@zooooma:
I’m certainly a fan of the more advanced games. But I like to remind myself that, had MB’s 2nd edition been the last A&A game ever made, we would still be playing it and considering one of the best games ever made.
I get that 1941 is more “bare bones” than MB. And of course I haven’t played it yet. But I’m optimistic it will be a good game in its own right, even if it pales in comparison.
IMHO, 1941 is less in every department than the 1980s MB A&A… it has fewer units in the box, fewer territories on the map, less income for all nations… it really is in every aspect, a bare-bones, “what’s the most we can remove from the game and have it still seem to be A&A” type of game there is. But for the same reason, it is cheap to buy, easy to learn and the fastest of the series to play… but the gaming experience (IMO) is less than that of the 1980s MB A&A. If you end up hating 1941 for its gameplay, its still worth the purchase, if for nothing more than some pretty interesting unit sculpts that are unique to 1941, but fully playable with other versions of A&A (like German Tiger tanks).
The true-successor to the 1980s MB A&A out of the current lineup of games, is, in-fact, 1942.2. More than 1941, more than AA50, and certainly more than Global, 1942.2 has the closest “feel” of 1980s MB A&A in units available, map/territories, income purchase power, overall gameplay and depth of game… it is the true successor to MB’s 1980s A&A. Having said that, I would consider AA50 the “ultimate evolution” of the 1980s MB A&A design concept. Global is a beast of its own… a great game, but its more of a bigger evolution of A&A and a “lets see what we can do with a game like this” rather than a refinement of the original, it’s an evolution and a taking it to the next level.