Posts made by WILD BILL

Japan will have its plate full in the global game (although it has a ton of crap). It won’t be such a cake walk for them in China if they have to leave much of that Manchurian force on the boarder. A NAP agreement would allow them to empty the boarder like they do now. If Japan tries to move like 15 ground units + a bunch of air into N.Russia, it won’t be able to crush China as quick. Then the march to India will be delayed, as the Anzac gets stronger. By then they better watch their back because the big mean green machine will be coming. I don’t think you will be able to ignore the US in this game.

I think that at some point Japan could go after Russia, I would just wait until China & India (IC) are in the bag first. Its normally a much shorter path through the middle east to Russia, and the Mid E might be worth more in this game.

I’m just saying that a NAP could be a double edge sword for the allies. It could shelter E Russia’s, but will just shift the burden elsewhere.

I’m excited about all the things we will be able to do. Attack neutrals, open and close seaways, bring enemies in on our terms and fight the war how we want to. If their lined up on the other side I say attack the bastards. I guess its possible that Japan and Russia could start off not at war, but I don’t think so. It was more of a cease fire (NAP). The same type of agreements (some secrete) were used to stab countries in the back throughout that time. As the allies you couldn’t expect the axis (or Russia for that matter) to live up to any of their contracts.

By the way I must have missed that clause in the original 1940’s document that Tojo promised 2 regimens to Stalin if they invaded again.

On the contrary the Anzac will stay. Their turn may be combined with the UK in the glob game I don’t know. The set up for the glob game will be the same with some minor adjustments. One of those adjustments (from Larry) will be a few Anzac in Africa for the glob game that won’t be there in AA40E only. He posted that a few days ago. The Anzac IMO will be about 1/4 the size of the UK, making it more of a minor power in the glob game. I think the rest of the Commonwealth will be represented too. I think the India IC will stay, but might shrinking to a minor. There will most likely be an AB & NB in Eastern Canada (Quebec) and maybe even a minor IC, controlled by the UK. There could even be some thing in S Africa.

I still feel because the Anzac will be such a minor power (most likely controlled by the UK) that there should be some mechanic to allow them to perform joint attacks. I know that the US took control of most operations in the Pacific, so allowing the Anzac to attack with either the UK or US would be a step in the right direction IMO. Other wise just splitting them off from the UK could be more of a hindrance to the Brits.

My Chinese box top said 1 inf an Hunan, and its there. The only mistake I’m aware of (other then the Errata to the set up) is there is supposed to be an inf on NZ.

I still see it the other way. If your Russia you buy ftrs because for the most part your a defensive nation. Germany on the other hand will be very aggressive. Those 4’s on attack are going to be awesome, right out of the box. Now granted Germany will have a bunch of them at set-up as Japan did, so may not buy many, but will value them non the less. As for strat bmrs there roll may be reduced because of the new SBR rules. Seriously how many times have you SBR in the new pacific game. I haven’t heard any chatter about that in this forum at all. It might be worth SBR if you have heavies.

I don’t like the capture capital rule either, especially if you still have other IC’s. I think you would need a simpler (kiss) rule as IL pointed out (kinda strange to have IL say a rule is to complex LOL). The whole Vichy troop loyalty thing could get ugly. I see why Larry avoided it. I really dislike the fact that in the case of London going down as an example the UK very likely will still have many tt. It seems very wasteful that the allies don’t get some compensation for them, unless they allow the axis to take them, then liberate them back.

There is a tiny loop hole in Larry’s capture the flag rule if you consider the Anzac in the global game. Say  London falls, followed by India. The Anzac Liberates India (giving it 2 IC’s) then continues on to recover the Dutch/British Isles in the Pacific along with parts of Africa. The Anzac could grow in to a major power putting it at the top of the Commonwealth. It could be rather deflating to the Anzac if London is liberated under these circumstances, imagine going from building BB’s and the next turn you barely have enough to build a DD. That"s probably why the UK player should play them both.
Seriously though we just need Larry to create bigger games with more minor’s.

Is there a tiny loop hole in Larry’s capture the flag (capital) rule in the global game. There might be when you consider the Anzac minor power is really an extension of the UK.
Say Germany does a successful sea lion (UK hands over $). Japan takes notice with the understanding that the UK can’t build at its India IC and invades/conquers it. A couple rds later with the help of Russia and the US, the Anzac liberates India. It now has two IC’s. Anzac continues on to recover the Dutch and British Isles from the axis along with parts of Africa. Its income could really start to grow. What happens to the UK’s NO’s if the Anzac meet those requirements. I think they should get them, but I have a feeling they won’t be eligible. Any way this has not been possible before the Anzac. You could have a 3 on 3 game (considering major powers) with London in axis hands. Is this precedence to finally put an end to the capture the flag rule.

You could have that 7th person play Anzac, China and France (regardless of turn order or turn sharing). That should keep his interest. At some point the Allies might lose say China/Anzac, but could liberate France. It would be a game with in the game to see if you could keep that 7th person alive as F Marshal mentioned earlier. The one thing I don’t see happening in the game that happens a lot in AA50 is trading France. I hope (Larry hinted) that France gets an influx of units when liberated to stop the trading. It could actually be cool to play the French if they get back in the game. Kinda like it was cool to play Italy (minor power) in AA50.

I would go as far as saying AA40P is really a 3 player game for best enjoyment (other then one on one). Jap vs the US/China then Anzac/UK. In AA40p the Anzac and UK seem to be about the same size, but you could split them if you have an extra person. I think that the six player suggestion for the global game is because the UK will obviously be much larger. The Anzac will be about the same (about 1/4 the size of UK) which will make it just a minor power or extension of the UK.

I think it would be cool if the Anzac could actually do combined attacks with the UK and maybe even the US.  Do you hear that all you National Advantage guys out there. I know combined attacks are off limits with major powers, but the Anzac I don’t think would rock the boat to bad.

@KH:

Obvious, the Dutch will also appear on the global board with it’s historical strong, huge navy. I guess three battleships, 2 carriers and 15 subs  :-D

I don’t see the Dutch having a navy at all. This game starts with the the low countries all ready in Germany’s control. AA40P shows this by leaving them totally unprotected w/no navy.

@spectre_04:

what about Canadians?  They have a roundel on the two territories in Pacific.

I could see a minor IC in Quebec. Giving them a Hudson Bay sz (shelter) w/access to the N Atlantic. That would at least show the importance of Canada in the war.

We have only played a couple of games. In my brief experience the Manchurian’s are over kill in this game. They are not tied up vs Russia, so they only add to the earlier demise of China. The Chinese don’t get any help because of political situations (fear of war or weakening UK). I think that will change in the global game. Russia should be able to aid China w/o consequences (I hope). Russia may not have any def units (tanks /ftr) to send there early on, however an AA gun would come in handy (PS: China should get AA at set-up or at least be able to buy one IMO). Also Russia just being on the Jap boarder should keep those Manchurian’s tied up.

The other thing that will help the allies is that the British (India) ships will have more options, they won’t be trapped at the edge of the earth any more. The UK (India) won’t be forced into a last stand that they can’t win either. I think the India IC may be converted to a minor, unless UK gets 2 capitals and India is left as its own power (can’t see that happening). The Aussie IC was already reduced to a minor. I think money will be tied to these British Commonwealth minor IC’s (regional spending), and you may have to turn over a certain amount if you lose them, but the Brits will continue unless England is knock out. Under this theory I wonder if the 2 British minors would be able to continue if England falls, that would be awesome.

By the way if you can find more then 6 to play (and stick with it) more power to you. I have a hard enough time getting 3-4 at a time, especially if the game has to be played in more then one sitting. I would think the six max is more of a suggestion, you can do what you want. Adding that 7th person will give you more standing around though.
On another note my son and I were playing a 1 on 1 (AA40P) last night and a college friend of his stopped by. After a rd or two (newbie) he jumped in and took over the UK. Of coarse I (as Jap) finished him off, but I think he will play again. One thing to say that because of the political situation in this new game the first few rds can be a little boring, especially for a newbie. I waited til 3rd rd to attack w/Jap. Plus the political rules are a little over whelming. I would suggest a first rd attack with Jap if playing with newer players, even if it is detrimental to Japan (although I don’t think it handicaps Japan that much anyway). That way there is more early battles to keep interests stronger.

I think 4 players would be ideal for the global game that way you don’t have players losing interest. Axis is obvious G & I, then Jap by itself. Pretty much splits were the maps come together. Allies might be cool to split the two theaters also. 1 play Euro side (Russia, England/Canada/Africa, France, E US. The other play China, W US, India, Anzac. Of coarse you can work together but have your own agendas (NO’s).

Even AA50 is fun this way, and it keeps it more of a global game. I would not treat it as totally separate theaters, you still need a certain amount of cooperation. Russia will find itself aiding China/India (protecting its interest), or given the chance Jap will still invade Africa/Russia etc.

I’m not sure if each power will still have its own turn in the global game, or if there will be powers taking their turns together like China/US in AA50. Larry has hinted that the UK player will most likely play France I thought talking about its fleet and what not? Maybe the rules will be somewhat vague (imagine that) and allow players to do as they feel fit, as long as each power still gets its own turn.

I think IL had mentioned in a different post that the US could even be played by 2 people. Both sides will have large incomes, and it is believed those incomes will be ear marked to a specific theater. I think it would be cool. It could even be comical if they don’t agree on certain strats.

I think the tac will be used more in the Euro side. Getting that 4 w/tank or ftr on a land attack is when you will see tac’s having more value. There’s only 2 units that will give you a 4 on ground (bmr & tac), unless you have tech. Just think in AA50 when you get jet ftr tech, now you can get a 4 on attack w/o tech. Who knows if jet ftrs tech will even be in the new game, may not be needed now.

Hey great point about continuing on after your capital is taken (China). So there is precedence. You should hammer Larry on it. After a capital falls you surrender your $, but can still produce infantry at certain points of entry (maybe VC) based on the tt value that you still control. Personally I think you should be able to mobilize inf at a VC w/o IC any way.

@Emperor_Taiki:

I know what you saying about ports and the overpowerness of air vs naval, but in AAP40 their are a lot of  places for the navies to hide from aircraft, it accauly feals kinda like the real war.

Most of those hiding places include an island AB. There will be islands in the Med, and you have Iceland but Larry already said no Azores. So unless there is an island in the Baltic or a special rule for scrambling near straights hiding places will be limited. Maybe there will be a rule that you can scramble from a capital in the global game.

@Funcioneta:

I wonder if Free France will get some rules to deploy units after lose of Paris … maybe China style (only inf) or maybe a IC at French Congo …

I wouldn’t count on it. Larry doesn’t like you to build after you loose your capital. Besides if you could just sprout up French rebels in Africa (like Chinese) they wouldn’t be able to leave Africa (ACME WALL) :?. Poor French couldn’t even help liberate Paris  :x. LOL

@Funcioneta:

Your guess seems OK, I guess then USSR will be in the 40s if they have to survive a bit … at least 10 for Siberia 20 from Europe and 10 from NOs …

Yea that sounds about right. I wonder if there will be any kind of lend lease for Russia, or if it will just be reflected through an NO again.

@Emperor_Taiki:

@i:

Romania
Hungary
Slovakia
Norway
Denmark
Neth/Belg/Lux
germany didnt control these contres till late 1940 and sinse the game starts earlyer in 1940 the would not be occupied
-12 ipcs so its now 24

The exact start date is June 4th, so mid 1940. Larry Harris has confirmed that all of these nations will be german controlled at the start of the game, Slovakia and Hungry are going to be one territory.

Yea the info I posted was from Larry’s earlier posts where he (at that time) spilled the beans on these countries being under total German control at start (some could change). Like I said some of those countries could be combined. The IPC values are an educated guess, I derived from AA50. I think Germany’s income should be in the mid 30’s to start, with a good chance to expand rd1 through France. There may also be a couple of pro axis tt to the east (like Bulgaria) Germany can simply move into w/o consequences.

I think total German IPC at start will be around 34 IPC (just a guess)
Germany (3tt)–-12
Austria----------2
Czec------------2
W Poland--------3
Romania---------2  
Hungary---------2  
Slovakia---------2
Norway----------3
Finland----------2
Denmark---------2
Neth/Belg/Lux----2
Some countries could be combined or worth only 1 IPC.

Then it will take France --7/8
I also think there will be a couple pro-axis neutrals between Germany and Russia that Germany/Italy will be able to claim w/o consequence. Early conquest will also start giving the axis their NO’s. By the end of the 2nd round Germany should be over 50 IPC.
Italy should start rather low but will have Albania and more tt in Africa to start. I’m thinking around 20 IPC total. It will also expand fast in to neutral countries/Africa and maybe take lower France (Vichy). By the end of rd2 it should be around 30-35 IPC w/NO’s.
It should be easier for the axis to get their NO’s early on as they will be expanding. I also think convoy’s will play a bigger role in AA40E this should help Germany as well.

Hey do either of those games have AB or NB, I know WOW has major and minor IC. See WOTC has now help its limited competition by not including plastic sculpts, they are so thoughtful (or thoughtless).

Oh by the way who ever uses the production chart any way!