would be nice) or some kind of set up tweak along the lines of a tournament variant.

I gotta think we’ll get something not too dissimilar from what Hasbro did with the classic cd way back when. That one helped to establish certain balancing mechanisms that weren’t really present in the box, so maybe we get something kind of like that. The Russian restricted opening in Classic comes to mind as something that game probably helped to establish.

I’ll also be interested to see how the new system of casualty selection and restriction on friendly carriers/transports will effect the playbalance for 1942.2. Not too concerned about transports, but the carrier thing could definitely have an impact for fighter transits and the British naval game in particular. From what I just read I’d think the proposed changes will be mainly influencing the Allied game. Really curious to see how having a fixed order of loss based on unit cost will effect multi-national stacks or strafing. Like if you have an Anglo-American joint stack that is attacked by G, it could make a big difference if you have to split casualties in a close battle based on cost, instead of choosing to take all the hits for one nations stuff to preserve the other nation’s counter attack power. Also there’s always those questions about how subs will be handled. But all in all, I can see the advantages of doing an asynchronous approach, since it will definitely simplify the back and forth in a given round, in terms of necessary exchanges between players who are doing their thing remotely.

Will be fun to see also what kind of options there are in terms of modification or edits to the standard game that the engine will allow. I think a lot of long time players would be looking for things of that sort to drive it into the future, since we’re a group that likes to tweak stuff. But yeah, I think it could be a major thing in terms of setting standards, if the base game has some options built-in to help with balancing or offering new takes after some time has elapsed.

Anyhow, I think its a pretty cool announcement. Look forward to learning more about it.

https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/category/68/axis-allies-online

Well, I loved those old infinity engine games and black isle materials. Baldur’s gate is always one of the first games loaded on the hard drive whenever I get a new laptop, so its cool to see someone with excellent taste at the helm haha. Maybe 42.2 has legs after all? I’m really pleased that one of these games is getting the official treatment. I gotta imagine there’s a fair amount of overlap between the peeps who got into D&D via those crpg games and peeps who might get into A&A with a digital introduction to the rules and such. Sometimes the table top can be intimidating for newbies and it can be challenging to connect with other like minded players face to face. But we buy the physical boxes at the same shops, so seems like it could work. I’m intrigued by the asynchronous play concept, and how a digital version might be used to help cement the ruleset or official updates to the setup and the like. Definitely cool news. Anything that gets more people interested in Axis and Allies, and a way to keep the franchise kicking. Especially if it leads to new boards or other boards like AA50 or 1940 getting a similar translation. I think hardcore vet players will be looking for different things out of the engine than players brand new to the game, but either way its still good news for those of us who like the digital format.

I tend to agree with most of the points Janus is making about streamlining the game. I think the prob comes from low-balling the money and trying to keep those numbers so low, instead of just amping the production a bit. Like do that on the map, where the information is easy to see and to parse, rather than with objective bonuses that are more complicated and harder to track.

So using Italy as an example, in order to add them into AA50 and Global, we saw stuff taken away from Germany without a real offset there. So G loses their Med fleet and all the income from Africa as well as from Italy itself, but doesn’t really gain anything. G’s starting cash is just lowered and their starting forces weakened. Like their Baltic fleet is still getting nuked immediately and they have fewer TTs under their control, and so for sure overall it feels like a nerf to team Axis. Just to get a weak can opening turn for a nation that only has like 10 ipcs at the base, doesn’t really feel worth it in the trade off.

Same deal trying to carve out Anzac or India from the Brits, or China from USA, while still keeping the overall money the same/super low there.

What they should do instead is change the acronym IPC from meaning Industrial Production to “Income & Progress” so it’s more abstract and flexible. Then raise the values of some contested TTs. It probably doesn’t even need to get juiced all that hard to still work. Add like 5-10 pics on the map to each player nation and you’re probably good to go, without really needing national objective money or anything that complex. Raise the value of some contested tiles by 1 or 2 ipcs to help balance it out and you’re good to go right?

I only mentioned adding a few other Nations/TTs to ‘Italy’ because of the way things tend to work mechanically for them. So if Italy is going to be all up on the Eastern Front anyway, just camping in Karelia or Belarus or whatever, maybe it makes more sense to see those units as Finns or Romanians and such, rather than as ‘Italians.’ Just for the suspension of disbelief hehe.

I think the scale of the map and the economy in Global is pretty decent, it’s just weighed down by other stuff. Like it’s not the extra cash or the extra TTs and SZs that make the game take forever. I can imagine a game on the scale of Global but which plays must faster heheh

Sounds cool!

Also, keeping with the theme of watching the first half of the film Patton hehe… a cool way to handle the endgame would be Sicily, Southern Italy or even the liberation of Rome. So instead of just Torch and North Africa, which would start with a lot of Vichy touch and go, and end with Axis being ejected from Tunisia/Libya I guess, the game could keep going to Husky into 1943 for the finale? A proper Sand and Sea campaign for the larger med theater, with some naval action and the big amphib landings as the capper.

Basically the later Stalingrad/Eastern front board could dovetail on this one as the follow up, since the two campaigns would have a bit of overlap in the timeline. Instead of Axis winning by taking Cairo, Axis ‘victory’ could be achieved more by just pushing out the Allied liberation of Rome. Allies win by bringing the hammer down and taking the bottom of the boot. I think that’d be fun!

Guess it just depends on the overall scale of the game, but to me that would make sense for a theater map. Basically left side of the board at Gibraltar/Morocco, right side Greece/Crete/Egypt clipping at Sardinia/Naples/Rome for the top of the Board, desert at the bottom. Then we got some decent room for the back and forth and a thrilling conclusion that scratches the itch with a dramatic finish. Before breaking out the next one in the series hehehe.

Ps. Another suggestion, which is more for the art direction. Try to include within the graphics or manual illustrations a Vera May Atkins type for a French Resistance espionage angle. Rosie the Riviter for a home front munitions liberty ship production type thing. Rita Hayworth and Vera Lynn for the USO inspiring the troops. A badass nurse like Juliette Binoche in the English patient. Just something in the collage montage artwork to bring that element into it. Not like a Lady Luck, or Victoria type tutorial advisor, but more in-theme like the real deal. Code breakers, patch me in ops. Obviously those suggestion tilt towards Allies Hollywood nostlagia, but I think that’s to the good. Hire Becca Scott back on too, and keep that tutorial video series going. Shades of Casablanca noir in the embellishments on the margins. Like just a full 1942 sweep for that. I think that would be nice to see in a theater campaign board with this setting and timeline.

For a board crop, maybe something like this?

I compressed the one from the encyclopedia for a narrower width, but that sort of spread, like on the Med highlight I mean. Could come in a bit tighter on the sides and clipping the bottom fifth off at the desert for the tighter focus along the coast.

Then abstracted and bulked out a bit for housing the sculpts, with Sicily more in the middle for the endgame (center board), but still maintaining some room for a naval game, with peripherals for the stage in. Compress it back down to 1:2 aspect for the table once the TTs are beefed up, so you get a similar view, but a bit wider again after it’s dialed for the unit housing.

Plenty of space at the bottom left and top left/right for a couple inset graphics. One for each side maybe? Or blown out a bit further to carve stuff up a bit more. Just for the decorative embellishments, you could put that stuff in neutral Turkey or Spain, or the Algerian stretch of the Sahara. I think something like that would be pretty rad. Anyhow just a quick riff haha

I can imagine it where the narrows in Libya, that’s your main choke point, where the line is only 1 tile deep, and the stuff on either side is like your sliding deadzone that changes hands back and forth early on. For Algeria, Tunisa, Egypt have some coastal tiles worth a bit more, but then some interior 'desert; tiles worth less, but which can allow for maneuvering and breakthroughs. The larger islands split up a bit, and same with southern Italy. USA concentrated more on the left out of Algeria/Oran in that corner, UK on the right out of Egypt, like for seats at the table. And they’re trying to meet at the middle and converge in Libya for a springboard. Axis in the middle (seats at the top of the table), trying to hold the wedge at the center.

For Germany, maybe it kicks off with a Tunisian stronghold or a way to paratroop in early on, but always with that tension in the background, ‘like should we really keep feeding units into Tunisia/Libya?’ with the added challenge of guarding Greece and Crete in the backfield, which could be a swing zone. Or same with Sardinia and Sicily vs the main defense of Italy tension. A more abstract tile near the top could serve as a German mobilization point in Italy itself, like troops coming in from N. Italy and France, or over the Alps or being diverted over from Greece. Then you could get something going where Axis try to race to Cairo initially, but if that fails (likely), then it’s a question of when exactly to pull back from Tunisia/Libya in order to prepare the final defense of Southern Italy. Having that as the big mid-game timing decision.

A North Africa board I think has the potential to be a bit more naval amphib oriented, which would be fun to see in a campaign scale game. Could probably still fit quite a few tiles in the Med and really break up the North African coastline and Sicily so there’s a few ways in for both sides. Couple fulcrums for the balance to hinge on.

For a new unit/sculpt, the paratrooper or air transport would be thematic (especially for Axis in this period), which could be introduced here and then really come into play for the follow up Market Garden. Similarly an Army Base unit that either side can use to try and establish toeholds, as a ground base parallel to the Naval Base or Air Base of G40. Some different way to mobilize units that gets around the concept of an IC with something a bit more flexible for this theater, like a logistics hub. A bunker/pillbox fortification unit could work as well, similar to the old ones, just reintroduced. Or a Command unit, where instead of a Strategic Bomber, we get something with similar stats/movement, but which functions more like a general commanding the forces. That could be fun for this one, since it kinda fits the mold with the big personalities.

The tactical bombers of G40 would seem like a better fit than the Strat Bs of 1942 sec edition for the big guns in the air and bombing. An air transport role for the Strat Bs here, instead of a heavy combat role, could work well. Also the Mech would be nice to have for this one. Not sure what they’d choose for a full unit spread, but it’d be cool if they staged in some concepts here too, so the jump from 1942 to Global 1940 in terms of roster/rules complexity can be tutorialized and introduced in stages via the more focused campaign scale boards.

For a long time now I’ve been hoping to see an official digital platform for A&A (one with at least some kind of connection to the designers and publishers) that could be used for alpha testing a new game before its actually released in print. I mean like a tandem release, where the new physical game follows the online drop.

Analog playtesting the way A&A has been handled in the past is pretty laborious and time intensive, as a cursory look back at the larry boards will reveal. Even with an open alpha and tons of feedback on forums and such for each proposal, its still a challenge to aggregate everything and to rely on anecdotal after action reports. I get the impression that there is never really enough time to hold the kind of informal FtF tournaments that would be required, or to get enough people all going gangbusters at the same time to actually get enough data beforehand to determine whether its fully cooked before running it to the printers in china and pushing it out on the shelves.

With a digital alpha you could speed up the whole process considerably and have gamesaves to use as evidence, to help parse the overall play-pattern and player experience in each iteration.

I think A&A online could provide a real opportunity, if ever we got a shot on a re-issue of 1942. Even a re-release using the same base map could be fun. I admit new maps get me more excited than the existing ones (there were a couple changes from Spring to 2nd Ed so least there’s a precedent), but even using the same map as 2nd ed, with set up changes or a rules change or two there are a lot of ways to get at a new take on things.

I guess what I’m hoping for is that A&Aonline goes beyond just offering a way to play 1942.2 or any of the existing A&A games digitally, and might eventually serve as a hub for developing the next A&A games. A place where the players could actually be more involved with that process, and provide feedback on things when it might still make a difference, e.g. before its shrink wrapped and sent off to stores.

I know there are some core table toppers who would probably never really play A&A on a computer, but who might reconsider doing so, if hopping online also meant possible glimpses at the next upcoming board. Or having other ways to get involved, provide feedback while it might still influence the basic set up/balance design, or otherwise engage with something that they eventually get to put on an actual table. I think we could see a pretty strong 3rd edition going at it that way.

Anyhow, just a few thoughts. To me the real longer term promise of an online A&A project would be something like that. And why I get exicted about things like possible toolsets or map/scenario editors.

Some visuals for ideas. A map redraft for G40 would be cool I think.

In that one I added Aden to Br. Somaliland. Sakhalin with a false connection between Japan/USSR on that border. Basra Qatar and Trucial coast I thought could just be added to part of E. Persia’s tile, like if trying to keep all the same game tiles without actually adding new ones. Falklands to Brazil as Pro Allies sorta works that way as well. Like still on the team at least. I mean without having to change the defined connections, but just cosmetically to flesh it out. I put Sierra Leone in the mix since that got the nod, added the Ascension Islands to it. Azores to Gibraltar maybe? (bit of an anachronism but seemed reasonable) or stuff like that where it wouldn’t effect the gameplay per se, but just adds more zone and spots for the bombers to land I guess lol.

Mats and markers for Purchase or DOW aids might be cool. Or similarly, one to track Objectives or VCs or Tech Advances more conveniently. Sorta like these screens, but a physical version, maybe all on a single large sheet so it’s handy. Income Counter same deal, separated from the map would be my preference.

I also still enjoy Revised and the older boards from time to time. It’d be cool to see optional rules in the new manuals to bring them in line with the newer ones. Like the cost of tanks or how AAguns work maybe. Something in that direction. Still a fan of the digital angle too, clearly hehe.

It’d be cool to see a bunch of boards bundled together that way, especially the smaller tactical boards, so we could have different campaigns launching from the same spot. That would be fun.

A digital version with a way to customize the look or general vibe is something I’d be interested in for sure, since tastes vary so widely. Anyhow just quick heavy bomber. I’ll be excited to see what they cook up.

Took me a while to realize this thread was in HR now. I guess that’s cool, anything goes here I suppose haha. Still my first big suggestion is to be consistent with what constitutes a Re-Issue/Re-Print vs a new "Edition’ (or if there is even a worthwhile distinction there) vs an entirely new game which properly should get a new Title.

For me this boils down to whether or not the update/revision can be handled by just updating the manual (e.g. the rules, or the set up cards) vs requiring major changes to other contents inside the box.

If the map does change (beyond cosmetics) like adding new territories and new sea zones, or adjusted connections/boundaries, that’s a new game and it should have a new name. If entirely new unit sculpts are added, that game should get a new title to reflect this, since it’s a very big change. Basically anything that breaks backwards compatibility with an already existing board, or which makes a previous release of that board obsolete.

You know what I mean, like if all I have to do is download a pdf of the new manual with new tech rules that’s one thing, but if I’m required to have a new map and new sculpts that’s a rather different thing. If the only changes are to the rules for existing stuff, or new unit set up cards for existing stuff, or if the changes to the map are only cosmetic, (like a new look and feel, but otherwise all the same TTs/connections) then that release should be a new “Edition” of the previous game’s same name.

Sadly these conventions have not been very consistent in the past, and so I think there is a fair bit of confusion regarding the whole ‘which edition?’ thing. This is part of the reason why I think they should drop the concept of editions for anything which should properly be considered sequels and instead give those new titles. I would look to the conventions adopted in Book publishing for guidance here. If the manual is being re-iussed, and only that, then a 2nd or 3rd edition printing under the same Name makes sense to me. If it goes much beyond that, then it should get a new Title/subtitle, or else some qualifier there like “Revised” or “Advanced” or “Anniversary” or some season/year whatever, to make that really obvious. I think anyway, but I’m pretty sure that ship has sailed already hehe.

It’s definitely a fair point. The unit bloat thing. Here’s an amusing example… shows a standard roster, then tech advances, then expansion type unit concepts I’ve seen floated. This set is generic based on Frostion’s with some additions I added, but gives a quick impression. Cause like many different graphics are required, just to handle the same unit, but in a different state of play. With physical sculpts you’d chip it or flip it, but for the digital version gives an idea of how things start to compound pretty quickly hehe.

I think another alternative to having multiple unit types, is to have cosmetic alts, which could be used in that way, but which could also just service the regular play. This is basically what we get when they vary the sculpts (like what equipment they use for the molds) for units in the smaller boards or satellite games. Or then just a cursory look at HBG shows that there’s probably a demand for something along those lines. So basically instead of paratroopers or marines as a set unit, you just have a handful of sculpts within the infantry box that could be used for these different concepts.

Or same deal for fighter aircraft or artillery or tanks or ship types. I don’t know, say for every dozen regular units you get a couple specialty alts of the same basic sort but a different riff. Very similar to the way they sell the plastic army men as toys. You know with a bazooka dude, and a paratrooper looking dude, an officer with a sidearm, that sort of deal. Basically a grab bag approach, in terms of what they include, but where each alt fits a certain niche that could be expanded. Or not, depending on how into that the player is lol. Since the equipment types Nation to Nation already feature pretty different looking sculpts, it’s not that big of a stretch to imagine the standard unit boxes having a few variants, but still using the same hue for their tints. Probably the expense goes up with more molds, but still, it would provide a lot of options for a look and feel vibe, without necessarily needing a ton of extra unit interactions or new rules per se.

Yeah I really like the idea of the whole med too, honestly. I noticed when trying to find a closer crop, that anytime I tried to zoom in further, it felt pretty claustrophobic and I wanted to scroll beyond the edge, like ‘wait - why stop here?’ Lol

I think I’m too used to seeing maps of the full Med to really get past that. Also it’d be a nice touch for new Roman empire ambitions, even if that ship had already sailed by the likely start date. This would be the board where Italy really makes sense as a player nation to me, like the reason to justify the existence of all those sculpts. Whereas in AA50 and Global, it’s more of a stretch to get them in the mix in a satisfying way. I think a somewhat larger board than the previous tactical games, so they could do the full stretch from Casablanca to Beirut would be pretty cool!

This one shows a fair bit of distortion. Europe was already warped/enlarged, so you can see Spain is a bit beefy from trying to make France/Normandy larger lol, which wouldn’t really be needed for a board with the Med focus. The other side of the Med is more compressed than it’d need to be here. But basically taking the rough G40 divisions for the TTs and SZs, and then subdividing some of those again, like 2, 3, maybe 4 times? Just to get a sufficient number of tiles and a dynamic playpattern going. Stretch-rotate or crop in tighter at the top, like right at Marseille/Milan/Istria, with an transalpine cut at the Po, but aiming to get the whole med in there somehow, with a lot more Sea Zones than shown below, clearly… hehe.

Sneakily foreshadowing a Stalingrad follow up by showing a bit of the Balkans? The theme could still be Torch, but something with a theater wide view on the Med would offer a lot of options if it crept on the margins a bit.

I dig the anti tank and sp artillery idea too! I played a D10 game that had them in the roster and they were fun. This scenario would be a cool one to see a jeep, and an infantry gun, and self propelled artillery. Perhaps an Armor advance towards the end where some even more boss tank types first come online. An apt scenario to do a heavy armor unlock or something.

This one has a lot of promise! More than the reprints/re-issues, with the ‘North Africa’ game we’ll really get to see what Renegade’s bringing to the table. I’m excited to check it out!

Ps. Random aside, but there were something like what, 10 million horses deployed in WW2 just by Germany and the USSR alone? I don’t know that we ever get that in our WW2 set piece sweeps. Except for the opening of the film Fury I guess lol. Might be cool to see one for some kind of general/logistics type bonus sculpt, where we can imagine him headed up the mountains towing a big gun in the endgame hehe.

pps.

Basically just blowing out the regional theaters of the Europe 1940 board, and doing each with a bunch more TT/SZ tiles. Maybe you put them all together like Voltron for the ultimate A&AE advanced board.

If they did the stretch on Europe a little different so you could make one larger board from the smaller theater scale maps.

Here’s an example using Turner’s, but imagining the stretch/warp so that center dividing line is more like the Rome Berlin Axis, doing the squish and pull for a nice spread.

Also, I’m curious, if they’re targeting a 2024 release date, if they already have the game basically roughed out in concept form? Like if they’re already alpha testing and play balancing something? I wish they’d use tripleA for that, like at least for an informal in-house testing type thing for their design team peeps. It could be done with a fairly quick turn around I’d imagine. Digital playtesting is pretty fast. They could probably clock triple the number of test games during the same period, even if it was closed playtesting for just their employees or whatever. It’s a cool tool, and something the A&A community sorta organically willed into existence with just the heart and love of the game, but it hasn’t really been used before for a real alpha test of a new game I don’t think. Although that would be kinda rad. Like it’s basically the role the thing was designed to play, as a map/game creator’s resource to trial the rough drafts. They could use the map creator tools to create a quickie templet, then use that to iterate in alpha. They don’t need to publish it that way, but they could test it like that. Since they can alter board states via edit and save stuff out locally.

Have Beamdog do the polished version with the UI that peeps are used to from A&AO with all the branding for the competitive digital play, after the honeymoon launch/CON FtF period, but by holding a digital AP run before the physical product goes to the actual printers, they could see if there are any big issues and shore em up way early. Like long before it hits the presses, after which point revisions have to be issued via errata. Just do the FtF and digital testing concurrently in-house to catch the breakers and shore it up. They could do that basically soon as they got their map ideas and unit roster ideas dialed. Like just pick someone on the team and have em learn the quickie creator tools to do the xml stuff hehe. Wouldn’t look as pretty, but it would work for the alpha drafting at least, presumably with rules similar to what we’ve seen up to the G40 level. Probably a pipe dream, like normal trend seems to be the opposite direction, but still, maybe Renegade will go renegade, and actually lean into it for a change? That would be so cool! Worth mentioning at least

Sounds cool!

Also, keeping with the theme of watching the first half of the film Patton hehe… a cool way to handle the endgame would be Sicily, Southern Italy or even the liberation of Rome. So instead of just Torch and North Africa, which would start with a lot of Vichy touch and go, and end with Axis being ejected from Tunisia/Libya I guess, the game could keep going to Husky into 1943 for the finale? A proper Sand and Sea campaign for the larger med theater, with some naval action and the big amphib landings as the capper.

Basically the later Stalingrad/Eastern front board could dovetail on this one as the follow up, since the two campaigns would have a bit of overlap in the timeline. Instead of Axis winning by taking Cairo, Axis ‘victory’ could be achieved more by just pushing out the Allied liberation of Rome. Allies win by bringing the hammer down and taking the bottom of the boot. I think that’d be fun!

Guess it just depends on the overall scale of the game, but to me that would make sense for a theater map. Basically left side of the board at Gibraltar/Morocco, right side Greece/Crete/Egypt clipping at Sardinia/Naples/Rome for the top of the Board, desert at the bottom. Then we got some decent room for the back and forth and a thrilling conclusion that scratches the itch with a dramatic finish. Before breaking out the next one in the series hehehe.

Ps. Another suggestion, which is more for the art direction. Try to include within the graphics or manual illustrations a Vera May Atkins type for a French Resistance espionage angle. Rosie the Riviter for a home front munitions liberty ship production type thing. Rita Hayworth and Vera Lynn for the USO inspiring the troops. A badass nurse like Juliette Binoche in the English patient. Just something in the collage montage artwork to bring that element into it. Not like a Lady Luck, or Victoria type tutorial advisor, but more in-theme like the real deal. Code breakers, patch me in ops. Obviously those suggestion tilt towards Allies Hollywood nostlagia, but I think that’s to the good. Hire Becca Scott back on too, and keep that tutorial video series going. Shades of Casablanca noir in the embellishments on the margins. Like just a full 1942 sweep for that. I think that would be nice to see in a theater campaign board with this setting and timeline.

For a board crop, maybe something like this?

I compressed the one from the encyclopedia for a narrower width, but that sort of spread, like on the Med highlight I mean. Could come in a bit tighter on the sides and clipping the bottom fifth off at the desert for the tighter focus along the coast.

Then abstracted and bulked out a bit for housing the sculpts, with Sicily more in the middle for the endgame (center board), but still maintaining some room for a naval game, with peripherals for the stage in. Compress it back down to 1:2 aspect for the table once the TTs are beefed up, so you get a similar view, but a bit wider again after it’s dialed for the unit housing.

Plenty of space at the bottom left and top left/right for a couple inset graphics. One for each side maybe? Or blown out a bit further to carve stuff up a bit more. Just for the decorative embellishments, you could put that stuff in neutral Turkey or Spain, or the Algerian stretch of the Sahara. I think something like that would be pretty rad. Anyhow just a quick riff haha

I can imagine it where the narrows in Libya, that’s your main choke point, where the line is only 1 tile deep, and the stuff on either side is like your sliding deadzone that changes hands back and forth early on. For Algeria, Tunisa, Egypt have some coastal tiles worth a bit more, but then some interior 'desert; tiles worth less, but which can allow for maneuvering and breakthroughs. The larger islands split up a bit, and same with southern Italy. USA concentrated more on the left out of Algeria/Oran in that corner, UK on the right out of Egypt, like for seats at the table. And they’re trying to meet at the middle and converge in Libya for a springboard. Axis in the middle (seats at the top of the table), trying to hold the wedge at the center.

For Germany, maybe it kicks off with a Tunisian stronghold or a way to paratroop in early on, but always with that tension in the background, ‘like should we really keep feeding units into Tunisia/Libya?’ with the added challenge of guarding Greece and Crete in the backfield, which could be a swing zone. Or same with Sardinia and Sicily vs the main defense of Italy tension. A more abstract tile near the top could serve as a German mobilization point in Italy itself, like troops coming in from N. Italy and France, or over the Alps or being diverted over from Greece. Then you could get something going where Axis try to race to Cairo initially, but if that fails (likely), then it’s a question of when exactly to pull back from Tunisia/Libya in order to prepare the final defense of Southern Italy. Having that as the big mid-game timing decision.

A North Africa board I think has the potential to be a bit more naval amphib oriented, which would be fun to see in a campaign scale game. Could probably still fit quite a few tiles in the Med and really break up the North African coastline and Sicily so there’s a few ways in for both sides. Couple fulcrums for the balance to hinge on.

For a new unit/sculpt, the paratrooper or air transport would be thematic (especially for Axis in this period), which could be introduced here and then really come into play for the follow up Market Garden. Similarly an Army Base unit that either side can use to try and establish toeholds, as a ground base parallel to the Naval Base or Air Base of G40. Some different way to mobilize units that gets around the concept of an IC with something a bit more flexible for this theater, like a logistics hub. A bunker/pillbox fortification unit could work as well, similar to the old ones, just reintroduced. Or a Command unit, where instead of a Strategic Bomber, we get something with similar stats/movement, but which functions more like a general commanding the forces. That could be fun for this one, since it kinda fits the mold with the big personalities.

The tactical bombers of G40 would seem like a better fit than the Strat Bs of 1942 sec edition for the big guns in the air and bombing. An air transport role for the Strat Bs here, instead of a heavy combat role, could work well. Also the Mech would be nice to have for this one. Not sure what they’d choose for a full unit spread, but it’d be cool if they staged in some concepts here too, so the jump from 1942 to Global 1940 in terms of roster/rules complexity can be tutorialized and introduced in stages via the more focused campaign scale boards.

I’m glad to see these back in print!!! I pine for 3rd editions for 1942 and G40 with A3 panels that stack, but I will take it for sure hehe.

I kinda got my hopes set on North Africa honestly. Like don’t get me wrong, firing up a Bridge too Far for Market Garden sounds fun. Or going all Enemy at the Gates Eastern Front or Stalingrad has appeal as well, although current events might have that last a bit charged. One reason I like North Africa is cause it kinda syncs up nicely with the 1942 starter board, whereas the others would feel a bit further along in the timeline of the war. Starting earlier for a tactical board might be cool, cause if they decide on releasing the others later, they could just do it chronologically. North Africa/Med first, then Stalingrad/Eastern front (could maybe be the same game right?) for the end of 2023. Then for 2024 an updated D-Day/Market Garden campaign and have that one hit on the 80 year anniversary. That would be a nice touch

Rigid map panels at A3 (like the paper size) would be pretty clutch. I mean it’s the name in the name right? haha

I just think that’d be a great way to present this stuff, like the OED or the Encyclopedia Britannica, except all emblazoned with A&A on the binding.

Maybe some of that cool filigree in the embossing, something fancy like that. I’d really go for a map ‘book’ that recalls the 1940s, like a period piece. Keep the badass cover artwork obviously, but instead of doing a highgloss D20-RPG style sourcebook, have it look more old school.

Top Secret mission dossier. Flat folder, maybe with a string to wrap it closed perhaps? hehe Just that kind of look. I think the box that holds the sculpts should also present like something you’d want to leave out on the shelf as well, rather than sticking in a storage closet or under the bed or wherever. Stuff that looks great for marketing on the shelf in a store, sometimes not quite as slick once you got it home. Especially if you have half a dozen already hehe. If the box was more cubic in shape and designed to hold all the plastic sculpts and pylons, dice, chips, towers, perhaps leave one plane of that box more plain lookin? You know instead of having the graphic flare lighting up on all 6 sides of the cube, leave 1 plane of the box that looks more simple, so that side can face out too.

Then sell the maps separately as campaign books. I prefer rigid panels to rolled mats. I have many mailer tubes and poster tubes, but these things live under beds or in the garage or in closets. If the maps stored more like a book I think it be would a lot easier to justify swooping yet more and more, or pushing them out in smaller editions.

Like you keep the starter set big-box edition in print much longer, but the add on maps can be printed in runs. Like do one every couple years even, tournament time, like the Olympics ya know. Keep the torch burning like that. Then we could collect them like Records. Fav album covers, that sort of present.

ps. one last idea for boxing, this may sound nuts, but organize the sculpts into boxes by unit type, rather than nation/tint color. All infantry of all colors in one box. All tanks of all colors in one box etc. It’s easier to fish by color than by type. It’s just as easy to clear the board for casualties when the units go back by type rather than color. I think players follow the convention of sorting units by color/nation because that was how it’s been done. But if the convention was switched in the initial packaging I think that method of unit storage makes the game faster to play, and easier to pick up.

Instead of the national set up cards drawn on the unit boxes, these boxes might have a larger graphics of each nation’s sculpt/equipment type with some details about it. The attack/def cost values of that unit on the box. When units die and need to be returned to the box, or purchased and need to be fished from the box, if these are already sorted by unit type, it’s very easy to just find your own color among the 6 others. Whereas if you have to dig around in your all-one-colored tray to fish by type this takes a fair bit longer. It’s worth trying if you never have before.

I have a giant box with all my smaller A&A games in their boxes. It’s almost too heavy to lift! haha

Takes up like an entire shelf in the closet. The boxes alone command a fair bit of space in cubic footage, just to store in your home as an enthusiast. Like it’s a lot to lug around too lol.

If the map board itself was broken into rigid sections, then these could be stored in something like a flat folder rather than a giant box. I don’t know some kind of decorative mission dossier looking thing.

With a slimmer attack profile than a box that’s like 4 inches tall but really beefy in the width/length. Envisioned more as a long haul map protector, flip display maybe. The kind of thing you can get with the bigger initial purchase, but then when newer maps are released they can just sell those as stand alone products that ship separate and slip into the collector’s case once they’re at home.

Instead of a folding map or a rolling mat, you’d get a series of rigid panels, say A3 but you lay them together. Basically aiming for something that doesn’t fold but stacks. Then the weight/sizing would be similar to a book rather than a board game box, and you could embellish it more in that way. Sturdier materials for the panels, or a standard slip protector that just comes with the thing initially. Perhaps doing prints on the obverse too so that each panel can do double duty. As collectors you’d be collecting the maps separately and treating them more like comic books or something I guess. Separate from the units for any expansion campaigns, so the cost isn’t too high there.

Instead of the expense going way up when you get more into the hobby and more advanced in the rules, the purchases would be more constant price, since it’d basically just be updated for the latest manual and map panels. The latter could also have display appeal probably. You know, like you have one box for your units like a cool themed kit box or wooden-looking crate to house the sculpts and dice, then a folder that holds the maps (or any future maps) with some room to spare. Doing this you could issue maps, and not necessarily need new editions or rules for those maps, it could just be like cosmetic updates and new looks periodically, switching the style to service different aesthetics.

Of course pushing out new maps with different connections as you scale up would be a lot of fun, and easier to pull off that too. I still think your starter box needs to have the basics, and be at a price point that’s sensible. If Zombies is 30 bucks at a big box store, then I guess that’s our entry level. If there’s a big scale up (advanced set with more sculpts) that costs another 30 bucks, but isn’t just duplicating what’s in box 1, that makes sense to me. As you push out into tactical boards and combo advanced maps like a G40, they could probably just sell the maps alone keep the price point reasonable and go for more collector appeal with that.

I don’t know seems like it might work. The boxes for these games are quite large right now. The 1940 boxes are large and in charge no doubt, and the giant AA50 I have sitting on it’s side on top a bookshelf cause it’s the only place I could fit the thing in my apartment. It would be really nice if these games could somehow rest conveniently on a regular bookcase, within a more standard sized shelf. AA50’s map panels would only be what like 8x10 inches if they were separated rather than folded? The box by comparison is pretty massive, in terms of the length I mean. And you know that last mile they’re sticking it in an even larger box to ship, just to keep the edges from denting heheh.

Something much taller but more compact in the length, taking up more space vertically but not as long/wide would be ideal. That would be a nice upgrade to how these things are sold. Nobody would want to discard a box to a game once they have it, but if it didn’t need a box to begin with, or only 1 box, that might pretty cool.

I imagine it looking more like a multi volume book collection or a fancy Encyclopedia when the maps are stacked all together on the shelf. They’d ship/present more like books than half a dozen larger board game boxes, if that makes sense. But then you open them and have the panels ready to rock.

Rigid Panels are better than folding cardboard or mats in my view, if only because they make it way easier to move the game once it’s set. Like if you have to carry the thing to another room or whatever. Otherwise you need a much larger rigid backing or have to lift the whole table lol. Rigid map panels could also stack on top of each other with pylons at the corners, so that the game can be stored while still set more easily. The pylons you’d keep in your unit box with all the rest of the kit. The manuals and maps would be in the slimmer book/dossiers type format, so you could keep 'em together all neatly in a row.

Some visuals for ideas. A map redraft for G40 would be cool I think.

In that one I added Aden to Br. Somaliland. Sakhalin with a false connection between Japan/USSR on that border. Basra Qatar and Trucial coast I thought could just be added to part of E. Persia’s tile, like if trying to keep all the same game tiles without actually adding new ones. Falklands to Brazil as Pro Allies sorta works that way as well. Like still on the team at least. I mean without having to change the defined connections, but just cosmetically to flesh it out. I put Sierra Leone in the mix since that got the nod, added the Ascension Islands to it. Azores to Gibraltar maybe? (bit of an anachronism but seemed reasonable) or stuff like that where it wouldn’t effect the gameplay per se, but just adds more zone and spots for the bombers to land I guess lol.

Mats and markers for Purchase or DOW aids might be cool. Or similarly, one to track Objectives or VCs or Tech Advances more conveniently. Sorta like these screens, but a physical version, maybe all on a single large sheet so it’s handy. Income Counter same deal, separated from the map would be my preference.

I also still enjoy Revised and the older boards from time to time. It’d be cool to see optional rules in the new manuals to bring them in line with the newer ones. Like the cost of tanks or how AAguns work maybe. Something in that direction. Still a fan of the digital angle too, clearly hehe.

It’d be cool to see a bunch of boards bundled together that way, especially the smaller tactical boards, so we could have different campaigns launching from the same spot. That would be fun.

A digital version with a way to customize the look or general vibe is something I’d be interested in for sure, since tastes vary so widely. Anyhow just quick heavy bomber. I’ll be excited to see what they cook up.

Sounds exciting!

For the Battle boards, I’d like to see something with materials that could also be used in Global.

I have Bulge, D-Day and Guadalcanal, but honestly they’re all just collecting dust in my closet lol. Same deal with the Europe and Pacific 2001. None of my friends who still game ftf seem particularly interested in revisiting these titles. So unless I was raiding them for HR sculpts, I haven’t really had a reason to even open the boxes in years. Bit of bummer there, since they got some charm, those games, but I think it’s because the smaller battle/theater boards are pretty self contained. I use the blockhouses I guess, and some of the cards are nice, but again not a top choice ftf. I get more requests to play Classic or Revised, if people want to stroll memory lane. Full disclosure, I’ve also never had any requests to play just Europe 1940 or just Pacific 1940 ftf, so there’s that as well. Sorta like "let’s go all weekend - or bust!’ with the combined Global game totally eclipsing the two constituant Theater games for that one.

This leads me to think that any new Battle Board really needs to justify itself with some unique sculpts or something, cause that’s a big draw. I’m struggling to think of anything they could put out that I wouldn’t end up buying, cause I always do lol, but then I think I’m pretty obsessed with A&A, so probably not the best yardstick. What I enjoy is a box that can be raided, with extras for the big one. But then there’s the challenge that the smaller boards have fewer factions, so it’s harder to get a complete roster.

Perhaps sculpts for Air and Naval bases? Or facility units of that sort, which are more generic/universal. Basically the stuff that doesn’t need a national tint for the colored plastic, so they can be used in other games?

Not a real answer I suppose heheh

But yeah, always good to hear of new stuff on the horizon. It’s been a hot minute! Haha

Look forward to seeing what they cook up!

Hope you guys are well and happy holidays! I haven’t posted here in a few weeks, but I was kicking around on tripleA and making bunkers and whatnot lol.

Here is set of units for use in TripleA…

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pqkn53r1vzjj467/units.7z?dl=0

They can be used with the current WWII Global 1940 map, like that’s how I did the labelling in the folders, but they’re at 54px so kinda oversized there with Bung’s centers. I use them at like 75% unit view which helps with the crowding. On the new G40 map, which is a fair bit larger, they’ll display at 125%. But anyhow, just in case anyone wanted to use them in the meantime on the regular map, figured I’d drop them here as well.

And then here is the crazy super zoom map we’ve been toying around with, painted up with a rough 1941 blocking… I did a quick label key which I’m currently typing out to take it through the tile busting utilities. Squashed a couple typos already lol, but gives a sense for that one. The playscale there is aimed more at computer bouts or like solo vs hardAI.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v4883h0aed6c5q7/Domination_1941_painted_labels_with_sz_key.png?dl=0

We can always revisit the sea zone colors and such. Doing a broken line doesn’t really work for the base, but it could be added in the relief. My hope is for custom Sz colors that can be changed in the map properties with a HEX designation, the same way it works with TT ownership colors. So that way players can change the blue to suit their tastes. This one just shows the generic Classic blue from the web palette, but ideally the player could change it to the water color they like best. I also want to do the same for the black/white border line.

Anyhow, that’s what I’ve been up to. The regular Global materials are pretty much ready to go, so hopefully in the new year we can get that one up. Catch you guys next round!