This promises to be the core game and it will be around for many years to come.
It's the only one you can buy at most chain stores, it remains reasonably priced, the scale is manageable (two sessions on the physical board for most players), 5 powers and it has a 1942 start date. I appreciate the excitement surrounding the earlier start dates, but 42 is the year I associate most with A&A. It seems traditional, and for overall game balance (Axis vs Allies) it remains my favorite. So I continue to play this map and promote it in my gaming group.
That said, I still have to point out that the economy on this board feels out of sync with the other changes that have been implemented since Revised.
A dozen new land territories have been added to the board
A number of sea zones have been re-aligned
2 new starting factories have been added
A new unit has been included
A new unit cost/ability structure has been implemented (aa guns, transports etc.)
And with all that, the starting money has remained essentially unchanged. Well OK, 1 ipc for Germany and Britain, but that's chalked up to a misprint/miscount.
Russia, which has been the consistent weak link for Allied gameplay since Classic, still has only 24 ipcs to start, even though they have more territory and factories to cover than ever before.
Britain remains at 30, despite the fact that they have an India factory to defend, and get virtually wiped out of the Atlantic in the first round.
America is still hovering at 42, even though they have to buy twice as many transports now to cross either ocean.
So basically, even with all the changes to the gameboard and gameplay the essential starting values are still...
I just want to focus on the Russian 24 here, since it just seems prohibitively low to me. Almost every one I know bids out Russia for at least 10+ ipcs in the opening round. If their starting economy was closer to 30 ipcs they'd be able to fight more effectively, and have a better chance at holding the center of the map (which is clearly the key to winning for either side), and afford more armor, artillery etc. It would also more accurately reflect the fact that WW2 in Europe was essentially a slog between Germany and the Soviet Union. In the actual War the Russians were able to hold their own pretty effectively, in A&A not so much. Even with a full prop up move by the Western Allies, they are still getting hammered.
So I guess my point is this, wouldn't it make more sense to start with the requirements of the map and the unit set up, and let that determine the starting money? Because it seems to me that its going the other way round, and the money has remained static, while we change everything else on the board. Like "OK Russia always gets 24 ipcs, because that's just the way it is!" I like the starting factory in Karelia, because it anchors the fighting, but a front line factory with insufficient money to put units in it, is a liability for Russia more than an advantage. What with all those German tanks in range!
I'd be the last person to demand that the numbers have to mirror reality, but just adding up the numbers in these charts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_p ... rld_War_II it seems to me like a boost to the Russians seems entirely appropriate. I think it would make a lot of sense, thinking about any future 3rd edition, to begin with the Russians and balance the rest of the board accordingly from there.
Does anyone else feel this way? Are you happy with Russians at 24?
I don't know about anyone else out there but that Russia and the A&A Russia are two totally different things.
- Posts: 949
- Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
- Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere
If Japan had been at war with Russia, and if it had tanks as good as Russia had, and if it could drive them across central Asia from the Chinese coast to Moscow ignoring the terrain then maybe Russia would have fallen. But none of this is history.
The simplest pact rules:
Japan may not attack the USSR until either Moscow or Washington has fallen
USSR may not attack Japan until Berlin has fallen
Japan still has options i.e. India/Middle East,
But USSR can now concentrate wholly on the German front.
Remember also that in 1942 Germany occupied a huge area of the USSR containing the bulk of its industrial areas.
Of course aesthetically the "Belarus" & "West Russia" tts should be combined into a single Moscow tt; the "Russia" region should be Urals (and still have a factory, yes 4 in totum).
The A&A tradition of placing Moscow in central Siberia is based on the assumption that it needs to be roughly equidistant from German and Japanese production centres.
I'm not opposed to the NAPact. Do you think it holds without other modifications to the rules map and starting units?
Concerning the actual NA Pact, it does seem both sides maintained neutrality up until near the end of the war wherein the Soviets broke the treaty?
That said, I might give this game rule a try as well but with a focus on Soviets attacking Japan only after Berlin falls or if either side decides to break the treaty at any point during the game.
- Imperious leader
- Posts: 5207
- Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
- Location: Moving up to phase line red...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests