Is there an errata (sp?) out for Europe and or Global yet?

@cds

Thank you! Seems like G2 is better than G3.

@Oyvind:

Could someone explain the “bid” in the first question?

It is a way of evening up the playing field when it is generally considered that one side has an advantage over the other. Using this as an example:

@Colt45:

Personally, i take Axis with a 3 bid otherwise il take Allies.

Colt45 554 has said that they’ll take Axis if they are given a bid of 3. This means that at the start of the game before the first turn they either get to put down units to the value of their bid, 3, in any of their territories, or accept 3 bonus IPC into one of their countries for spending at a later time.

In a general bidding arrangement, the opponent would have the opportunity to take the Axis for a bid of 2 if they thought they could win with that and that process repeats until a bid has been determined and teams are set.

A bid of 3 is considered a pretty well balanced game. I believe the current bid for 1940 Global is sitting between 20-30 for the Allies. We can read into that that people think that playing the game without bids leads to many more Axis wins than Allied wins by evenly matched players.

@QwertGold:

Also, In Aplha3 Russia gets +9IPC instead of the 2 units, regardless of their diplomatic status with Germany, and what territories they control.

I just checked the Alpha 3 thread again and did not see this rule on there.  Can you tell me where you found this?  Thanks

All, just an FYI, but there is an A&A 40 Pacific discussion thread re: the Alpha set-up for the Pacific in the global game re: Siam. Since there is no truly “Global” site, just an FYI.
Ron

Stay on topic. Geez.

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.

@Bube:

I think that the global game will sell seperatly so the can sell us all the sutff that should have been in the game in the first place.

They have already stated that there will not be a separate global game. Everything you need will be included in both the Pacific and Atlantic games.

@Imperious:

1 French inf

???

Theres a French Infantry that starts in the UK, like ANZAC had a guy in Malta.