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

No one is mentioning what Italy is doing.Sending as many mech and tanks east to can-open ahead of German forces is popular.
Its good to battle the brits all over the med.Its more rewarding for Italys  income level.My mistake is trying to do both,and not succeeding at either before the American wave arrives in SZ 91.

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.

Italy can’t go first. The axis are already too powerful. I have never won a Europe game playing against myself on the europe board with allies. Italy going before UK would mean Italy is a juggernaut! Also keep the french units. They don’t do much, but making them UK wouldn’t be historical at all.

would 1942 work for Russia? they would have very little income seeing that most of their IPC’s are made i the western part of the country.

I thought it was funny that one of the first things it brought up was a review for AA50.

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.

@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.

As I said, the only time this would be good is if Russia holds all its territories and is about to attack Germany, and so Japan captures 1 territory to stop them.