After replaying it on slow speed, it appears that they are using dice as aircraft range markers and bomb damage. I hadn’t thought of using dice for range markers but it makes sense. More practical than using cardboard chits.
Posts made by IdaRed
-
RE: Time Lapse Video: Axis & Allies 1942 SE Tournament Finals at Gen Con 2015 - Etiq
-
Time Lapse Video: Axis & Allies 1942 SE Tournament Finals at Gen Con 2015 - Etiq
What is the purpose of the dice the players would sometimes place on a territory or the board throughout the game? They appear to be markers of some sort.
Referring to the 1942 SE time lapse video posted on the home page of A&A.org here.
-
RE: Neutral Color Schemes
Beautiful! Thanks for posting the pictures. I may try some of both options using the mono-scheme as my back up.
-
RE: Converting AA42 into AA50
Doing it yourself can be cost effective if a game is OOP and sells for a steep premium like AA50. Otherwise, yes, it is almost always more cost effective to simply buy the in-print game. Doing it yourself is great if you enjoy the hobby of crafting something or want something unique. But it’s not a way to save money.
-
Neutral Color Schemes
Anyone have a color scheme or reference for the armed forces of the neutrals? Anyone paint their neutrals anything other than a solid color?
I am trying to decide if it would be nice to have the neutrals painted their own scheme or if it would be distracting and hard to tell apart.
-
RE: Expanding on Units - New and OOB Types
There were quite a few escort carriers built during the war. Their mission was to provide convoys with air cover to defend against subs and minor air threats. They were too minor to be included in the big picture of the OOB games but if you’re adding naval units they should be included.
Mentioned in the cruiser thread were armored carriers. The British built their carriers that way and the main penalty was a smaller air complement which diminished their primary armament (compared to USN and IJN) but was nice to have when hit. I suggest making armored carriers 2 or 3 hit but carry 1 less air unit to offset.
Something you could use to distinguish battleships would be to let them fire first in a round of combat, like subs.
-
RE: Cruiser Idea
I think adding AAA capability to the cruiser appears to be easier to balance than lowering the cost. Value of the unit can be adjusted by varying the number of AAA shots. Lowering the cost in addition to AAA seems to throw off the value of the DD and BB. Lowering the Offshore Bombardment of a cruiser to 2 makes sense thematically and might be a good way to go, but I think OOB rules left it at 3 to KISS.
-
RE: A simple anti-stacking rule
I thought limiting builds to the IPC value of the territory or Major and Minor IC were elegant solutions. They have a similar effect without complicating things.
At the high level of abstraction of A&A, limits don’t make much sense. I’ve always viewed units as all being variations of the same thing. For example, Tanks are elite mechanized divisons with generous numbers of half-tracks and trucks for the infantry and a larger than normal allocation of armor and artillery. Infantry units would be the infantry heavy formations with smaller proportions of armor, artillery and motor vehicles. In WWII tanks were rare (compared to modern armies) and most infantry walked. Another reason why I don’tr think elite units are appropriate in A&A (even though I agree they are cool) as they already exist in the form of the tank unit.
The destroyer issue is a good point but it really works itself out in that DD are the most cost effective naval units and thus there is already an incentive to buy lots without adding rules.
If you really want such a rule, I like the per IC limit much better than an overall limit.
-
RE: Victory Cities
My OP was referring to AA42–I didn’t explicitly mention because I had posted in that subforum but the Mods moved the post here. :?
I understand exactly what you mean about calling it after Moscow falls–we usually do the same.
So is a minor victory scenario any fun to play? The “minor victory” conditions in the rulebook seem odd since capturing 3 VC would mean the axis have to take Leningrad, Calcutta and one more—probably Moscow or Honolulu. Moscow falls in line with what everyone is saying, BUT Honolulu? Seems like an odd VC choice.
-
RE: Victory Cities
Thank you, good question. I knew what I was trying to ask but did not convey that clearly in my original post and poll.
I revised the poll question. What I meant was do people play with the victory conditions set out in the rulebook or some sort of house rules?
-
Victory Cities
I’m curious if anyone out there is using the victory cities either as they are OOB or for their own house rules?
-
RE: -A Painting Tutorial and Resource for A&A Global-
For those of you who apply primer before painting your miniatures, are you using cans of spray paint like Krylon or the brush on kind like those sold by Vallejo and others? If you’ve used both what is your preference or pros and cons of each?
-
RE: Victory Cities
I have no idea what this poll is about but voted USA because it sounded good.
-
RE: Order of play rule confusion
Can land units retreat as in can they do what naval units can do and retreat into any territory that those units attacked from?
Yes, all land units retreat into one territory from which at least one attacking unit came from.
Can they choose to keep attacking or retreat at the end of every combat step phase or just after the first?
Follow the steps in order. The attacker can choose to retreat in Step 6 of every round of combat. In other words, after the defender fires and all casualties are removed, the attacker decides if he wants to return to step 1 or retreat per Condition B of step 6
It says that land units and naval units use the same rules as air units after successful combats so does that mean that infantry can’t retreat because of them only having one move?
See answer to your first question. No, if the attacker retreats then an infantry will technically move 2 spaces, into the territory during combat movement phase and then during the combat phase as a retreat.
Also can multiple units Attack territory from different territories? Absolutely. Follow Turn Sequence. All units in a territory with enemy units conduct combat during the Conduct Combat phase. Units from one territory can move into multiple territories; units from territories can move into a single space to conduct combat.
-
RE: Rolling hits and taking casualties or Planes vs Subs
I was hoping you would show up Krieg, with some official answers. Yeah, I’m being a little bit of a rules lawyer here but making the rules clear is important. Pull up the 2nd edition rulebook and look at page 17, Step 3. It specifically states to roll all units with the same attack values together and to assign hits up to the maximum legal targets. Roll your eyes if you like–go ahead–but I think a small caveat should be included in that first paragraph. FWIW.
Thanks for the official answer, reading the rulebook late I night gave me second thoughts about how we had always played it.
-
Rolling hits and taking casualties or Planes vs Subs
During combat phase we have always rolled separately for units that require special rules. e.g. aircraft and subs when no destroyer is present. We just assumed that was how it should be or maybe we learned that in another game. While reading through the rulebook, I just noticed that that is not how it works if you read it literally. The rulebook actually says to roll for all units with the same combat value and then assign hits up to the maximum possible. It says nothing about rolling separately for ships and aircraft. Am I reading that correctly?
In other words, if I have a battleship, cruiser, 2 fighters and a bomber attacking an enemy battleship and 2 submarines, I can roll 3d6 and 2d6 without worrying about whether it was my ships or planes that hit as long as the number of hits do not exceed the number of eligible attackers. So when I roll 3d6 and roll 3 3’s, the defender has to take his BB and 1 sub since the planes could not hit the second sub. But if I only rolled one hit, then the defender could choose any unit as a casualty because it could have been my cruiser which scored the hit, regardless of which dice it was. Right?
-
RE: Limits on the number of groupings for each unit?
In the 1984 version of the game (Milton Bradley) you were limited to the pieces in the game. Looks like they managed to find a copy of the old rule book online. Nothing more than trivia though at this point.
-
RE: HBG Mini Questions
Thanks for the input John and Marc. The differences Marc mentioned do matter to me as I am somewhat obsessive about details. I suspect I will end up a piece junkie eventually as well as I’ve always liked miniatures and model building. I’m not going to be painting my newer pieces anytime soon. I am very tempted to start practicing on the older pieces first and work my way to the newer sculpts when I am satisfied with my skill level. I actually got interested in painting game minis by a friend after he showed me his Battlelore set. He showed me how just a little bit of paint–even a basic paint job–could make a mini so much more appealing and more fun to game with. I’ve been really impressed with the painted minis posted in this forum.
I need to sit down and budget out minis. I think I am leaning toward just buying new copies of the games and supplementing with HBG minis for additional sculpts. The main drawback to just buying HBG minis is a number of the basic ones for ANZAC and Italy are out of stock right now.
-
RE: HBG Mini Questions
P.S. HBG sells second edition pieces for the axis and allies games. You may want to go on their website and check how much they are.
It is my understanding that from 1st edition to 2nd edition only the Italians and ANZAC pieces changed, plus AAA units for all countries. Is that correct?