Axis and Allies 1942 Second Edition vs the Original Game (1989)

Ive seen it tried many times against me, but its a side show. you need a combination of events. You need to make a thousand cuts against an enemy and it will die quickly. Keep hitting France, Karelia, Italy, Benulux, Norway and you will win

@W4rP1g oops! Corrected!

I’m currently playing two games IRL, but will be glad to start a forum/email game with someone!

@Cow:

Rommel I made my scientifically proven starting setup changes.

I know about those. I love them, but I meant a whole map redesign (example: China has 3 territories). That would be even cooler.

Now that I understand the rules properly (well some of them anyway :lol:) I can see a whole new set of options for the UK, in Egypt, India & possibly the Med, perhaps including SZ37. wittman’s G carrier in the Med is also making a whole lot more sense. And my use of R fighters looks set to change. I will just have to be sad enough to play one more solo game to test these out I guess.

I can not think of any previous game I have ever had which would have interested me enough to be as sad as that! :-D

I find the concentrated bomber strategy very interesting as an approach for the US, for the reasons outlined here - the cost of getting US infantry into the action is incredibly high, so much so that Air power compares much better vs. land forces  for the US than for other nations.

How many bombers is too many? I was picturing maybe 2 US bombers on US1, but for the purposes of strategic bombing, the early IPCs denied will be magnified throughout the game, so perhaps a US1 buy of 3 bombers makes sense?

Unless Japan was posturing in range of a US attack, I imagine I would build the bombers in western US and then send them directly to the UK for use in SBRs vs. Germany (or sinking/deterring a German fleet). Would you agree?

Aniversary Is cool to have but other than having Italy I just wasn’t all that stoaked about it. The sculpts in mine were really bad in alot of ways I ranted about this along with others when it came out . 1942 Second Ed is awesome and with a bit of tweaking you can probably get a better experience than AA50. HBG and FMG have a set of Italian minis and roundels you could easily use. As far as balancing goes you could simply combine Germany and Italy and simply use your Italian pieces in place of Germans where it calls for them or use some house rules.

You can get the Aniversary rules too but I’m not sure where.

While I might dodge some stones being thrown here AA50, was not a favorite of mine. For what it costs to get a copy it’s not worth it. There are a ton of threads on here as to how to make your own version of AA50.

Personally the attraction of this game for me was to have the game in my AA collection. I have all the board based AA games except for Guadal Canal and AAE40.

@Sean.C:

@adaptation:

I don’t know why people say Pearl Harbor cannot be done anymore - don’t forget that the Japanese sub is now absolutely untouchable with the new rules and can always go for Pearl Harbor. You can get 3 fighters(9), 1 bomber(4), 1 cruiser(3), 1 sub(2) and 1 AC(1) (grand total of 19) VS sub(1),destroyer(2),AC(2),fighter(4) (Grand total of 9).

Over 95% chance of victory with average IPC losses around 16-18 depending on if you chose to lose a bomber or fighter after your sub.

Then you end up defending with 2 fighters ( 8 ), 1 cruiser (3), and 1 AC (2) (grand total of 13) VS 2 fighters (6), 1 bomber (4), 1 destroyer (2), and 1 battleship (4) (grand total of 16).

Over 95% chance of losing your Japanese fleet with an average IPC loss around 18-20 for America depending on if they chose to kill a fighter or bomber after their destroyer.

Plus US player submerges the sub right at the beginning of the J1 attack, allowing it to participate on the counter on US2…

Then you have to consider that UK1 has almost a 70% chance of wiping out the other half of your japanese fleet

You’re goal here is India, not America.  The only reason people did it before was it was a slam dunk with no losses most of the time with units you didn’t need for India anyhow.  It’s a completely different story now.  Now your looking at the annihilation of a majority of your fleet that you actually need to help take India.

Yup, if the UK attacked SZ37 then Japan has to wipe out any remaining UK fleet from that attack and get the UK transports as quickly as possible. Attacking the US fleet almost removes Japan from the Pacific after US1.