Pacific 1940 review copy has arrived

@crsluggo
Thank you so much! Life saver :D

Bummer, I think Jonas got spooked by some spam.

The original pacific by far was more fun and balanced (if you used 23 VC’s as Japan win).

Pacific 1940 is distorted because it was designed to be combined with Europe 1940, hence Japan is overpowered (to compensate for America having more money in Global).

@Admiral_Thrawn:

Just got the game today. Very cool. I’m not really complaining but, does anyone else wish the game started Dec. 7th ‘41? Or had a 40’ and 41’ scenerio? It seems it would keep it simple for one thing. Not a lot of new rules about when how you go to war. The game is about war. Just cut out the first 3 rounds of the game and get to it. The games are long enough. I feel you lose historical flavor as well without the sneak attack of the Japanese. The surprise attacks was the main reason the Japanese had a silver of a chance in WWII. There whole philosophy was based around it. In the original AAP this was captured nicely with the defend on 1 rule for the surprise attack. Now we have this artifical the U.S. and U.K. just automatically go to war if not attacked. Just like the real war in AAP 41’ you wanted revenge for those easy attacks.

Don’t count out the Brits (probably never ANZAC though) attacking Japan first! In our last game Japan had Yunan on J1. China reinforced and sat in Szechwan, so on J2 Japan reinforced Yunan with even more units, and some planes (not all). In all Japan had I think 4 inf, 2 art, 1 tank, 1 mech inf, 4 figs in Yunan, and the BRITS rolled up in there to save an early conquest of China on UK2. They blew Japan out of the water actually with I think, 6 inf, 1 art, 2 tanks, 1 mech inf, 4 figs and a tac bomber. The Brits ruined Japan! It was an exciting move, and big for the allies!

@Vareel:

I don’t think i’m explaining properly.  There should be convoy zones to represent what goes from the US to the UK/Russia.  If G attacks those convoy zones only, it would start war.  I think that is how it should be.  Obviously there should be other convoy zones as well, at least for the UK.

I suppose it depends how they do lend/lease but I’d prefer it not be a simply free cash objective for Britain/Russia (where’s the lending part in that).  What I’d like to see is a lend/lease that’s not a 1:1 gain for Britain and Russia.  The US can designate some number of IPCs to Russia and/or Britain (say 12) and they get half that amount (6 to the banker).  This has a sense of depreciated value and inflated cost (hey, the US is capitalist) to that “lease” from the US and doesn’t punish the axis as much trying to balance Russia & Britain’s economy vs Germany’s which could be unfairly skewed as Russia and Britain get free loot at minimal expense to the US.  And that could be designated in as a different type of convoy zone, perhaps only near the US coast, which would mean the Germans would have to go way past the Channel to stop it, if they even wanted to.  It has the benefit of immediately helping Russia and Britain in a pinch, but if they can hold out the US can send more in US units, which I think would be a more balanced way to send help to an ally.

That way it’s not quite the same as the established convoy zone, because Russia and Britain can’t GET cash from US territory obviously (nor should they)and there would need to be convoy zones for britain that are wholly independent from the lend lease zones you speak of.

@runyan99:

Regardless, it would be nice if some people would work on a new 1940 setup and ruleset for AA50.

Okay, I elect you.

idk. but I most definatley will implement the whole russia can fight china rule.

great pix craig.  nice to put faces with the names.  +1 to you.