@barnee said in Larry Harris 3.0 Setup Cards for Printing.:
@vodot said in Larry Harris 3.0 Setup Cards for Printing.:
Navel Setup
lol :)
yeah, my navel setup is nobody’s business but my own
@barnee said in Larry Harris 3.0 Setup Cards for Printing.:
@vodot said in Larry Harris 3.0 Setup Cards for Printing.:
Navel Setup
lol :)
yeah, my navel setup is nobody’s business but my own
As I print these, I noted a correction: “Navel Setup” should be “Naval Setup”
@Black_Elk said in Larry Harris Semi-Official Tournament Game Patch:
Yeah, I reprinted my cards for the Tournament set up
Hey @Black_Elk, which cards/files did you print to refresh your setup cards? I’m teaching 42.2 (live, to a full table!) in a couple weeks and would love to set it up with 1942.3.
EDIT: Nvm, I [re]discovered @Mondueo’s great 42.3 setup cards here: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/39616/larry-harris-3-0-setup-cards-for-printing?_=1709213218386
@8d88 said in 2 ocean USA strategies?:
An alternate setup might be interesting where the US player is forced to fight both sides of the map. Perhaps with a split economy and/or shutting down the Panama canal.
I wasn’t going to mention it since its a variant and your original post was leaning towards actual 42.2 strategy, but yes, and this can be super fun! When I used to play a lot of Revised in college I would occasionally get groups of 6 or even 7-8 players. After incorporating Italy and China from @Black_Elk’s ‘Pact of Steel + China’ modified setup, the next move (If we had 7+ players) would be to split the US economy at the board edges and give each half +5-10 IPC. The two halves could take turns together, but each could only build from the economy gained/lost on that side’s half of the board. Units could be flown across the US or shipped across the panama canal if desired, but not built directly at the other side’s factories. Pacific player would also control China (which in this version got a factory, a third territory, and kept a separate economy from the US). Super fun!
8 players and we would do the same for the UK economy with Canada (add a factory here) + London on one side, and India (add factory) + Australia (add factory) on the other, splitting any African money between the two. Japan had to play these games VERY differently and much more surgically than a normal game of Revised (which is typically KGF with a MONSTER Japan), and Germany and Italy were very tough to contain with the much more limited resources going into the Atlantic.
Hi @8d88 - if by “viable” you mean “potentially game-winning at a high level of competitive play” then I believe the short answer is “no” and the long answer is “nope.” :)
Much longer and un-asked-for answer: It depends on your definition of “viable.” I like playing the US with a two-ocean strategy— particularly when I’m teaching the game—becuase it gives me the most control over the balance/fun ‘knobs’ of the game experience for the other players. If one player is dominating (or struggling), I can most effectively reach out and smack (or help) them with the US, and to do so requires two-ocean logistics (or some kind of “Green Skies” strat) to immediately get material where needed. My A1 purchase in these teaching games is definitely going to be two-ocean; enough carriers and transports to make up for any G1/J1 losses and to (lightly) defend and escort two oceans’ worth of shipping. My A2 purchase and moves will be more transports and escorts as needed, and the start of flowing material in whichever direction.
In many cases the two-ocean A1 purchase evolves into a normal one-ocean US strategy becuase it becomes quickly and painfully obvious which of the oceans is going to require the smacking (or helping) given dice, player skill, and other factors. This also depends on the kind and quantity of communication that is allowed/happening between the Allies.
While the two-ocean US strategy is mechanically very suboptimal for a dozen reasons which others here can explain better than me, the Allies will still often “win” teaching games where I play the US as a two-ocean power. In that regard, if winning = viable then I would say potentially yes—if you’re playing with new/poor players, particularly new/poor Axis players, and you want them to have a good time and come back next time—when you can crush them with an all-in Thorpe Thump, KGF, or whatever you like :)
@Nuts I’m proud that they went with a D10 right in the face of releasing their “battle dice” accessory product.
It should go without saying- but it definitely doesn’t- great design should trump a marginal increase in sales. I don’t expect companies to sacrifice significant financial incentives for the sake of minor improvements, but in the world I work in (consumer electronics) it’s often the case that they’re willing to sacrifice significant design improvements for even the potential of a minor financial gain. Good on you, Renegade.
@shadowhawk I think categorizing A&A as “as much a game of luck as a game of skill” is selling the system short, especially at the highest levels of play that you’re discussing here. It’s possible to lose because of bad dice, of course, but swingy-outcomes decrease with sample size, and so the “luck” factor in A&A decreases when:
Gary’s videos that @phd_angel linked above are great examples of all of these factors.
While there will always be cases of great players knocked out early in a tournament due to bad dice, this will still usually require being matched up with a similarly skilled player getting good dice, because it will require a skilled player to capitalize quickly on those advantages before the good player can adjust.
I think players with differing skill levels will be sorted out over the course of any tournament involving multiple games & rounds, especially if isn’t single elimination (like this year’s world championships at Gen Con). Requiring players to play two games (one from each side) with identical bids can be a good way to mitigate the effects of luck. In any tournament, whether it’s chess or ping pong, you’ll see a great team or two knocked out early and a mediocre team or two going father than they should on paper… but if you look at quarterfinals, semifinals, and finals you’ll almost always find highly skilled teams duking it out.
Hi @Nuts, welcome to the forum!!
RE: new units, I think there are some fun options and at least one no-brainer: if you’re playing G40, those Somua S35’s go right in as drop-in replacements for the blue T-34s in G40! Finally!!
The problem with the rest of the units is the limited number of powers with the sculpts available.
There’s the multiple copies & paint option, of course… but if you’re buying multiple copies to paint units you’re much better off looking at all of the incredible community support and high-detail sculpts that have been created for A&A at places like HBG, IWNGU, Combat Miniatures, and even my own web store.
@atbot Awesome! The ability to hold chips/damage markers is a really cool innovation!
@Black_Elk said in North Africa pre-release:
D10! …That innovation alone should turn up the heat a bit for desert sands hehe
I agree, the D10 change alone is huge. No more dividing by 6 for hit counts!
Thanks Dave! In to win again for 2024!
Hi @Timothy-Gengarella, I never found good printable artillery files for A&A so I drew up a few, including a generic “Advanced Artillery” piece for use in systems that use them, including GW36.
Shot you a PM with some details :)
@Pine-of-England YES! Thank you!!!
EDIT: Here is the the text data file - after downloading, rename the file below from *.txt to *.otf, then right-click --> Install.
@Azimuth @Argothair
Love the discussion & would love to look at a French recolor on some TTs and some splits per your ideas, Azimuth, to both enhance vanilla and also potentially accommodate the addition of France. Like Argo says I’m skeptical it’s possible in a way that retains middleweight status while adding strategic options and fun, but let’s find out!
That balance is crazy difficult to achieve and I think AA50 pulls off something of a unicorn in accomplishing it. Want to keep this thread firmly in that worldview.
@reloader-1 said in [AA50] Map Overlays - Splitting Australia, the Balkans, and Sea Zones; adding Cairo, Malaya, Singapore, Rio, Cape Town, Recruitment Centers and tons more!:
Nate, could I ask a huge favor - could you edit the Version 4 map file for me and remove all of the RCs? No other changes, I’d like to print it out but without those as a very nice vendor on Etsy (ummm… you!) made me a buttload of 3d printed pieces :)
Added Version 5 (no RCs or TSR) to the second post above. Thanks and enjoy!