Posts made by The Fire Knight

Ok, so we all know that in Pacific 1940, it is possible to go for Australia first. America first. Or not declaring war immediately and taking down china first. But strategy dictates taking down india. I would like to know the opinions from those lucky few who have played a Global 1940 game or who are currently playing a global 1940 game if it is the same way with taking out england. Does it look like taking down England will be the new norm, or will a fast russian strike still be a viable german strategy?

When will they come out?

@The:

@The:

@The:

@The:

@maverick_76:

Pretty much what he said.

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

@The:

@The:

@The:

@maverick_76:

Pretty much what he said.

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

@The:

@The:

@maverick_76:

Pretty much what he said.

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

@The:

@maverick_76:

Pretty much what he said.

yea, pretty much what he said

yea, pretty much what he said

@maverick_76:

Pretty much what he said.

yea, pretty much what he said

@Wilson2:

I believe that the P40 rules say that invading one Mongolia province does not affect the others. This seems to go against the true neutrals rules. What is the ruling on this?

good point. But if I were an official judge with the limited info that i have, i would have to say that they would all still become pro-the other side. Reasoning being:…

"Rules Precedence

The global rules are mostly based on the rules from Axis & Allies Europe with a few extra changes just for the global game plus the unique aspectsof Pacific 1940. When following the rules, do it in this order:

Global Rules section in the Axis & Allies Europe 1940 game
Axis & Allies Europe 1940 rules - basic mechanics of the game
Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 rules - for rules that are very specific to that game, like Kamikaze"

Hey, I know that I will not be referring to the rules whenever i’m moving ships from one side of the board to another. I will probably use paper slips labeled 11, 28, 51, 52, 64, 65, and 66, and then place one of each on a sea zone depending on what all spaces connect to it. Will anyone else be doing the same?

@Dylan:

@gtg21:

Understanding that the Germans need to start the game with some territory all their own, I do however wonder why Romania (who didnt formally enter the war on the side of the Axis until Nov. 1940) wasn’t made a pro-Axis neutral territory in the game.

Romanian forces made up a large part of Axis eastern front forces and it seems to me that by not having them as a pro-Axis neutral that spawns at least 5-6 infantry, that the Axis is deprived of additional infantry that should in fact be represented.

The result is that the Axis end up having to produce through their own IPCs more infantry than they realistically should when you consider the manpower contributed by Axis satellites - of which Romania was the largest contributor.

Even the initial setup doesnt account for this since Germany starts the game with just 2 inf and 1 armor in Romania.  Assuming those intial set up forces are intended to represent a Romanian contribution, there’s no way the starting forces in Romania should be fewer than those generated by operation of the Axis entering Bulgaria or Finland (each of which spawns 4 inf).

Just a casual observation - Im sure there’s a good reason Romania was made a German tt - but I do think the initial set up for that tt should be boosted by at least 2-3 infantry.  Particularly when you consider Russia gets to generate 4 free inf per turn while at peace - a production level that in just 2 rounds negates the infantry the Axis gain through Finland and Bulgaria.

Interesting point, but I guess, it’s just that Bulgaria is more south, and closer to Greece and Yugoslavia.

We got to remember it’s a game, not a war.

Quite debatable.

I suppose that would work, although my stubbornness says keep it the same.

@SAS:

@Bob_A_Mickelson:

I understand you point of view. Unfortunately the chart is already 9 1/2" by 16 3/4" (slightly bigger than the old AAP income chart) and I’m not sure I am willing to make it any bigger. I would prefer the chart going to 100 but its already pretty massive.

I am open to suggestions.

Well here’s what I was thinking, your current chart is 5 roundels deep by 15 roundels wide, funcioneta suggested on another thread that doing a chart with a section for 1s and 10s would save space so why not start by setting the chart up like this:

0     5     10     60
1     6     20     70
2     7     30     80
3     8     40     90
4     9     50     100

We already know that Europe comes with two Union Jack roundels for UK Pacific, so you would just put one on the 10 and one on the 6 and you’ve got the UK Pacific income.

However, this tiny chart would get really crowded with 10 powers (counting UK Europe and UK Pacific as separate since they are on the income chart) with 2 roundels each on the board, plus we’ve only used 4 of the 15 columns you currently have, so we could potentially even have 3 of these charts: one for the 3 Axis powers (Germany, Italy, Japan), one for the 3 major Allied powers (USSR, UK Europe, USA), and one for the 4 minor Allied powers (UK Pacific, ANZAC, China, France).

The last chart for the minor powers could even only include 0-9 and 10 and 20, since one of these powers would have to get really lucky to be earning more than 30 in a game.  This would leave plenty of room for extra NOs and such. 8-)

I disagree. With so few numbers, a lot of powers would be on top of each other, which is always annoying to me when changing income and such.

basically. Wow.

You should have just pressed the quote button and then read it that way.  :roll:

Does anyone know why morocco is not required as well for a strait crossing?

I don’t know about that, but on the subject of straits, why are ships able to enter the med through the Gibraltar strait by only controlling Gibraltar? Shouldn’t you have to own Morocco too?

They should add Kiev, Johannesburg, and Vladivostok, for a total of 22 VCs

I agree, it’s better to be too cautious with the true neutrals than to lax. It’s not like the game gets worse just b/c invading true neutrals is a bad idea, b/c we’ve never (except i suppose in the original) been able to do it anyways. I think it’s fine for now, but maybe in a later version it could be made as a more reasonable and realistic option.

Sounds like a waste. Best to just build when the german fighters are not in range (aka, fighting russia) or even just save for a turn or two.

6 players for the ideal game.

p1- germany
p2-italy
p3-japan
p4-us and china
p5-uk, france, and anzac
p6-russia