@AcesWild5049 said in Classic rules, and some disagreements.:
It should be “feature requested” as it is a clearly defined out-of-box rule. AAA is perpetually running on a “house-rules” variant of Classic without it.
Again, I would say “2nd Edition”, not just “Classic”.
How about if the armours would defend at 3 instead of 2? Would having armour at defence 2 be a feature request? I think that when something doesn’t work as it should, that is a bug, not a missing feature, especially when you cannot even have the game working as intended by following the rules yourself.
In any case, go ahead posting the matter in here, if @redrum actually believes this is a feature request (got no answer so far):
The only thing I’ve pointed out about this matter is that you should not simply say this is a Classic rule, because if, then, a developer would apply it for Classic in general, 3rd edition games would get it too, which would be bad (you can see by yourself that, at least in TripleA, 3rd edition is called Classic).
@djensen renamed this section as “Axis & Allies Classic” (it was called “Axis & Allies 2nd Edition”, or something like that, in the old forum, I recall), that I think it is going to be confusing (we have a good example right here). I suggested to name it “Axis & Allies (Classic) 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” or “Axis & Allies 1st/2nd/3rd Edition” (just adding “Classic” between parenthesis or in the description), but this has been already discussed here:
Calling it the current way would have been fine if the description would have been something like:
Includes MB Gamemaster Series 1st and 2nd editions, and the two Hasbro Interactive (CD-ROM) 3rd Edition.
or like it is called in the official Larry Harris forum:
Original Axis & Allies 1984-2004
(though this is rather vague, or surely not very clear)
but I see it currently is:
The original MB Gamemaster Series game from 1984-2004
that is substantially a wrong description, as long as @Krieghund or anybody can confirm the 3rd edition is Classic too, as I believe it is, and those are not part of the Gamemaster Series.
Here is my rationale and an example of when and where it can matter on turn 1 (starts at 8:14): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_u_mOFTcQA&t=511s
I don’t understand your comment about defending submarines.
I’ve watched and listened to all that video, and it seems you missed the most important item related to column rolling.
Simple example: without Russia Restricted, if you are attacking the Baltic Sea with 1 submarine and any number of fighters, your fighters may be completely safe for that combat round, while in TripleA you will have a quite scary 1/18 probability to lose a precious fighter.
On top of that, TripleA is actually not even consistently rolling all dice at the same time, as you can test that defending submarines are rolled and assigned before any other defending units.
So, yeah, TripleA distorces the rules with this wrong implementation of 2nd edition rolling, giving an advantage to the Axis by discouraging the attack on the Balic Sea, or making it a little less effective and efficient.
On the other hand, I partially disagree that what would happen in your example around the Hawaii is that much of a game changer. Considering all cases in which you are in the situation of the attacking carrier not hitting, the attacking submarine not hitting, and the two attacking fighters scoring 1 hit, if, then, the two battleships both hit, it doesn’t matter what you selected as casualty before, as you will lose all your defending units (I’m sure no disagreement here, of course). If, in the same situation, only one of the two attacking battleships hit, deciding whether to take out the submarine or not before or after they do makes no difference, as, in this case, you should always not take the submarines as casualty, and the same applies to the case of both battleships missing. In any possible cases in which the attacker scores 1 or more hits, in that situation, it seems clear to me that taking the submarine last as casualty is always the best choice. If, then, you would have only taken the carrier as casualty, and both battleships miss, you can consider not retreating the submarine if you score 3 hits on defence, but you should always retreat the submarine if you only score 1 or 2 hits (that is the average, you would consider upon taking casualties, no matter if with or without column rolling). But I would agree that may have a small role if, instead, you would be in a condition in which the attacking force is weaker than in your case, either because you sent a little less than you did or because you had a very unlucky first combat round in wich the attacker missed every hits and the defender hit enough to suggest not retreating the submarine already, but waiting at least one more combat round (but this is very unlikely to happen).
But I agree that this rule might keep coming up over the course of the entire game, giving some subtle advantage to the attacker.
This also means that TripleA is bugged for 3rd edition too, albeit in a different way, and despite the fact that it factually works fine by Classic 3rd edition rules if you have defending transports and subarines, but not if you have defending submarines and anything else but transports.
@Krieghund can you please confirm this is what it is supposed to happen:
If you have 1 submarine and 1 fighter attacking 1 transport and 1 submarine, if the attacking submarine misses and both defending units hit:
- In 1st/2nd edition, you only lose the attacking submarine, as long as the attacking player doesn’t take a fighter as casualty when the transport hits (that would be absolutely idiotic).
- In 3rd edition, you lose both attacking units (you are not permitted to do the trick of assigning the transport’s hit to the submarine, thus being unable to assign the submarine’s hit to anything else).
If the above is true, I’m curious what is the implied intended rule for assigning defensive submarines and others hits (say, if you would be playing by 3rd edition rules on a board). Should defending submarines hits be assigned before anything else or should you assign them at the same time, but taking care to lose the maximum number of units you can (I know in practice both would work the same)?
Also, I found a download for Classic 3rd Edition here:
Is it true that this game is now “abandonware”, and does that mean that it can be legally freely distributed and downloaded/installed (I have no idea; just noticing that site is offering it for free)?
p.s.: Regarding attacking the Baltic Sea on round 1, it should also be remembered that 3rd edition rules add the “Submerge” rule (effective as default, but optable out, as any other 2nd-to-3rd editions changes), making unworthwhile attacking that sea zone with 2 Russian units (better either sending both units in the North Sea or sending only the submarine to the Baltic Sea).