AAP40 double game on my new table

Yes, it’s in the FAQ.

http://www.wizards.com/AvalonHill/rules/AA_Pacific_1940_2nd_Edition_FAQ.pdf

It does!  Thanks for the rulebook notes.  Makes taking Japan that much harder, little OP’ing… but it is 4 on 1.

No only minus 2.  So if the IPC value of surronding territories was 6 the sub would only subract 2 IPC.  It would take 3 subs (2x3) to subtract all 6 IPC.  Now if there were 4 subs in the sea zone (2x4=8) the nation would only lose 6 IPC because the value of the territories only equal 6.

@cressman8064:

Another idea to add to this tread is to play Pacific1940 with every nation having the “Improved Shipyards” technology. This technology will be included in the global game anyways, but by giving it to every nation in the Pacific only game it turns out to really help the allies. If you havn’t heard, this technology makes all subs, transports and destroyers -1 IPC, and all crusiers, Aircraft carriers and Battelships -2 IPCs. Since the allies generally will be building more ships to counter the Japs, it allows America to build up faster but at the same time also gives the same advantage to Japan if they choose to go for heavy naval builds.
I played a game testing this change and I as Japan still performed a massive Jap1 attack. America built destroyers and crusiers like they were going out of style and while Japan was mopping up the DEI and India America was threating the rest of the Pacific and Japan herself with massive fleets. ANZAC was also able to build 2 subs from turn 1 and they can become a real thorn in the DEI.

I really like this idea Cressman. While the OP’s idea could work if Allies weren’t allowed into the USSR, it’s simply too complicated for me, as I already fail to follow a rule or two. :roll:

However, Cressman’s idea could work, as the Allies have strength in what they BUILD, and Japan has strength in what it already HAS. A bid could work too, though.

I too am new to the site, but have been playing this game for nearly 15 years. welcome to the family.

In regards to a pacific strategy I believe that China is a place for mis-placed agression. I dont think you need to advance more then 4 provinces in to China, taking Yunan, Hunan, Anhui, and Charhar. This reduces China economy by 1/3 and denies them their NO, it also keeps your units close enough to the coast to pull them back if they become needed else where.
The key to winning comes from taking and holding the southern resource area which include Maylay, Kwangtung, Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Celebes, French Indo-China, and the Philipines. By taking this area you will double Japans economy and reach a parity with the US. Also, this area will put 2 more VC under your control, which are the objectives you need to win, and gain you some of your NOs.
From here its key to make swift work of India, throwing everything you can aginst them. The quicker this is done the beter (turn 4 or 5 ideally). Then you will be free to finnish of China at your leisure.

After that its really up to you. I like to go after the Anzac’s as taking their VC is harder for the US to take back. Best of luck, hope this helps

So my group has completed a game where Japan went for America.  We figure that whether or not Japan wins is dependent on a few things.

I don’t remember whether the final assualt on WUS happened on J3 or J4.  I think it was J4, and they waited until J3 to attack Alaska?  Either way, the statistics were about a 45% chance for Japan to take WUS.  They needed some AA misses to throw it in their favor.

There really is little that the UK and ANZAC player can contribute to the defense of WUS.  The best thing for them to do is go crazy in the absence of the Japanese forces.  By the time America fell, the UK had liberated most of China, and had several rounds to build up a navy with the help of the DEI income.  Australia also had a bonus going on, adding 2 loaded carriers to supplement defense of the UK fleet.

Japan thought about going straight for Australia, but the UK fleet with transports(deploying from  Kwangtung and Kiangsu factories) was already threatening Japan.

While America had fallen, they only gained +10 income from America, +Mexico +Alaska, while giving up on their territories in the Chinese mainland.  They were being out produced by the Allies, and out of position to restablish a hold on the mainland.

@bigopfer:

You are totally right Plum, the game is not worth the money they charged. The map IS amazing, the gameplay IS really fun. But you nailed it with the boxes, paper money, IPC chart, cardboard pieces, lack of tac bombers. I mean, I paid basically the same money for this game as I paid for my copy of AA50 and this AA40 Pacific is missing lots of the quality that AA50 had.

Exactly!  I was totally content with how they presented AA50.  Everything was high quality and all aspects of the game and its components were top notch.  Totally worth the money I spent on it.

While this game certainly has some high quality aspects about it, (especially the game play, which is all that really counts in the end) there are so many small blunders it’s really frustrating.  The income chart is what gets me the most.  It seems like the day before they shipped the game out somebody realized “Oh crap!  We forgot income charts!” and then threw together the first thing they thought of and tossed it in the box.  I’m surprised they weren’t scribbled on a piece of notebook paper.

…or maybe neutral Sweden ?