Pacific 1940 review copy has arrived

@tmartin

I’ve never done it myself, but my impression is that the game is severely imbalanced in favor of Japan, so start with a 30-50 IPC bid for the Allies, and revise from there.

Bummer, I think Jonas got spooked by some spam.

@CWO:

@John:

I think my first edition Anzac Cruiser is the Kent Class and the other is the County Class for the second edition. Is this what you were saying?

That’s the most likely hypothesis, using the nomenclature of the rulebooks.Â

Ok, cool, so it is the British Class Cruiser. Good to know!

Thanks again! :-D

I say that the next game needs Canada, special neutral rules for Finland, and vichy french rules (and, depending on the time period, poland as well). Why be picky and only make a few improvements?  :-D

I stopped watching Spielberg projects after AI.

I did hold my nose and watch BoB after several friends assured me it wasn’t some leftist revisionist effort. I watched the interviews with some of the soldiers involved and when they only panned some of the inaccurate historic aspects I decided to watch it. I was going to do the same here until I read a recent Hanks’ interview where “he wanted to emphasise(sic) the way the Japanese had been treated by American soldiers” and “also wanted to have people say, ‘We didn’t know our troops did that to Japanese people’.” He then implied that same racial hatred of WWII soldiers was present in Iraq and Afghanistan today…

Yup. I’m done with this. Needless to say I decided to read Sledge’s book instead. Rather get the straight story from someone who was there instead of a revisionist retelling as seen through PC colored digital camera lenses.

@jeffdestroyer:

Someone will make a larger Map if the 1940 Europe game does not have  big enough territories to hold pcs.
The crunch has occured in Europe in the past

Yes, this is my concern as well. But no worries. As we have seen in the past, if there is a big enough issue with TT size and enough people complain, our talented artists here at AA.org will produce some beautiful jumbo maps for us to print out and all will be right with the universe.

You talented folks know who you are  :wink:

@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.