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

My name is Emiel Lieffering,
I am planning on hosting a tournament for Axis and Allies 1940 Europe 2nd Edition through TripleA. Anybody could enter and we will host it in a discord server. We will play for fun and the games will be played in teams of 2 players. You could join this tournament as a team or be matched with another player.
If you are interested you can add me on discord (Emielson#2198) or send me an e-mail at LiefferingEmiel@gmail.com

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Not really, Alpha3.9 is way outdated, as it was the predecessor of the official Global 2nd edition ruleset.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

If you haven’t found it yet, go to HistoricalBoardGaming.com (sponsor of AAA.org!).

They have copies.

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.

My bet would still be for Russia because even though he does speak well of how Germany is doing he seems to be even more proud of the fact that Russia has held out for such a long time and is still very strong.

You’d think it would be easier to set-up the subforum and move the threads as appropriate now, before the release date.  Wouldn’t you?

#584

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.

Can we combine this with A&A on a Colonial Diplomacy map and play global?