Anyone still play pacific as a stand alone?

Hey Major,

I’m in EST. I can play almost anytime since I’m retired. Just let me know when you’re available and we can get going.

@CWO:

@John:

I think my first edition Anzac Cruiser is the Kent Class and the other is the County Class for the second edition. Is this what you were saying?

That’s the most likely hypothesis, using the nomenclature of the rulebooks.Â

Ok, cool, so it is the British Class Cruiser. Good to know!

Thanks again! :-D

While it’s true that you will occassionally be heard, it will certainly not be an interactive process.  Unless, of course, someone from here decides to take it upon themselves to transpose discussions back and forth between the two sites.  My point is that anything posted here may or may not actually make it back to Larry, whereas if it’s posted there he’ll definitely see it and comment on it.

I’m really not sure what all this resistance is about.  If anyone really wants to participate in this process (or even just watch), what’s the big deal about going over to Larry’s site and paying attention to one thread?

My thinking is as a separate game this setup is flawed, but I’m betting anything that the Global game (the one we are all going to play from here on out for the most part) is pretty balanced with the addition of all those Russian infantry to the North of Manchuria. Something tells me that India crush strategy will take a beating.

no.

it seems like no one is answering the threads question.

japan initial purchases are transports, then subs and destroyers to keep usa back. they have enough tacs already
china they can not purchase tacs
uk needs to buy ground units
anzac needs to buy cheap naval units
usa is the only country that i would even consider a tac purchase. then give my head a shake and realize that i need more important units.

@oztea:

id like it if a turn represented 3 months
1 turn to a season
so that seasonal rules would be simple to implement.

I see where you’re coming from, in fact, I had the same idea, try to make it simple. However, I honestly didn’t really think of seasonal board changes, I was only going for chronological comparisons.

Really awesome this came up!

Sure, my opponents did in our first game: I was the Japan.

I attacked the US navy at Hawaii with my huge Imperial Navy: obviously I destroyed all while they don’t scrambled any fighter nor tactical bomber. At his turn, the US player counter-attacked my ships, destroying all them… We closed the game and immediately started a second one: there’s no fun in playing Pacific without ships! :D

@bigopfer:

You are totally right Plum, the game is not worth the money they charged. The map IS amazing, the gameplay IS really fun. But you nailed it with the boxes, paper money, IPC chart, cardboard pieces, lack of tac bombers. I mean, I paid basically the same money for this game as I paid for my copy of AA50 and this AA40 Pacific is missing lots of the quality that AA50 had.

Exactly!  I was totally content with how they presented AA50.  Everything was high quality and all aspects of the game and its components were top notch.  Totally worth the money I spent on it.

While this game certainly has some high quality aspects about it, (especially the game play, which is all that really counts in the end) there are so many small blunders it’s really frustrating.  The income chart is what gets me the most.  It seems like the day before they shipped the game out somebody realized “Oh crap!  We forgot income charts!” and then threw together the first thing they thought of and tossed it in the box.  I’m surprised they weren’t scribbled on a piece of notebook paper.