My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

[CWO Marc]

@Razor:

makes me remember the good old days when the first A&A Europe was released, with 24 new and uniqe sculpts.

Though keep in mind that there were shared pieces of equipment in that game, like the American destroyer, submarine, transport and artillery piece, which the British and the Russians used too.

[reloader-1]

Also keep in mind that the sculpts in 1942/1940 are brand new - they may be the same tanks/planes etc but they are completely new (compare tanks and other models to AAE/AAP models.)

[maverick_76]

The quality of the sculpts looks good too, and that is all I really care about.

[cminke]

has any one com,pared the size of an old aa bb to a new bb? the diffrence in size and detail and qulity is amazing!

[Imperious Leader]

I wonder how many of these new pieces are in the set?

Is it a situation yet again where say Germany has only 6 tactical bombers or 6 Mech?

As for France, once they get liberated, they can build forces so it is important that the sculpts are ‘French’

Also, i would use them for neutrals so as not to confuse the units from other powers pieces. Under house rules some of these neutrals need something more than infantry and having unique pieces is a plus.

[Flashman]

Ironic that the French pieces are wearing trenchcoats, since the only ones who’ll survive the early rounds will be based in Africa…

Still, they’ll do nicely for WWI French inf when the time comes.

[Imperious Leader]

Yes perhaps that was the intention. When i see a French soldier it seems that greatcoat and the unique helmet are the iconic uniform of French infantry 1940.

Thats what they were after.

You can make the same case for UK 8th army infantry wearing shorts in Normandy, but that too is iconic uniform that were remember best in.

[Dylan the Canadian]

@SAS:

The French units are rocking the sweet trenchcoats. :mrgreen:

http://www.axisandallies.org/node/433

Damn those are awesome, but why French, why? Well actually it suits them the best.

[djensen]

I didn’t have time to photograph the global map so I used some photos of the game I took the other night and did a post about the rules. Krieghund will need to proofread it for mistakes before it is “official.” Thanks in advance, Krieghund.

http://www.axisandallies.org/node/438

[Imperious Leader]

Really nice report.

The way its written makes it seem like we don’t even need to look at the rules because of the manner you wrote that.

[purplebaron]

Awesome.  Thank you.

I really like the “Strict Neutrals” rule.  Should make things quite interesting.

[SilverAngelSurfer]

So they did include the “strict neutral alliance” rule.  That’s kinda cool.  I guess we’ll see how it affects the gameplay.  I also like that the Soviets get to place 2 infantry for Free in Novosibirsk every turn.

[Krieghund]

@djensen:

Krieghund will need to proofread it for mistakes before it is “official.” Thanks in advance, Krieghund.

It looks OK to me.  :-)

[FieldMarshalGames]

Thank you for the great pictures and the rules update.

[Napoleon]

So Usa and Russia cannont attack neutral while not at war?….Could have been fun for russia to kill some time attacking finland or another pro axis neutral.

[WILD BILL]

dj thanks for the update on the rules (especially neutrals). Have a question though.
If you attack a neutral friendly to the other side (combat phase), you fight the standing army (printed on the map). Say the battle goes bad (or you retreat?), leaving 1 neutral inf. Your enemy still has to non combat in to take ownership right?. In the mean time what power represents the surviving inf (multiple powers could come in). Do you just use the inf that you think will end up with the territory?

part 2-Does the friendly power coming in after your debacle only get the units left after your battle (could be none), or does he get the full standing army it once had. I would think only what remains, but had to ask.

PS: I like the domino effect that comes w/strict neutrals. I understand there had to be some kind of risk/reward for game play. I think that many people will not like this link however, sighting historical reasons, or simply that what happens in Turkey, shouldn’t affect what happens in Spain or Mongolia etc…  This is a rather over simplistic way to handle it, and I can see a ton of house rules looking for Larry’s endorsement coming up in the future.

Edit: In a global game (if rules stay the same) it does seem kinda funny that if Italy/Germany decide to invade Turkey, that Russia basically gets 6 free inf (Mongolia) for their Siberian front. Or even better the US makes its way over there to claim the Mongolians to get boots into China. I would say that if your side plans on taking one strict neutral you may think about setting up multiple targets to take them on as neutrals (weak), rather then giving extra inf to you enemies.

[Driel310]

Well one thing is sure: If Germany wants Spain, she is gonna pay for that. Russia will walk into Turkey and get 8 infantry. India will walk into Afghanistan and get 4 infantry.

And that’s only the big boys! Not talking about the smaller neutrals. I guess Larry wanted the true neutrals to remain neutral.  :-)

[johnnymarr]

interesting

While the Soviet Union is at war, place 2 infantry units in Novosibirsk during every Deploy Units phase as long as other units are deployed during that phase.

[Napoleon]

Suposed to mean what?..…Siberian troops comin in?

But i like the idea!

[Dylan the Canadian]

I can’t wait!!!  :-o