Axis and Allies at Renegade Con:
Watch it live at YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xa-mTB5uFo
Will start any moment now.
Playing Risk with a guy I did know but not that good.
So playing Risk… finishing the game. Discussing it… And then… then I said: “Well, yeah, would be nice if Risk had ships to cross the seas.”
And then… then he said: “Well, Axis and Allies got little ships?”
He: You want to see this game? Will get it from my room?
And the rest is history…
Please do understand: this was (just) before the Internet started… so it was not easy to find new games. At that moment I did not live in a big city. So…
The winner of ‘Pick your Battle’ is:
I am pretty sure Larry Harris once said that about 80 % of the questions sent (pre-email, pre-internet) to Hasbro were about subs…
Well, I am still learning new stuff (into Axis and Allies since the mid-1990s). So thanks for this question.
To be honest I cannot recall if this situation once happened in a game I played.
But I can imagine this can be a handy tactic to ‘spread’ your subs…
Wow… again: thanks. I like to keep learning about Axis and Allies Classic’s great (and sometimes unclear though) rules! Keep playing A&A Classic!
Let me first say we all really appreciate the time and energy you spend on Axis and Allies and on this very forum.
Still, I ask: when can we expect Part Two of this interview…
Update September 2022:
I just found this one:
“The war is the same, but occurs in an alternate universe where the Earth’s land formation happened
So Axis and Allies… just on another map.
Will check this one out asap…
@Krieghund Thanks again for all your fast replies. And seems I am getting most issues right.
Having said that: being VERY far removed from your level of (tacit) knowledge of all things A&A among some of the guys (sorry no ladies unfortunately) that I play with I am known as ‘the guy that is looking for rules issues and strange/improbably combinations of rules…’ - and in this case: cards :)
Following up on this:
Z DOMESTICATION card
If you have an unit in an area controlled by one of your allies and you play this game then I guess YOU get the money?
And not your ally…
BTW: Card says ‘units’ but I guess one unit is enough…
One more question…
Z CONSCRIPTION card
I think this has been covered before. But just asking for now:
(1) Do ICs and AA guns (and Mobilization Centers) qualify as a unit in the context of this card?
My guess: yes.
(2) But… what if you have lost control of one of your areas containing an IC… to Zs? Then this IC is no longer yours I guess? So then that IC cannot be used in the context of this card?
(3) If you have unit in an area controlled by an ally and you use this card… then this Z gets replaced by one of YOUR infantry. Is this correct?
In the same vein we interpreted the SALVAGE OPERATION card wrongly.
We thought that the ACTIVE player got one IPC per destroyed Z that was destroyed by himself.
So this introduces some bookkeeping but not an awful lot. If the attacker destroys a Z jus put that aside and at the end of the combat replace 'em with 1 IPC each.
Here we did NOT follow the ‘net effect’ argument that I line out here:
@thrasher1 I don’t think it’s any easier than some of the other ones.
… easier then ‘forfilling’ one of the other AAZ cards you mean?
Thanks for VERY fast reply BTW.
Just compiling some (rules) issues we got into when playing AAZ. And again: it was fun!
As we finally played AAZ again we were wondering:
Did more people interprete this rule wrongly?
Namely that you had to destroy ALL Zs that were present in an Z-controlled area?
If I introduce players to AAZ it seems all of them expect this to be the case: that you only get the bonus if ALL Z-units are destroyed.
Rule book: see pages 4 and 23…
Yes. I refererd to RESEARCH MISSION card.
We interpreted this as:
“The active player must destroy as many Zs that the ‘net effect’ is three Zs less on the board after the combat.”
So two things must occur:
OK, so we were wrong. But under the official rule isn’t it often maybe to easy to ‘forfill’ this card and thus get the bonus?
@Krieghund Thanks for reply.
We interpreted this card as:
‘Net effect must be three Zs less.’
Yep. Finally AAZ hit our table again. Actually in the incarnation of ‘Axis and Allies 1942 Second Edtion’ + Zs…
For now we have two rules questions. And these have probably been covered. So feel free to link to an older topic/thread.
(1) Not deploying all your forces inside an area when attacking Zs present in that very area
Zs controlled West Mexico (area directly below Western US). There were also Zs present inside Western US area.
US player wanted to attack Zs that controlled West Mexico area. Using some units from Western US.
OK, these units can move into West Mexico during the COMBAT PHASE.
Some units were left inside Western US. These attacked the Zs presen there during the COMBAT PHASE.
I guess this is still all ‘legal’.
But what if instead of attacking West Mexico the US player just wanted some units in Western US NOT to attack the Zs inside that area… but move them into friendly (this is important!) Western Canada?
Technically these units can only move during the COMBAT MOVEMENT PHASE. Or is ‘avoiding’ combat also allowed in the combat movement phase? I guess that is the case. But then when is this very move conducted? As it might otherwise ‘interere’ with ‘real’ non-combat movement of units into that very (friendly!) area…
Am I too strict here?
(2) Z Cards
If a card says: “You get X if you kill at least 3 Zs during combat” does this:
(2a) Include Zs killed by your opponent? The defender. In case you attack an enemy held area.
(2b) Newly ‘created’ Zs? Or must the ‘net effect’ be: three less Zs?
Looking forward to the aswers and responsed. And again: we had a GREAT time playing!
As always: thanks for your fast replies!
We played AAZ1942SE tonight. And we had fun! Still had some questions regarding US setup. Will come back to that.
But we had a fun evening. And a lot of unexpected stuff happened. That is part of AAZ. Some may not like that. And that is of course fully OK!