Starting Units

42 will give you more of the “typical” A&A scenario (Germany starts deep in Russia, Japan is at its historical apex, etc.).

41 will give you a new experience, where the Axis haven’t really started expanding yet, but are tremendously strong compared to the Allies.

If you’re all around the same skill level, play 42. If you have a mix of stronger and poorer players, play 41 with Objectives Off and have the stronger players take the Axis. Axis are stronger in AA50 but harder to play, so the learning curve should be enough to keep the stronger players on their toes.

Good luck with your game!

@Gargantua:

But cmon, Germany building an ACC! That shouldn’t bother you! :P

True, if that’s all he built and the Allies have enough to easily destroy it.

But aircraft carriers ROCK, for ALL powers.  Now that they only cost 14, and who knows - in their game it’s possible it only cost 11!

Aircraft carriers are the most efficient way to get quick defense against air, in the sea.  I buy an aircraft carrier with Germany in almost every game, and yes, I usually win.

Now building one in SZ5 when it’s occupied, depending on the situation, may be a very bad idea, as you said.  :-)

@idk_iam_swiss:

That wasn’t a battle…it was UK pearl harbor. They flew in dropped bombs and ran away. Thats like calling Pearl harbor a battle. which is wasn’t.

In fact, the Japanese used Taranto as a model for planning Pearl Harbor

Well, you guys might be missing something here.  You do not need to agree that the game is imbalanced, or have a consensus on what bid is necessary to balance it, to have a consensus on what I am talking about.
Example: Person A may think the game is already balanced and that a bid is not necessary, Person B thinks an Allied bid of 6 ipcs is needed when you play with NOs, and Person C is nutty and thinks that 21 ipcs are needed for the allies with NOs.  But all of these three people may in fact agree that a bid of 2 infantry in europe would be equivalent to a bid of 2 naval warships off the coast of america.
Agreeing on what to do to balance the game is not a pre-requisite to agreeing on certain bids types being equivalent.

Or, to think about it in a different way, lets think of this as a Ratio.
I’m just going to throw this out there, but lets say you have a Bid of X.
If you use it on the “front line” in either Europe or Africa/MiddleEast, then all you get is X.
If you use it not on the front line in Europe/Africa/MiddleEast, or you use it on the front line in China, then you get X1.5
If you use it not on the front line in China, or you use it in the Atlantic on Navy, UK main island Air/Land, then you get X2
If you use it on Pacific navy, or American Continent Land/Air, then you get X*2.5.

Now, as you can see, if you think X should be zero, then they all end up as zero.  If you think X should be 6, then you could either get 2 europe/egypt inf, or 3 chinese inf, or a cruiser in the atlantic, or a DD + a sub in the pacific.  If you think X should be 10, etc, etc.

@Krieghund:

@Gallo:

We both agree that the movement is legal, since it’s not specifically forbidden by the rule book… but his complain is very soundable: all those zeros should be able to intercept my bombers (or other fighters if I had them)

Fighters in territories or sea zones being flown over cannot intercept planes.  Only planes in the territory or sea zone actually being attacked may defend.

@Cowboybob:

On another note i have alwase wonderd….when Fighters attack a territory that does not have any Fighters or AA guns in it and just Ground forces,do the Fighters attacking get to just keep rollin tell they have killed all the Infintry/Tanks?.I can not tell you how maney times me and my fellow A&A freaks have run into a situation where the Germans have these air forces attack a USSR territory with no AA or Fighters.So my queation is do they get to kill all the Reds or do they have to turn back after one round?

Ground units defend normally when attacked by fighters and/or bombers.  The attacking air units can stick around for as many rounds as they like, or until they’re shot down, whichever comes first.

Thanks

Well, I don’t think we can say either way if the game favors one side or the other if the setup is incorrect. Hopefully it is balanced or is close. Hopefully in the true setup India and Australia and Canada have an IC. I doubt it but a man can always dream. If it doesn’t I will try to house rule them in but, that leads to trying to rebalance the game. If of course it was balanced in the first place. Hopefully China’s setup gives them a fighting chance. I don’t want to see Japan able to defeat them in 2 rounds. Being able to beat China should be an endgame scenerio for the Axis. It should play out more like AAP.

@marechallannes:

@Driel310:

To add to that, putting in an extra DD in SZ15 makes a shitload of difference since Germany is now unable to attack Egypt on G1, making life hard on Italy as you described.

Of course you have all the liberty of the world to guess the correct setup as we don’t know the whole true one, but this change is so big impact on game balance is very substantial.  :wink:

p.s. trust me, if Japan wants, India will fall on J2. Only the Russians can prevent that, but I doubt they can spare the troops.

Did you play it with this DD in SZ 15?  When did you take egypt?

I am not shure to sacrify the german bomber for a landing operation in turn 1…

No we did not. We used the R9 version of the map Bluestroke made. We believe that is the only setup that has some basis, the pictures from GenCon. Any changes to that setup (although we got confirmed there are some) are pure speculation.

And unless you are unlucky, Germany should not push the Egypt attack until the bomber dies too.

I am starting to think it is the strongest position the axis has ever been. Now if we only knew all the bonuses……