Posts made by LuckyDay

oh they’ll go out of print and be onto the next incarnation of the game by then…

Yeah, that ignorance is bliss thing is not always so bad…

And on the other hand, had some of these problems been seen earlier they wouldn’t have needed to send us extra tac bombers for Japan only to take them away now…  (unless that was Krieg’s plan to get us extra pieces all along)

Here’s Larry’s latest take on the alt setup, Scenario Alpha (from earlier mentioned thread)
_I call this setup “Scenario Alpha”.
All the National Objectives and bonus incomes remain as they are in the present Pacific40 rule book, with the exception of the following two NOs:

Note: The UK will gain 5 IPCs for controlling Kwangtung and Malaya at the same time but only if at war.
Note: The United States will collect 5 IPCs per round for controlling the Philippines but only if at war.

China
Szechwan 5 Infantry and one fighter
Hunan 2 Infantry
Yunnan 4 Infantry
Kweichow 2 Infantry
Shensi 1 Infantry
Suiyuyan 2 Infantry

ANZAC
Malaya 1 Infantry
New South Wales - 1 Infantry, 1 Minor IC, 1 Naval Base.
New Zealand - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Queensland - 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Sea Zone 62 -1 Destroyer, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 63 – 1 Cruiser

United Kingdom (India)
Sea Zone 37 - 1 Battleship
Sea Zone 39 - 1 Destroyer, 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Kwangtung - 2 Infantry, 1 Naval Base
Burma - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Malaya - 3 Infantry, 1 Naval Base
India - 6 Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC

United States
Western US - 3 Infantry, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 Tank, 1 Bomber, 1 AA Gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC
Hawaiian Islands - 2 Infantry, 2 fighters, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Philippines - 2 Infantry, 1 fighter, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base.
Midway - 1 Airbase
Wake Island - 1 Airbase
Guam - 1 Airbase
Sea Zone 26 - 1 Sub, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 10 - Battleship, Cruiser, Transport, Carrier w/Tac & Ftr
Sea Zone 35 - 1 Destroyer and 1 Transport

Japan
Japan - 6 Infantry, 2 Artillery, 1 Tank, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers, 1 Bomber, 1 AA Gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Major IC
Manchuria - 6 Infantry, 1 Mech Infantry, 1 Artillery, 1 AA Gun, 2 Fighters, 2 Tac Bombers, 1 Bomber
Palau Island - 1 Infantry
Kiangsi - 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Formosa - 1 Fighter
Shantung - 2 Infantry
Kwangsi - 3 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Iwo Jima - 1 Infantry
Jehol - 2 Infantry, 1 Artillery
Caroline Islands - 1 AA gun, 1 Airbase, 1 Naval Base, 1 Infantry
Siam - 2 Infantry
Okinawa - 1 Infantry, 1 Fighter
Kiangsu - 2 Infantry, 1 Fighter, 1 Tac Bomber.
Korea - 3 Infantry
Sea Zone 6 - 1 Sub, 2 Destroyers, 2 Carriers each with 2 Tac & 2 Ftrs., 1 Cruiser, 1 Battleship, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 19 - 1 Sub, 1 Battleship, 1 Destroyer
Sea Zone 33 - 1 Destroyer, 1 Carrier w/ 1 Tac & 1 Ftrs.
Sea Zone 20 - 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport_

@skinny1:

I understand that but it is the principal of the matter. A set of games that are as pricey as these are should not have these many issues.

Exactly the problem I have with Microsoft… :-o

I’m interested in reading through this setup thread, gonna dive into it, but so far, I’ve not had any problems with E40 like I’ve had with P40, and when together, I’m not seeing these issues as glaringly either…yet at least.  I have some concern that as everyone’s had almost a year to ripe into issues with P40 that now the community is going to over-react on the fixes… alas, should at least give the benefit of the doubt at this point… :|

@HolKann:

Don’t force your believes onto other people…
…just keep it like this:

wow, outta both ends, nice…

and isn’t tan(k) so much more intuitive than arm(or) or what about bom(ber).  And when did we slack off with using lower case letters when talking about units as ok?..

@Flashman:

If the setup was historically accurate, the Baltic States would be neutral and Bessarabia part of neutral Romania; this would give the Russians something to do R1.  Also, Persia should be Pro-Axis giving them something to think about on their southern border.

But I don’t think Soviet units should EVER be allowed to share territory with other Allies.  Even when at war ships can share the same sz, but not fight together.  Similarly I’d allow US/UK units to land in Russia on NCM, but not defend with them if the tt is attacked. Stalin simply didn’t want to share the glory with anyone else.  He’d take your money but he wouldn’t plough your path for you. He didn’t even help the Polish partisans in the Warsaw uprising.

To balance, the same thing should apply to Japan in regard to German and Italian units and tts, as there was practically no military cooperation between Japan and the Euro Axis.

In other words Japan and the USSR should be considered to have allies only in the sense that they have enemies-in-common with other powers.  They are still members of the two great alliances for game victory purposes, but are essentially fighting different wars.  Some monetary aid to Russia from the West is authentic, but then Germany got huge non-military aid from Russia until it decided to invade the place…

Excellent stuff Flash, and for (at least house rules) easy enough to correct in the game.

The key to the new Para rule will be in the Airbases.  They have to be built and kept in repair for it to work.  Depending on where you want to use Paras there are places setup already for them, but in other areas you’d have to build the AB first; perhaps requiring some further planning ahead of the drop.  Not that that is too off from reality, but the old ‘use the Bomber for the Para drop’ plan may have been a bit more simple.

Parachutes would be the big ‘tech’ in this Tech rule, as doors in the planes already were invented.

I personally like Paras getting the one-shot preemptive strike before the battle at 1, ala DDay and then functioning as INF after.  I don’t like increasing their attack, just seems overpowered.  I have played where they disrupt the enemy’s defense, lowering up to 3 enemy units DEF by 1 in the first round of combat.  Adds to the thinking and time, (not so fun) but seemed to work well otherwise.

@SAS:

@Brain:

Yes thank you kcdzim and IL, I was incorrectly thinking of how the word “scalable” was being used.

It doesn’t mean you can climb it, BD. :-P

Nice!  :-D :-D

IL, have you done the P40 map?  There’s no link on your mediafire stuff that I found.

@Viracocha:

@jim010:

I like the ‘grey’ they used in Europe - dark, but not as dark as later games.

Me too.  :|

This might be the color for the FMG german pieces later on then, if the color works well, it could be close enough for the dice and close enough for using with OOB pieces, but different enough to give more choices. 
    Just had a flash of Rodney King, “Can’t we all just get along?”

@Brain:

@bennyboyg:

@Brain:

@cminke:

you shour put some thought into that dident you!

He put more thought into it than you did on your spelling.

I really don’t understand how people can have such horrendous spelling.

Spell check and free online dictionaries don’t even help.

Says the guy with a run-on sentence on his side quote.  Hyphens are not periods… :roll: lol

doubtful, Iwo was practically uninhabited before the war, with about 1,000 people and a IJN base.  No need for convoy attacks against an island that wasn’t producing anything to convoy anywhere.

The mistake was more likely to be giving it any income, as it’s value is more like that of Midway or Wake.

I believe LH said there was 6 territories between Berlin and Moscow, so the Mech Inf. will really shine in Europe.  Mech Inf. need ground to cover to keep up with tanks as fodder, all the islands limits them to more continental fighting in Pacific.

@Funcioneta:

The problem is not BC. WUSA just one territory? For 3 millions of square kms? Come on!

Of course it’s not, that’s the point of asking why would it even be involved!!  And what’s 3 millions of square kms in WUSA?  It’s the US, they don’t use the metric system.  shoot, most Canadians don’t even use it still…

seriously though, I’m sure it goes back to the thought of if you can take the WUS, then the game is over and you should just reset the board.  Sorta like what happens when you take France in most games as the Allies.

If they had taken Anzac and combined it with the UK and made India the separate power that would make it very interesting for an independent power to back up China and be between Africa (Italy) and Asia (Japan), but then there would be the historical questions about India building planes and ships that they didn’t do historically I suppose…  alas…

@robbie358:

You could just up the canadian IPC value to 7 to solve the problem.  Very unlikey that would ever fall to Japan, and is just as historically accurate.  Comon, all of British Columbia is just worth 1 IPC?

and then a quick left turn down the “how the heck did we involve canada in this conversation” hallway and back we go…

and yes, Brit Col. 1 IPC, sounds good… :-o :roll:

it’s in german, that’s why it looks that way…

@reloader-1:

This poll is bearing out my supposition that more hardcore fans prefer gray, but will buy both colors or either black or gray, and the average fans are interested in black.

wow, and when you don’t like the results of the original poll, just make a new one and try to sway it…interesting…

I love the option about both black and gray, when the question is ‘which color’, as is singular… :-o

@The:

this is a stupid thread made by someone who didn’t look at the board for more than 1 minute. let’s get a mod to close it down.

Agreed

these forums are to help players, whether in strategy, rules, finding FMG, or counting.  We all know that WotC has made a number of mistakes with the game production, hence there wouldn’t be such a long errata.  Sometimes the newer people may not have caught up to the learning curve with everyone else.

Maybe you should try and be a bit more helpful before someone starts picking out the ‘stupid’ things the two of you say.

Welcome, Buicksuper, hopefully your next comments are greeted with a bit better.

:-D

I think that if you look real close, just under the word ‘image’ there is the picture of Ava Braun, so they are going with a bit different arrangement for the pictures this time around for Europe.  May need an FMG commander piece for this too…. :roll:

Aha!

Found the box art on coolstuffinc.com

interesting that it says it’s published in 2009 and expected release is now Fall 2010… alas, here’s the pic!

http://www.coolstuffinc.com/main_boardGame.php?viewType=view board games&fp=Acc-AVHAxisandAlliesEurope1940#Axis and Allies: Europe 1940 Board Game

:wink:

did you see the Anchors in the Trafalgar section?  Now if you took those and added those little stands like allboxcars mentioned you’d have some 3D pieces for naval bases that could gel well with the game….