Community Links for Global 1940 Related files

@Kreuzfeld said in Why is Global better than Revised?:

@SS-GEN It is a very good game. At least 40% of the rules are relating to optional units. Most people play with most optional units, but a lot of people play the vanilla version.

:+1: :+1: :+1:

Short answer: Yes.

Long answer: Yes, but there are a couple differences between the editions. At a minimum, download and understand that rules for Pac '40 2nd Ed. in addition to the rules for Eur '40 2nd Ed. Also, Japan and ANZAC will be missing their own AA Gun sculpts. No game play affect to this, just something for those that like the pieces. Also, the 1st Ed ANZACs are Brits in Grey, it wasn’t until the 2nd Ed ANZACs that ANZAC got “New Zestralian” units.

Clear as mud?

-Midnight_Reaper

We played with dice, not low luck.

Wilk,

I read through some of your posts. You seem to have a lot of questions. We’re happy to help, but I have to ask what materials you have for AAG40?

Do you have the actual game to reference or are you part of a group and there’s only one copy you guys are sharing?

One answer that might help is that the second edition of Axis&Allies Global 1940 has the most up to date official rules set. The alphas were for the first editions.

If you have the manual you will want to read the rules very carefully and thoroughly.  Its easy to miss things in this edition.

As for a picture I don’t know of one available that will suit your needs. Even if there was one, because the game is so large your avaerage sheet of paper is too small to see enough detail to use as a handout most likely. CWOMarc’s suggestion of taking a picture would be your best bet.

I hope this helps.

@knp7765:

The only issue I had was with the giant ANZAC infantry units. They are a head taller than all other nations’ infantry and really look weird on the board.

Also, their round base has a larger diameter than the standard A&A infantry base, so they don’t fit in the central depression of standard A&A mini poker chips, which is a bit annoying.

So what’s the…wait.

I gets it now: there are 36 techs on 6 charts. Roll 1 die for the chart and 1 for the tech.

If that’s what he means definitely no.

@valtteri771:

why would japan have to attack russia I have won many times as germany without sealion and japanese help in barbarossa.

Oh ,  and if you check out the early GNazi buys,  my Axis opponent  even admits he didn’t buy enough tanks since he used his airforce to destroy the British Navy in turn 2 and the Mediterranean Navy in turn 3  early in the game.  so the extra 9 IPCs from the far east could have been elminated earlier.  He didn’t hit it till Japan Turn 8  which meant the Soviets colleted 72 IPCs for the game from the far east.  cutting it down by turn 5 or 6 well after Germany was pressuring the Soviets and with Japan stomping to to india could have swung the war against the Allies!  I had also moved 15 far east troops all the way back to moscow and they were big help in retaking Stalingrad.

We both had prior family engagements, thought I mentioned that in our last email, and Germany was a paper tiger after the sealion bid and all the failed tech rolls. Yes you were pushing India, and I probably would have lost it, but the us fleet was moving and ready to rumble, not to mention ANZAC actually had a BB and a fully loaded AC fleet ready to move! UK had sealed up Africa and Germany had a one layer offensive into Russia (no backup inf on the way). By the way you slipped the +10 IPC for Japan rule into the original Alpha setup when we played. That is part of the improved Alpha i think, Jim and I had never played with the Alpha setup before that so we never noticed.

I still think it would have been close. But I distinctly remembering you folding during the auction due to time after we decided to call it (9 hours of game-play) but I may be wrong.

Also I will send you some links concerning the tactical game I mentioned that we should demo next year at Ellis Con. I have made Terrain and stuff for it over the past few weeks. Its Axis & Allies on steroids.