So if new changes are Final.. when will Larry update his site?

In what way would taking your allies into battle even remotely slow the game?

Yeah, I have to admit that I have done that in the case of existing carriers. I say I will move the carrier to a certain spot so planes involved in a battle close by can land. Then the planes get killed (which I figured they would) so I leave my carrier where it is or move it to a “better” place.

@CWO:

@DizzKneeLand33:

Apparently none of you has a cat…

Yes, the cat issue is something that’s come up a few times on this board, as the picture below will illustrate.  I can’t recall if the suggestions were made seriously or not, but some board members have thought about protecting their games-in-progress from one weekend to the next by using a system of overhead pulleys to either raise the table to the ceiling or lower a protective hood over the map.  Feasible for a dedicated gaming room in the basement, but not likely to be approved for the living room by the lady of the house.

That is SO CUTE!!!

How well does the cat play?  Does he attack the US on turn one? :-D

@Maddog77:

What’s w/ all the whining going on about the “new” tank rule? It’s not a new one either. 3-2-2-5 is the “old” rule since the game was marketed in the early '80s. It’s only a buck more now. Big deal. Simmer down folks and relize it’s only a game. Getting you panties all bunched up and calliing names is pretty lame and infantile. Do some of you need a time out? Or do I have to get the belt out?  :-D

As far as the “rule” goes, I like the current 3-3-2-6. Only for the defense factor. But when I play the original, it’s 3-2-2-5. So I don’t rely on tanks for defense as much as I do a stack of Infantry.

Amazing! when tanks defend at three I use them for defense
when tanks defend at two I use infantry for defense

@Stikato:

If an airbase becomes non-operational due to SBR, does that prevent scrambling on that turn? (Since SBR happens “first”)

In other words, if Germany was able to knock out the AB in the UK, and the UK saved their fighters for a naval battle in 110, could the UK scramble to protect 110 on that German turn?

Scrambling occurs before SBRs, so bombing a base won’t prevent scrambling in the same turn.

Found Reply#6 that refers to Canadian shield…i.e. operation Hollywood. They credit me and my friend for independently publishing it first :) Search for Hollywood.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6090.0

I’m looking for the original on Avalon hills site if its still there…have to remember my password and old email address. I’ll post it in Revised if I find it…Kind of cool, people became serious about a KAF strategy.

EDIT:
Here is the AA50 plan I put on Board game geeks since you were curious. Its the third post.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/455961/what-is-next-to-mexico-on-the-other-side-of-the-bo

Here is a recollection of the original Hollywood plan, look at the bottom post by Iron Chef…my screen name on Avalon hill was Original_james back in 2004.

http://forum.rpg.net/archive/index.php/t-135650.html

SHARED THIS ON LARRY’S SITE ALREADY, JUST WANTED TO SHARE THOUGHTS HERE ALSO:

Ok Larry,

Me and an official playtester of yours here in Michigan (his name is mentioned in the rulebook for Europe 40) played Global with the new setup given with all the aircraft taken away and such. Here was a short summary of what happened:

On the Europe side:

Germany played pretty predictably, sinking most of the UK navy, taking France and the Eastern European pro-allied and pro-axis neutrals with Italy. They continued to build on their air force to keep the UK from building ships right away. Began to stack some ground units as well. Italy expanded into Africa and shored the Middle East slowly controlling the Med.

UK responded by NOT attcking the Italian navy and pulling back the rest of the navy it had left until it could come back to England with a strong navy that included the US. UK took the Pro-allied Brazil and shucked the troops to Africa to help the SAfrican force which slowly pushed the Italians back up to Egypt turning the tide in Africa.

Russia stedily built a force consisting of infantry spiced with some tanks, artillery, tacs and mechs. Stacking behind some dead zones and waiting for the declaration of war.

US spent about 70-80% of its cash in the Pacific since it could not even approach Africa/Europe before a state of war.

Now for the Pacific side:

India with little cash built mostly infantry and stacked. Combined navy near India and activated the Persian troops to bring back and help defend India. In Global, India has a little more help from some extra troops west and a few ships, including one French destroyer to help defend. Also, it can fall back with its stack to West India if needed.

ANZAC naval base is much needed and I am glad it is there- balances nicely.

China was stonger, but does what it normally does and stacks at Yunnan to wait to wear down Japs. China units are really used as a delaying tactic for the India crush.

Japan didn’t see an advantage to the India crush in J1 but felt that the initiative came to them in J2. They didn’t want to wait until J3 because they felt the Allies would have established a long-term defense of India. So with that the Japs declared war on J2 taking back the Dutch East Indies and unleashing the fury. Japan built transports J1 and J2 and built more planes to replace the ones missing from the new setup in J2.

Now even though both Japs and Allies have the same amount of planes removed, Japan can build them faster and move them closer to the action (India). US could also build their planes back but it takes them longer to get them to the battle scene (India). Brit India and ANZAC can’t build much of an airforce because of the typhoon of Jap units coming fast, so India stacks and ANZAC tries to distract and/or try to send some units.

Japan can make the US wait longer to send ships and planes down to ANZAC by using its navy as a shield. I as Allies, I made tactical blunder ruining my chance to meet the Jap onslaught of India from behind through Australia. However, if not for this the setup seems very balanced and gave some options to both sides.

A hot topic question will be “what to do with the Russian inf on the Pacific side??”
It is very frustrating for the Russians, if you attack immediately, Japan will bring the heat to wipe them out with now China and Russia give large concessions to Japan $$$. If you stack and sit. Japan has to garrison Manchu with a small force but continues to spearhead to India. I figure as the Russians, you have to attack with the 18 inf at some point. The hard part is when. Timing is everything in this decision.

With US entering the war at turn 2, the US began to throw a good amount of cash to the European side, mainly because of the blunder in the Pacific- India would not last long now- 2-3 more rounds. I recovered nicely putting pressure on the French coast quickly until I made another tactical error involving Gibraltar- arrggh!!!- new rules and new map takes a little while getting used to.  :-(

Besides these 2 blunders, I thought the Global game was pretty fair and balanced with a slight edge to the Allies. I definitely think the Allies are a little easier to play because that sides is spilt into 6 sub parts (countries) that are easy to prepare while you are waiting for the Axis to finish. The Axis with so many more units in the beginning, take longer and you have to be very efficient both in the short-term and the long-term planning.

Anyway that was are anaylsis so I hope it helps.  :-)

I only have the forum and 1 person to play with so I might use yalls tips to teach someone.