Has anybody run a sharpening filter on this thing to see if they can glean any additional detail?
You watch too much CSI.
I’m not suggesting that we “zoom in” to determine if the US infantry are using an M1903 Springfield or an M1 Carbine, I just think we might be able to extract a few boundaries (particularly between sea zones) or IPC values.
Has anybody run a sharpening filter on this thing to see if they can glean any additional detail?
It looks that way for Algeria but I’m just surprised they also don’t have Morocco (from the picture, not a definite thing). But that would be correct, US troops landed in Morocco and Algeria during the invasion of Africa if I’m not mistaken, then allowing them to setup to invade the underbelly of Europe (Italy).
I see this a gameplay decision. I would guess that they want to Italians/Germans to be able to counter attack a US/UK landing at Algeria, with the two fleets standing each other off across the straights of Gibraltar.
That being said, I think it could be interesting having the territory of Morocco being accessible only from the Atlantic side of the straights.
OK, here’s a question.
If you look at the borderbetween Libya and the Sahara, there appears to be an oddly shaped territory that’s colored more like the beige of a neutral territory (no name or other symbol visible, though) than the blue-gray of the impassable Sahara. Any theories? Is that a possible path to try to outflank the Brits in Egypt, or do you think it’s some other map or picture artifact?
That’s just the rest of Libya(look at a modern map), and is probably there to show that part of Libya is in the Sahara.
I realize that it represents Libya politically, but I don’t see any reason for them to make that distinction on the map unless there was a gameplay reason behind it. Having it be neutral makes the most sense (and opens up some possibilities), but I can’t see any markings (Name, IPC value, or Unit Silhouettes) that would positively identify it as such. Hence my question.
On another thread, there was a discussion about how much time it would take to get German reinforcements (AKA, Rommel) into Africa. Basically it came down to: T1-capture French TT on Med, T2, build IC, T3 Build transports and units at IC, T4, first opportunity for units to arrive in Africa. This was deemed long and cumbersome, and people were despairing that Africa would become an Italy-only endeavor.
The setup on the image we’ve seen gave me a thought (with all the caveats on the unreliability of the image as a representation of the actual setup). Even with Germany having no territories on the Med to start, it would be perfectly reasonable and even likely for the Germans to start with a transport and a destroyer in the Med (Relying on Italy for protection). This way, the Germans could start shuttling units over on turn 2.
OK, here’s a question.
If you look at the borderbetween Libya and the Sahara, there appears to be an oddly shaped territory that’s colored more like the beige of a neutral territory (no name or other symbol visible, though) than the blue-gray of the impassable Sahara. Any theories? Is that a possible path to try to outflank the Brits in Egypt, or do you think it’s some other map or picture artifact?
I count over 20 Soviet territories. This is more than the entire Soviet Union in AA50-41. Add that to the 9 on the Pacific board and this game will have a massive Eastern front
Interesting. Let’s assume 30 territories for the USSR, then, and let’s further assume that each one has a minimum value of 1 (given that every territory in Siberia has a 1 IPC value, I don’t expect any of the Europe board USSR territories to have 0 value). Further, let’s assume that the USSR has a major IC in Russia, major IC in Caucasus (Stalingrad) and minor IC in Karelia, then those territories have minimum values of 3, 3, and 2, respectively. With all of those assumptions, the minimum USSR income is 35 IPCs. Realistically, I would expect those three territories to be higher, as well as to have a few other 2 value territories. Therefore, I expect that USSR’s starting income is a healthy 40. Just think what that means for the other powers.
Keep in mind this may not be the correct map: on a map in the P40 rulebook, Koprea is 2 ipc’s, BC and Yukon have a british roundel and are called Western Canada, and I think some Chinese territories are wrong
True. Assuming that this is the image for the back of the box, it may have been shot using an early development or playtest board, as the map and box are probably sent to production at close to the same time.
Anyone notice that they reworked the battlestrip a bit to make it slightly more battleboardish?
Maybe I don’t play the game right…. but who really uses the battleboard? I mean, to me and my cousins, it is quite a waste of time. It is much simpler to count up your unit types and keep track of hits as you go.
In my family, the tradition is that we only use the battle board for the one or two climactic, game-changing battles we typically have in a game. Usually, that’s a German attack on Moscow, an amphibious assault on Germany, or or big naval battle in the Pacific. The other common usage is for the “I’m probably gonna lose at this point, but if I make this long-shot attack and get a little lucky, I can work my way back to even” battles that usually finish out our games.
AWESOME!!!
The map looks excellent. It’s gonna feel a little weird for a while having so many neutrals that get regularly captured, but I’m sure I can learn to deal ;-).
One big caveat. We may be able to glean some starting setup information from the setup pictured here, but bear the following things in mind which cast doubt on the veracity of the setup (as a starting setup).
So, my guess is that for the photo shoot, they set up the game at or close to the starting setup, then removed almost all the white and red chips, then had someone who didn’t know too much about how the game plays make a few “moves” to give it a more “action” feel, then plopped down some US units somewhere.
That being said, here are some thoughts on the mapboard that are interesting/awesome/disappointing to me
Awesome
Interesting
Disappointing
Can’t wait to see what other people turn up.
To put it simply… can carriers be taken as losses if they are vital to planes being able to land safely?
As I understand it, you’re allowed to make your attacks as “risky” as you want. As long as your planes have a landing spot “Assuming you win all battles”, you’re in the clear.
Funcioneta is right……i will try to play with 7 players…but for the allied minors…i’ll try to put some rookie players on that mission
Maybe it’s just me, but I think that putting rookie players on France or China in a seven player game is asking for them to never play the game again. “Here, why don’t you dork around with these guys for 3 minutes, then wait an hour and a half for your next turn”
To me (and without having seen the full game, obv) the maximum the game can realistically support is 6 (Germany, USSR/France, Japan, UK/ANZAC, Italy, USA/China) or 5 if Italy isn’t enough to entertain a full player. That way each of the allied players has a major and a minor ally, and each allied player will have something to do in the beginning of the game and the end of the game. The Axis players will be fine, as they tend to have more activity per nation than the allies do.
Of course, personally, I prefer 1-on-1 or at most 2-on-1, though that may be in part due to availability of time and opponents.
But I like the idea of a German Navy out of the Baltic.
Me too, though to be honest, I’ll be happy with the idea of a German Navy IN the Baltic without living and dying at UK’s whim.
The only thing cartoonish around here are the constant complaints by Players, surrounding China’s rulesets and limitations.
It’s a game, get over it. How cartoonish is it that artillery can take part in amphibious landings, or that it’s shorter (in terms of sheer movement distance) to blitz tanks through the northen steppes of Russia, or Across canada in one go, then it is to go from one Europen territory to another 2 away.
Or the fact posts about ACME walls, and complaints to Krieghund aren’t outright banned.
If it’s so bad for you that the game becomes unplayable. Leave the community. Please.
Thank you for saying so.
What people tend to forget is that these annoying ACME wall rules are in place to prevent even more annoying and a-historical abuses, such as Chinese units marching across Russia to can-opener against the Germans (you know it would happen).
If a rule has been put in (especially by someone who is notorious for NOT wanting special rules), then please trust that it is there for a good reason. I for one am inclined to trust the judgment of a veteran game designer who has a 30 year history producing success after success with a dozen versions and variants of a flagship game franchise than the nitpicking rants and whines of people who have had, shall we say, slightly less success as professional game designers.
play smart and thats all you will need! :wink:
play smart and roll well and you will carry the allies on your back. ;-)
The Consensus seems to be that Japan is the favourite in A&AP:1940. This means that to balance the gloabl game Germany should be the dog in A&A Europe. The Allies will have to divert resources from Europe to Pacific or Japan will spill into the Middle East, Africa, and/or Russia.
I disagree. Even if Germany is favored in A&AE:1940, it could be balanced or favor the Allies in the global game. There are two reasons for this.
The first is strategic swing power. As discussed in another thread, the Allies (in particular the US and to a lesser degree UK and USSR) have the ability to “swing” their force from one theater to the other, the better to both concentrate their forces (which is why KGF is so disproportionately powerful a strategy in most other versions of the game) and to respond to specific threats as they develop.
The second is small-scale tactical interactions. To list two specific examples off the top of my head, USSRs Siberia setup (actually not part of the AAE40 setup, but still…) will do a lot to keep Japan “honest” and leave troops behind to defend Manchuria, which will slow Japan down in taking China and India. Also, UKs Mideast starting forces and African production will have the option (swing power) to help defend India, as will the potential Indian ocean fleet.
We’ve been going for a while on speculation and a few choice tidbits from LH and Krieg. When are the official previews supposed to start? IIRC, for AAP40, they started about two or three weeks ahead of release. Does that mean we have to wait until August to get anything juicy?
oh i…oh … haha… i did not know…i did not see that…?..what!? oh wrong poll!..i must have …um…picked the new one opps!
Why……do…you…put…elipses…between …every…few…words???
Dude, William cminke is William Shatner!!! Awesome!!! 8-)
You will need much mojo to have success with a ignore France strat :-D
I agree, but I also believe in giving players enough rope to hang themselves. The decision that I think Germany will have is between a guaranteed smashing victory against France that leaves your army out of position for several turns against USSR (as those bemoaning the lack of railroads have pointed out) or a marginal victory against France, leaving a larger force to pressure USSR, but resulting in higher attrition and a chance of failure.
@UN:
Not only does France get to go last, but Germany is in a position from the get-go to basically slap France in the mouth multiple times and then some. I know that we (me?) have no idea what the unit placement will be, but I have a feeling that France’s initial forces won’t be all that great. So then how on Earth is France going to survive even one round? Maybe there’s a Maginot Line rule in the “France” territory? Maybe I’m unaware that this has been discussed to death and that I’m simply a paranoid Frenchman?
I think the idea is that Germany has the capability to overrun France on turn 1 if they commit to it, but to give them the opportunity to follow other war plans if they make sense (e.g. an immediate assault on USSR and a turn 2 or 3 rollup of the French). That’s how I’d set it up.