I asked Larry over at his website if ANZAC would be separate in the global game, but he said:
Q: Being as Canada is a Commonwealth of UK, and ANZAC is a separate power, how will that play out in the “full” game, both economically and with territories?
A: In the Global game both the ANZAC and Canadian forces will probably be controlled by the UK player.Q: Will ANZAC control all of the UKs territories in the AAP map, with UK controlling the ones on the Europe map?
A: No, again the UK player will control all commonwealth territories in the global game. I’m not 100% sure about this however… In the AAP there will be a dedicated UK player - based out of India and the ANZAC player out of Australia/New Zealand.
Krieghund wrote:
I wish I could take credit, but this one is all Avalon Hill.
I love you anyway, man! :-D
PS, how about Italy getting some new sculpts and a different colour?
Working on it. Can’t promise anything, though.
Good to have you on our side. Any hope for the Italian marker, by the way?
Looking forward to these games.
Cheers
Any hope for the Italian marker, by the way?
Working on it. Can’t promise anything, though.
Semantics? I don’t think so. Not sharing a turn is a big change, especially for the navies, as they can’t attack together. Not to mention adding another player position. It may be a small change rules-wise, but that doesn’t mean it’s not significant.
@Captain:
I asked Larry over at his website if ANZAC would be separate in the global game, but he said:
Q: Being as Canada is a Commonwealth of UK, and ANZAC is a separate power, how will that play out in the “full” game, both economically and with territories?
A: In the Global game both the ANZAC and Canadian forces will probably be controlled by the UK player.Q: Will ANZAC control all of the UKs territories in the AAP map, with UK controlling the ones on the Europe map?
A: No, again the UK player will control all commonwealth territories in the global game. I’m not 100% sure about this however… In the AAP there will be a dedicated UK player - based out of India and the ANZAC player out of Australia/New Zealand.
that change is getting smaller and smaller. No one said it wasn’t significant, just that it was a stretch to say it was a brand new power.
It’s just as much a separate power from India as the United States is.
India now separate too?
I should have said “UK”, not “India”. I was thinking classic Pacific.
no, we were talking classic Pacific, just wanted to make sure whether we were getting a fresh news scoop.
is Canada, ANZAC, and the other smaller players, going to get a Separate turn? If their turns are taken with UK, will they get a separate combat phase (like china in aa50)? Please say no, I want a combined combat for them, otherwise they will be weak and pathetic.
is Canada, ANZAC, and the other smaller players, going to get a Separate turn? If their turns are taken with UK, will they get a separate combat phase (like china in aa50)?
Per LH
powers that have their own “Income/economy”, they are:
US
UK
Russia
France
China
Australia/New Zealand (ANZAC)
Germany
Japan
Italy
If ANZAC gets there own Income, why not Canada? Canada… Oh Canada… All the Canadian Provinces are represented . It has its own national control markers. Totally controlled by the British player, however. ANZAC forcers, in AAP40 have a different status due to its relative power and influence in the region. Canada would probably prove to be too small a power and there really is no need to have another Allied player represented in the Europe game.
i don’t think you understood my question jonny….
i already know they will get their own separate economy, the question is, is their combat done at the same time as UK combat, or is it a separate combat and thereby weak and ineffective?
if they have separate turns, this means I can’t use UK resources to seamlessly transport canadian forces out of canada and into join attacks in europe. It means that not only do i need canadian navy, but i also now have many multiple small and pathetic attacks instead of a single strong attack. Who wants to attack France first with 2 inf, then attack with 2 more, then attack with 2 more, then attack with 2 more, or attack with 8 all at the same time? this splitting up into gazillions of different nations is counter productive in many ways.
Canada’s representation is purely as Canadian roundels printed on the board. This is completely cosmetic. Functionally, it is part of the UK in every way.
although history books say that we gained our independence from UK during WWI
If ANZAC gets there own Income, why not Canada? Canada… Oh Canada… All the Canadian Provinces are represented . It has its own national control markers. Totally controlled by the British player, however. ANZAC forcers, in AAP40 have a different status due to its relative power and influence in the region. Canada would probably prove to be too small a power and there really is no need to have another Allied player represented in the Europe game.
The “IN AAP40” might suggest that ANZAC will be controlled by UK in the global game. I don’t know for sure.
I agree that too many allied nations would be counter productive in the way that there will be too many small nations. However, you have to agree that they can be annoying the same way italy is, and can open up holes in the enemy’s defense
In a house rule of mine, I have Canada and Australia sperate and must build on their own factory but can fight with the UK player seamlessly.
They can be run by a seperate player or the same UK player.
although history books say that we gained our independence from UK during WWI
The Statute of Westminster of 1931 was the instrument which gave legislative independence to Canada and the five other Dominions which existed at the time.
CWO Marc
Yea, I’m aware of that Marc, but in history books, they say that Canada became, symbolically of course, a country in WWI at the battle of Vimy because for the first time, the entire canadian army was fighting and dying together. It was us against Germany. Of course, with support of the UK. But the main forces were Canadians against Germany
@Imperious:
I’d be curious to read their financial statements and see if Avalon Hill even makes a profit, and I’d also be curious to talk to their marketing directors.
Financial statements? I think the idiots write it on the back of all the bags of Taco Bell drive thru while they fart in their cars on the way back from a 3 hour lunch break. That is if they are not too bothered to stop reading the latest D$D fictional novel about some idiot wizard or memorizing what saving throw to make for a spell they might be conjuring. They must be a team of total misfits and malcontents and government chain gang furlough types based on the asinine methods they run the business. I would have them all fired on the spot and no severance pay.
Heh, another non-satisfied customer statement non-withstanding, I’d say we agree on this issue! WoTC IZ TARTED! FO REELZ! BOYCOTT HASBRO AND WoTC FOR THEIR ASININE BUSINESS PRACTICES!!! (Though I very much doubt they’d even care listening since it seems their main objective is to bankrupt the A&A franchise anyway).
Didn’t I just see this complaint in another post. I think without having any real knowledge that WOtC got lucky and struck it rich with their Magic game but are still learning how to run their business.
The “IN AAP40” might suggest that ANZAC will be controlled by UK in the global game. I don’t know for sure.
I think you could be right on this, in the Pacific game they will play as totally separate nations taking there turn at different times (having some limited joint strike ability would be cool). It sounds like in the global game they could be merged back into one kinda. Keep in mind they will be different colors. Maybe one player controls both. The Aznac gets its own IC’s. Ipc’s generated by Anzac must be spent there. Finally they move together as one nation. This would be pretty cool and open up a whole new front to Japan. In many AA games unless UK builds down under, this area falls to Japan pretty early. By a fix amount of income being spent there it could help do away with a KGF strat.
Somehow we got off the topic of box art.
Product Description on Funagain…
Axis & Allies celebrates 25 years of strategy war gaming with a deluxe edition of its original theater-level game. Axis & Allies Pacific 1940, designed and developed by Larry Harris, utilizes the updated rules established in A&A Anniversary Edition. Two new combat units debut in this game, Tactical Bombers and Mechanized Infantry. Australia and New Zealand, joined together as the ANZAC forces, represent a new playable ally. China fields more forces than ever before, but will need help from their allies – the United States and England – to withstand the might of expansionist Imperial Japan.
Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 features an oversized board that measures 35 inches wide by 32 inches high. With over 450 pieces, deluxe game components and local storage boxes, this game raises the standard established by A&A Anniversary Edition. All new rules for neutral nations, naval & air bases, kamikaze attacks and convoy disruption add even more depth and historical accuracy to this giant game.
Finally, this deluxe theater-level game is designed to join together with Axis & Allies Europe 1940 to create the greatest Axis & Allies experience to date! When joined, these boards will measure 5 feet wide by 32 inches high. Both games have been designed to play alone or together to offer a 2-6 player global 1940 scenario, complete with separate set up and national objectives.
Is my math wrong or did someone make a mistake???
Assuming that the AAP40 and AAE40 boards are the same size, 32 inches is definitely the height but the widths are different!!! Is it 5ft (60 inches) or 70 inches the width of the global game???
:?
32 x 70 combined, so 32 x 36 each
@Imperious:
32 x 70 combined, so 32 x 36 each
Wouldn’t that be 32 x 35 each?
typo, yes your correct.
