My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

You should check out Young Grasshoppers videos for global(you’ll see all the units on the Europe map at start-up)
  Sometimes I find units do sort of spill over into nearby zones.In our last game we had a lot of units parked in Romania.We parked aaa guns and air units in the black sea and just announced that they’re all in Romania.Point the noses of the planes at the territory you want them to be in so there’s less chance of confusion.

@theROCmonster:

Honestly I think if anything the allies are advantaged in this one. US is just so powerful. Russia will always fall no matter what the allies do, but it then becomes a struggle for the axis to take Egypt. Normally a game will come down to the US having factories in finland/Norway, and possibly southern france and Normandy. While Germany has a ton of money, and Italy is making under 10 because of convoy raids. Germany has a ton of money that it tries to use to in both defense against a monstrous US, and a pretty powerful UK, while also trying to take Egypt. As long as allied players don’t freak out when Moscow falls then they have a good shot at victory.

The allies have to play very smart, and not rush into things if they are to keep germany from getting the final VC.

@P@nther:

This is covered in the rulebook:

@Rulebook:

Multinational Forces: Transports belonging to a friendly power can load and offload your land units.  This is a three-step process:
1. You load your land units aboard the friendly transport  on your turn.
2. The transport’s controller moves it (or not) on that  player’s turn.
3. You offload your land units on your next turn.

Unloading in an enemy territory occurs in your scenario in US’ combat move phase, followed by the battle.
Unloading in a friendly territory occurs in US’ NCM phase.

Thanks, sorry I missed that.

I looked it up. Yes, you are right. It only applies to major ICs, so a minor one could indeed be built in Finland.

Ja das ist gut thank you brothers

Yes, but with so much information overload I started doubting my own thoughts and ideas.

@Krieghund:

@GrayBlaZe:

Hey Keighund, got a question; Why could it not be considered to be up to a nine person global game instead of six.  I do understand that playing France, China or ANZAC will be very minor, however, it’s possible for nine people to draw straws and last three places got it get the minors.  Or am I missing somthing?  I’m assuming that it’s just listed as six because that is the max number that would be a good game to spread playing around equally so nobody is just totally eliminated fast with France or having to play limited China.  Is this correct?  Thanx……

You’ve already answered your own question:

@GrayBlaZe:

When they state the number of players, it is just a recomendation.  You could very well play with nine players except; France, China, & ANZAC would be quite boring, unless a newbe or child was playing with you, it would be good for them to play a minor country.  If you are playing with six then some player would play two counties, however, they are still considerd nine different armies; if you play two they don’t mix there income.  So it always be nine indiviual counties weither you play with nine people or two.

The “official” player mix listed in the rules is what we consider to be the best mix for optimal enjoyment of the game.  There’s nothing stopping you from changing that if you have more than six people who want to play.  I do think, however, that getting beyond six will definitely get into territory that could be at least somewhat boring for players of minor powers (ANZAC, China and France).  A seventh player playing all three wouldn’t be too bad, though.

I know, but now it is impossible for the axis to win without taking Cairo (unless they invade UK, US). Also, the middle easts income is now a factor and UK would be limping without Middle East/Africa income. Italy would also be earning 40+.