My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

@jejedada Merci pour le travail !

I usually figure half and hour to an hour per round as long as players have a concrete idea of what they want to accomplish and plan during other people’s turns.  So, the fastest game of Europe I have had so far was this last weekend, at 4.5 hours and 5 rounds.

@Bodeacious:

@Koningstiger:

Land three American transports loaded with 3x infantry and 3x tanks in Africa and along with the assistance of the Brits and some token French forces, the Axis will never ever control all of Africa! An Allied player that allows this is defeinitely doing something wrong! ( I agree that Africa is a relative sideshow, but you simply cannot allow the Axis to take ALL the African IPCs!)

The Us can send three tanks to Brazil and pick up the three men there.

Wouldn’t you have to unload at least one of the tanks to claim the infantry? That would then also mean that transports’s move is over since you unloaded. You wouldn’t be able to move that transport again until your next turn. Apart from that that’s a good points. I also go to Africa via Brazil. Again, an Allied player that allows the Axis to completely conquer Africa is doing sth wrong…

How much did you pay for shipping (USA to UK)?

It looks amazing. Thanks 13thguardsriflediv

I’ve said it many times, by why not do it again! :-D

2 Player Game
1. Germany, Japan and Italy
2. USSR, UK, ANZAC, US, China, and France

3 Player Game
1. Germany, Japan, and Italy
2. USSR, UK, and France
3. ANZAC, China, and US

4 Player Game
1. Germany and Italy
2. USSR, UK, and France
3. ANZAC, China, and US
4. Japan

5 Player Game
1. Germany and Italy
2. USSR
3. UK, France, and China
4. Japan
5. US and ANZAC

6 Player Game
1. Germany
2. Italy
3. USSR
4. US and ANZAC
5. Japan
6. UK, France, and China

Yeah

Also in 5 and 6 China can be with the Russians.

@maverick_76:

That is why I was kidding, kinda like the pot calling the kettle black……

lol. You’ll never admit it, I know it  :wink:

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.