Revised vs. '42

[aagamer_kc03]

Presuming you play one or both versions...please vote and feel free to discuss why

[David_Newell]

I play both, but prefer Revised.

I suspect 42 is a much better table top game than revised, and if I only had 2 hours to play in one sitting, I would choose 42.

To me the main issues with 42 are as following:

At upper levels, the game is unbalanced towards the Axis. Bidding the Russians extra IPCs to spend on round 1 probably would solve this. Unsure how many IPCs would be needed, but probably between 2 and 10, depending on quality of opponents and the desire to handicap a match to even it out. Alternately, an extra infantry, or perhaps artillery in Karelia, is probably all the units the Russians would need to balance.

To me the bigger frustration in 1942 is how decisive the naval battles are (Due to transports and Sub rule changes, and cheaper bombers). A Standard Deviation in either direction can be decisive. To that point, I'm unsure how to fix the issue. Either naval units weren't discounted enough, perhaps 10-20 percent more of a discount over revised, or perhaps more naval units are needed on the board in the beginning to get them a little more "weight", and shrink the range of outcomes within a standard Dev. Low luck gets rid of this risk mid to late game, but not enough in the early rounds.

That said, its fun. A good dice game, and a great tool for a revised player to improve their skills and take learned tactics back to Revised and radically make their game alot stronger.

[commander_chaos]

Russia has one move it can make in 42 that cuts off Germany from Africa that squares the game.... my only complaint with 42 and revised is Japans ability to so quickly put pressure on Russia which is so far from the reality of WW2, just look at a map... how many miles, mountain ranges, deserts and lack of gas stations and 7-11's separate Tokyo from Moscow? This issue is addressed in Global, cant wait for it to hit GTO!!

[bleslie88]

Again I need to spend more time on revised. As an original Axis player over 10 years ago and many many games behind my belt. I find this new slightly modified game a breath of fresh air.

The cheaper navy and air allow for brits and americans to make precense felt faster. I think the top players are still feeling the game out, I am putting up great fight with allies vs top players, and look to improve my game. I think this is a great game and the cheaper units rock. The map makes it better for USSR to maintain IPC production over old map, so not sure why they need to be stronger.

Simply, when the brit navy lives, it's a hell of a game. Norway is hell... Which makes this tough start for allies. If the navy survives the german attack, the game is on equal footing as far as I am concerned.

Low luck allows for aggressive USSR start which gives allies edge as well.

So to say 42 favors axis is a stretch. I think people know how to play axis well from older versions, and now must play allies very well to have a chance. With the variation of unit cost for air and naval, and the map changes and the openings available for axis... This may pose a challenge to to implement a great opening for allies. The game is very even though and not so easy for USSR to fall. I think it as a great map and game.

[rjscmk]

They both have their plusses.
I think the bidding in revsed makes sense. Would like natl advantages and a full sized screen.
I like the extra ship and some of the rules in 42 actually i like them all. It is the game setup changes I dont like. the demotion of the bb to cruiser in the med and how, in general the uk navy is reduced with the transport rules. 1942 might be balanced for the very good player, but for the novices i play with, a germany that can afford a bomber every turn is very hard to beat.

[lukalion]

I agree with David and i am sure playing 1942 made him a better revised player.

[rockismyreligion]

Revised, Revised, a thousand times Revised.

Since the GTO beta, I have only played '42 live, and even dislike it then. But, to complete a collection, one must own the bad copies of the game as well.

[smalldog47]

I think 42 has much more realistic naval rules. What ww2 navy puts defenseless transports in the line of fire while capital ships hide in the rear? I love both games but aa42 is abit more interesting in my opinion..Also I think it might lend itself to quicker games,with not so much building up of large forces.Some of the top players won't branch out from revised at all(you know who you are)..try it out...whats the worst that can happen..you lose??

[commander_chaos]

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

[lukalion]

I think 42 has much more realistic naval rules. What ww2 navy puts defenseless transports in the line of fire while capital ships hide in the rear? I love both games but aa42 is abit more interesting in my opinion..Also I think it might lend itself to quicker games,with not so much building up of large forces.Some of the top players won't branch out from revised at all(you know who you are)..try it out...whats the worst that can happen..you lose??

I think all the top players play both versions at high level thats why they are in my top 10 aa players.
1. Fp - prolly the best player in GTO plays every game at top level (except chess ), player with best 1942 score and the ruler of revised league
2. Hit - winner of JamesJett 1942 live tourney
3. Zhukov4- 3 times winner of 1942 ladder league
4.Williamthebloody - he and FP two best Low Luck players that i know
5. David Newell - founder of revised league, if he didnt quit 1942 he had a chance to become Champion of both leagues.
6... gingerbenjamin, Rem400... great players in both versions
- bmaster and Heagyth that i met in double tourney very classy players
- and AFatCat,bb82 (to bad that this two dont play 1942 more often)

[bb82]

There are some good revised vs 42 threads out there already. They are very different games. It mainly comes down to personal preferences. But in general, hardcore revised players will likely stay with revised. Whereas newer players are more likely to go with 42. And many are just waiting for global, so see no point switching to a different version than what they are currently playing.

I think 42 has much more realistic naval rules. What ww2 navy puts defenseless transports in the line of fire while capital ships hide in the rear? I love both games but aa42 is abit more interesting in my opinion..Also I think it might lend itself to quicker games,with not so much building up of large forces.Some of the top players won't branch out from revised at all(you know who you are)..try it out...whats the worst that can happen..you lose??

I think all the top players play both versions at high level thats why they are in my top 10 aa players.
1. Fp - prolly the best player in GTO plays every game at top level (except chess ), player with best 1942 score and the ruler of revised league
2. Hit - winner of JamesJett 1942 live tourney
3. Zhukov4- 3 times winner of 1942 ladder league
4.Williamthebloody - he and FP two best Low Luck players that i know
5. David Newell - founder of revised league, if he didnt quit 1942 he had a chance to become Champion of both leagues.
6... gingerbenjamin, Rem400... great players in both versions
- bmaster and Heagyth that i met in double tourney very classy players
- and AFatCat,bb82 (to bad that this two dont play 1942 more often)

Usually a high enough top player will specialize in a certain variant and mainly play that variant. Specializing is a core ingredient of becoming a 'top player'. I do know some from that list that do play different variants but I'd also argue they are not the top of all the variants they play.

For example: I think Hit mainly plays regular dice (maybe soon LL), Live (with skype), revised, multi.

I mainly play regular dice, standard PBEM, revised, 1v1.

Each different 'option' does change the game and forms another variant. Sometimes the variants are different in small ways, sometimes in huge ways (especially if your comparing 42 to revised). Also keep in mind that the top players in one variant are unlikely to be the top player in other variants. Keeping with the example above, I doubt I'd consistently beat hit in his variant just like I doubt he would consistently beat me in my variant.

[UtzChips]

I don't have $15.00

[lukalion]

If there is lets say 10 different variants, for me the expert player would be the one who can play all 10 in high level (not necessary to be the best) then just to be specialized in 1 but play bad all the rest.

[bb82]

If there is lets say 10 different variants, for me the expert player would be the one who can play all 10 in high level then just to be specialized in 1.

Then it is a semantics issue.

But truly, just like with companies or anything else in life, to be the topmost you need to specialize. Otherwise I'd argue that the pool of players in some variants just aren't that large/diverse, meaning not many experts in it.


But yeah, I could see a top player playing well in the different variants (given a little practice). But not many would want to or able to put the time into it. They find a variant that suits what they are looking for and stick with it.

And I'm really not sure how this got started in a revised vs 42 thread .

[smalldog47]

Lukalion...all the players you named are excellent,no arguement from here. I was sort of joking with bb82 and acesup33 both top players that refuse to dip a toe into the 42 pool. I can't get aces to even try tsuro because its a new game for him..I'm happy to play revised with bb or aces(with or against) but its also fun to joke around with them..As far as fresh is concerned ....he once offered me a draw(revised)after he was clearly going to win,thats the best i've been able to do against him in maybe 5 or 6 games. I played 1 game (1 vs 2),me vc frsh+hitter...luckily I made it way past turn 1 ...all the way to about turn 4!!!!!