Question: Number of Players in AAE/AAP40 World Game

[FieldMarshalGames]

Ok, so the GLOBAL game will be 6 players standard.

But I see no reason why you could not make it 7 if ANZAC can hold their own in the Pacific version.

Thanks for the Answer!

[Guest]

It could be 9 if you wanted, as well, with France and China.

[marechallannes]

I think ANZAC forces will be replaced with UK units.

There is no reason to keep ANZAC as a separate force in a global game.

…or canadians. :-P

6 players:

-Japan
-Russia
-Germany
-UK/France
-Italy
-USA/China

[Razor]

That is pure speculation

[johnnymarr]

That is pure speculation

isnt it all?

[marechallannes]

@Razor:

That is pure speculation

Sorry, I’m unemployed and can’t pay for insider tips. :-D

…but but a voice whispered to me, thet there will be another global game setup, too.

[Guest]

@Razor:

That is pure speculation

Why don’t you ask that inside person? :roll:

[Emperor_Taiki]

@marechallannes:

I think ANZAC forces will be replaced with UK units.

There is no reason to keep ANZAC as a separate force in a global game.

…or canadians. :-P

6 players:

-Japan
-Russia
-Germany
-UK/France
-Italy
-USA/China

Larry Harris has said the ANZACs will be in the global game and they will start with forces in egypt.

[Guest]

@Emperor_Taiki:

@marechallannes:

I think ANZAC forces will be replaced with UK units.

There is no reason to keep ANZAC as a separate force in a global game.

…or canadians. :-P

6 players:

-Japan
-Russia
-Germany
-UK/France
-Italy
-USA/China

Larry Harris has said the ANZACs will be in the global game and they will start with forces in egypt.

Well then that would make 7 at least.

[FieldMarshalGames]

Larry Harris has said the ANZACs will be in the global game and they will start with forces in egypt.

That is awesome!  Even if there is an alternate set-up with UK player controlling ANZAC, I see no reason why ANZAC could not successfully play alone if another wanted to jump in on the fun.

Playing FRANCE would be a short game so I don’t think that is viable…  unless more “Free French” troops could be gathered throughout the game.

As for CHINA, I have had a player control it in AA50.  Better to have seat at the table with a small power than no seat at all!

[WILD BILL]

You could have that 7th person play Anzac, China and France (regardless of turn order or turn sharing). That should keep his interest. At some point the Allies might lose say China/Anzac, but could liberate France. It would be a game with in the game to see if you could keep that 7th person alive as F Marshal mentioned earlier. The one thing I don’t see happening in the game that happens a lot in AA50 is trading France. I hope (Larry hinted) that France gets an influx of units when liberated to stop the trading. It could actually be cool to play the French if they get back in the game. Kinda like it was cool to play Italy (minor power) in AA50.

I would go as far as saying AA40P is really a 3 player game for best enjoyment (other then one on one). Jap vs the US/China then Anzac/UK. In AA40p the Anzac and UK seem to be about the same size, but you could split them if you have an extra person. I think that the six player suggestion for the global game is because the UK will obviously be much larger. The Anzac will be about the same (about 1/4 the size of UK) which will make it just a minor power or extension of the UK.

I think it would be cool if the Anzac could actually do combined attacks with the UK and maybe even the US.  Do you hear that all you National Advantage guys out there. I know combined attacks are off limits with major powers, but the Anzac I don’t think would rock the boat to bad.

[marechallannes]

@Brain:

And it will be even better with FMG pieces. Oh yeah! :-)

I saw a picture of an italian tank.

Will FMG produce japanese tactical bombers, too? :?

I like this 7th player idea, controlling France, China and ANZAC.

But I don’t believe that there will be ANZAC playing pieces in AA Europe 40.

[Guest]

This is the complete list of what FMG will produce for each country.

Naval Units:
Transport
Submarine
Destroyer
Cruiser
Carrier
Battleship
*Task Force Marker (Similar to AAP)

Air Units:
Fighter
Bomber
Dive Bomber (TAC Bomber)
*Air Transport

Army Units:
*Infantry (Two Sculpts each)
*Armour (Two Sculpts each)
Artillery
Half Track
*Truck
*Commander Unit

Other Units Bonus:
*Major Factory
*Minor Factory
*AA Gun
*Bunker Unit (fortification)
*Naval Base Unit-Marker
*Air Base Unit-Marker
*Army HQ Unit-Marker

*units are those which are not currently found in AA40

[Flashman]

Separate ANZAC command is ridiculous in Global.

All such forces were completely under UK command until Spring 1942, when they were handed over to the USA under the SWPA command of MacArthur, who based his HQ in Australia.  There is at least as good a case for India being a separate power as the ANZACS.

One idea I’ve considered for simple individual victory conditions is “Best of Enemies”.

This separates the war into it’s 3 core conflicts; Germany vs USSR in Europe, Italy vs UK in the Mediterranean, and Japan vs USA in the Pacific.

Each player gets an “honourary” individual win if his core enemy is defeated first; e.g. the British will always argue for an invasion of Italy rather than Germany.

Wind the clock back to 1940 and it becomes a little more complex; France would probably see Germany and Italy as equally dangerous; the USSR would regard the western capitalists as the main enemy rather than their German socialist brothers.

However the ultimate objective will always be to defeat the enemy alliance, and there will inevitably be an optimum means of achieving this; in Global this will probably still be the Moscow tank magnet, regardless of any obstacles the designer throws in it’s path.  Only a rock solid Russo-Japanese NAP will prevent this, and for 1940 the timing is wrong.

[Guest]

@Flashman:

Separate ANZAC command is ridiculous in Global.

It is not needed, but if you wanted to add a seventh player it would be nice.

[Lucifer]

@Flashman:

Only a rock solid Russo-Japanese NAP will prevent this, and for 1940 the timing is wrong.

You seem to forget that there was also a no-attack-treaty or alliance, between Germany and Russia. Guess what happened?

In A&A we can do different things than the real WW2 commanders did. If you disagree with this, then you are advocating for a completely different game than A&A has been from Classic to AAP40.

[Guest]

@Subotai:

@Flashman:

Only a rock solid Russo-Japanese NAP will prevent this, and for 1940 the timing is wrong.

You seem to forget that there was also a no-attack-treaty or alliance, between Germany and Russia. Guess what happened?
In A&A we can do different things than the real WW2 commanders did. If you disagree with this, then you are advocating for a completely different game than A&A has been from Classic to AAP40.

Yes, If we could only do what happened in the real war, then why play the game. Allies win, Axis lose.

[questioneer]

@Brain:

This is the complete list of what FMG will produce for each country.

Naval Units:
Transport
Submarine
Destroyer
Cruiser
Carrier
Battleship
*Task Force Marker (Similar to AAP)

Air Units:
Fighter
Bomber
Dive Bomber (TAC Bomber)
*Air Transport

Army Units:
*Infantry (Two Sculpts each)
*Armour (Two Sculpts each)
Artillery
Half Track
*Truck
*Commander Unit

Other Units Bonus:
*Major Factory
*Minor Factory
*AA Gun
*Bunker Unit (fortification)
*Naval Base Unit-Marker
*Air Base Unit-Marker
*Army HQ Unit-Marker

*units are those which are not currently found in AA40

This is awesome!!! When are the preorders and pics???

Is this confirmed???

Field Marshal should be making Larry’s games!!! :?

[Guest]

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=13894.msg540383#msg540383

Yes it has been confirmed.

[questioneer]

I’ve heard this turn order also:

1. Germany
2. Russia/France
3. Japan
4. UK/ANZAC
5. Italy
6. US/China

Six players is plenty- each player has enough to do.  With 9 players 3-4 will be doing a lot of sitting around.