Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory? The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States. You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.
I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.
Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable. Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.
It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency. If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue. Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.
Axis & Allies Global 1942 Section. (Link posted for setup)
-
The duel setups in the Anniversary edition was one of the best things Larry ever did
Agreed!
-
G42 setup linked in the first post calls for BOTH Italian units AND French units in TUNISIA.
Which is correct?
-
Anybody? Looking to start playing tomorrow morning and would like to clear up this confusion beforehand.
Surely some of you have played the G42 setup.
-
The Second Edition revisions that P@nther linked clear this up, Italy controls Tunisia and there are no French units there.
Global 1942 2nd Edition Setup
Linked again for good measure. -
Thanks Colonel,
I somehow missed Panther’s post. Appears that the turn order has also changed. -
Hey guys, if you ever wondered what the original setups looked like with the units stacked up next to each other, well wonder no more.
First I have the land and air units for the 1940 Global setup.
Next are the land and air units for the 1942 Global setup.
Overall, it doesn’t seem to be much of a change between the two setups. Most of the nations seem to lose some infantry except for the US which gained. Also, while UK lost planes, the US seems to have gained some. The Axis seems to be almost the same. Germany and Japan have more fighters but less bombers.
One big change is German armor. Germany has a stupid amount of tanks. They have more tanks (16) than all the other countries combined (15), including the other Axis nations.By the way, as for the chips:
Yellow = 20
Blue = 10
Red = 5
White = 1
-
Here are pics of the naval forces from the 1940 setup and then the 1942 setup.
Japan is almost the same. Italy’s navy is severely depleted. The Royal Navy is really cut down but the US Navy seems to have grown.
I wonder what would be the outcome of one big huge naval battle: All Axis vs. All Allies
-
@knp. thank goodness for our resident quartermasters on the boards +1.
-
Great stuff KNP!
Strategy wise, I am really unsure how Germany is supposed to get any momentum against Russia in this game. They can be wiped out of Russia R1 (except for E. Poland and Bessarabia) and then have next to nothing left. I am only one turn into a test game, but wow, it looks quite grim for Germany after just 1 turn.
-
Great Stuff KNP (as always).
-
Great stuff KNP!
Strategy wise, I am really unsure how Germany is supposed to get any momentum against Russia in this game. They can be wiped out of Russia R1 (except for E. Poland and Bessarabia) and then have next to nothing left. I am only one turn into a test game, but wow, it looks quite grim for Germany after just 1 turn.
I thought that the Germans might be under powered too. They get their teeth kicked in the first round, but start to rebound after that (tanks from W Europe). The Germans can mount a pretty good come back around turn 3, but seem to get bogged down again soon after as the Russians also get stronger (hard to drop Russian income, and they can get Iraq for extra bonus). Pressure from the US in Europe will also take its toll. I think Japan can make its presence felt in the Mid East, and on Russia’s back door though, so taking on Moscow looks to be a coordinated effort (much depends on where the US plays).
-
WILD BILL, vonLettow,
I agree with both of you guys. With Russia going first and the setup the way it stands, Germany really doesn’t stand a chance in Russia. I’ve tried this game a couple of times now, and both times Germany gets wiped out in Russia (Ukraine, W Ukraine, Smolensk, Belarus and Baltic States). Plus, Russia is strong enough that they can keep up the pressure or at least keep Germany out of Russia for most of the rest of the game.
In our last game of Global 1942, Russia actually took Berlin in round 3 or 4. Germany was able to take back Berlin and kick the Russians out of E Europe, but that gave Russia a LOT of money to spend and they were able to get a lot of really nice equipment (planes, tanks) that in most games of Global 40 they can’t afford to get. Germany had a lot of problems keeping the Russians back and fighting the Brits too. I don’t think there is a real chance of an Axis victory on the Europe side.
Japan had a decent chance as they were spread out all over the Pacific and Asia and China and Russia were very weak. Even with their higher income, they couldn’t keep up with the US Navy and eventually got cornered on their island.
Once that happened, the US went full tilt toward Europe and whatever small gains the Axis were able to make there soon disappeared. -
We played this weekend and Japan won, I believe on turn 6. USA went KGF with little to nothing in the Pacific and Japan ran wild taking almost all of China and then India on turn 5. Moscow stacked infantry and also had an armor stack rolling through south west Europe. USA took Italy down but it was too late as Japan took Hawaii.
Next time more attention to the pacific. Either more $ into the USA fleet in order to challenge Japan’s massive fleet or Persian factory to reinforce India.
-
I have not won as the Axis as yet, but should this game be seen as more of a tournament set up and the Axis given a timer victory instead?
I find it fun and do not see it as a must to win as the Axis, only a different perspective and possibly historical ending. (?)
Perhaps the Japanese should lose 3 units and the Germans be given 3 in exchange.I hope, incidentally, all are playing with the amended Sub set up as suggested by Krieghund.
I mean moving one German Sub to a different SZ, so one of the two survives. -
We should also play without the stupid Russian NO of Spread of Communism including Africa.
This is a ludicrous extension of the NO.
Stick to European territories. -
@wittmann:
I have not won as the Axis as yet, but should this game be seen as more of a tournament set up and the Axis given a timer victory instead?
I find it fun and do not see it as a must to win as the Axis, only a different perspective and possibly historical ending. (?)
Perhaps the Japanese should lose 3 units and the Germans be given 3 in exchange.I hope, incidentally, all are playing with the amended Sub set up as suggested by Krieghund.
I mean moving one German Sub to a different SZ, so one of the two survives.Where did Krieghund post that suggestion?
-
Panther asked me the same question last week.
Is on Larry’s own site: Harris Game Design. Was probably 3 or 4 months ago.
Cannot be more precise. Panther found it and posted a link. (I am not very good at that!). -
The move of the sub (one of them from SZ97 to SZ103) was suggested by Krieghund, here’s the link: http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?p=66021#p66021
I have one question: are USSR at war with Japan and/or vice versa? Thanks…
-
Si Sergente. Tutti i paesi sono in guerra.
-
That said, the special Mongolia rules still apply.
If Japan attacks a Russian territory bordering Mongolia, the 6 Mongolian Inf become Russian.
Or if Russia attacks a Japanese controlled territory, the Mongolians can never become Russian(unless Mongolia itself is attacked, of course
And the Allied player chooses to make them Russian).Have you tried playing? It makes a refreshing change. A few of us play team games here on AAA.
Suggested Topics
