What's the first thing you'll do upon getting Europe 1940?

@Cesc.1987:

So if I play a single Europe 40 or Pacific 40 game I must use the setup that is on top of the faction’s boxes.
If I play a global 40 game I must use the Global 40 setup alpha 3.9 version, correct?

Not really, Alpha3.9 is way outdated, as it was the predecessor of the official Global 2nd edition ruleset.

@rulebook:

Global Rules

…
Set up units as shown on the setup charts found in Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940. Additionally, place the following units:
Amur: 6 Soviet Infantry
Sakha: 6 Soviet Infantry and 2 Soviet AAA
Buryatia: 6 Soviet Infantry
Egypt: 2 ANZAC Infantry (also, remove 1 United Kingdom infantry)

…

The powers start with the following IPC income levels and treasuries:
Power  Starting Income
Germany  30
Soviet Union  37
Japan  26
United States  52
China  12
United Kingdom - Europe  28
United Kingdom - Pacific  17
Italy  10
ANZAC  10
France  19

HTH :-)

As for attacking France, I only attack Paris.

As for SZ 93, I only need 2 air units (1 Fighter, 1 Tactical Bomber) and with that, I outgun the French Navy. (Though, I do send 2 fighters and 1 tactical, for better odds, I just dont have too.)  2 Fighters, Tactical from W. Germany.

W. Germany to France
France to S. France
S. France to SZ 93
(Battle)
SZ 93 to SZ 95
SZ 95 to either S. Italy or N. Italy

why the americans on turn 2 are near afrika?

@z0m4d:

These are pretty sweet!  Any motivation to do one adjusted for the different national objectives in the 2nd edition?

I concur!  These are the best I’ve found and the NO board is fantastic!  I’d love to see these updated for the 2nd Ed.!  Exclamation point!

@Hansolo88:

Yes, bring on the 2nd edition review!

The threads below aren’t reviews, but you may find them useful if you haven’t yet seen them.  They include map pictures, sculpt pictures and unit identification tables:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28201.15

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=28244.60

@LHoffman:

@Make_It_Round:

Italy. For the novelty factor alone.
I like problem-solving, and Italy is bound to have more problems than the proverbial one-armed paper hanger…
Plus, it looks like there’ll finally be something interesting to do in Africa, with so many French and British units around to roll up.

I’d like Italy because they aren’t all over the place, they basically have only 1 front and they can have a fun and challenging time taking over Africa. Very little stress. They can just do what they like and support the Germans as needed… What a life!

I probably won’t be Italy first… but they’d be fun to play with as you could experiment a good bit… with what to attack and where to go. You could play as Italy the first time and learn what not to do with other powers by just watching everyone else. Then you’d be more prepared when you play again.

@LHoffman:

Interesting, yes… but I don’t think the similarity between the A&A game and Axis pact you reference is intentional. By that I mean it was a total coincidence. Taking into account all of the other errors in Pacific and previous versions, there is no way that the designers paid that much attention to detail. I bet it just looked like a logical place to split the board for them.

Yeah. I think they just split it where China ended, and that happened to be there.

Besides, 10 degrees is a large error.

I assume you meant to put “owned” instead of “pwned” when talking about a Barbarossa/Stalingrad game in reference to Battle of the Bulge or Guadalcanal. I agree here too. At least for me, a game such as that would probably have owned the others.

Nah, I meant “pwn”. I was using netspeak: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pwned

I think some kind of A&A Russian-front game would be the brilliant, but I don’t hold out much hope of seeing one.

I won’t continue, since I’ve made my feelings clear and this is just one of those ‘we don’t agree’ type issues. I also don’t want to sound like I wouldn’t be able to enjoy / play the game because of it, which obviously isn’t true.

However, I will still say this…

No, they’d probably, like me, not give a damn.

I think some of them, like some people here, clearly would give a damn. For that reason alone designers should take certain things into account. I don’t hold WotC in particularly high esteem, since they have a habit of short-changing the consumer on many small aspects of games which in reality would take almost no effort or cost to put right. Larry only has input which goes so far, and he has my respect. But Wizards do too many irritating things, and to me, this is just another one of them.