Welcome Sloan, yep that's a lot of red territories. Germany will have its hands full.

I like what Emperor_Taiki recommended. Fall of 1941 would be a great start time. The political rules would be in the rear view mirror and most of the pro neutrals would be decided. Germany would start deep into Soviet tt, but Russia would have more then just inf at this point to slow down the German advances and start counterattacks. Germany would still have to decide which direction to concentrate its forces. There would still be plenty of action in the Med & Africa. A late fall 41 would also work best in the Pacific. It would be about a J3 attack. ��� would start w/plenty of navy/air & transports to perform its dirty deeds on all the Pac islands (it would feel a little scripted though). There would have to be enough incentive for ��� to attack UK & US as they would not yet be at war. I guess you could make it so the US/UK can declare war on their first turn, and US gets its war time income automatically in its first collect income phase. That way ��� has nothing to lose.

How about subs and air power. If US and Anz (maybe even UK) build a bunch of subs they can 1-2 punch smaller ��� fleets protecting DEI. Damage those BB's and take out the garbage ships with US, then finish them w/British or Anz. Keep chipping away. It does suck though if/when ��� brings its air power to Phil. Then life can get difficult. Its hard to chip away when the ��� fleet is protected w/10+ planes. At least there using them for defense and not for offense though.

I hope they reprint it. Its over 500 online.

Europe/Pacific 40 will be better then AA50.

It will also be a lot more involved and probably a much longer game as well. I think AA50 will still have an audience. It could also be difficult to put G40 in a tourney format.

I'm 46. I have 2 sons, 19 & 22. My younger son and his friends are playing my AA50 game quite a bit lately in their summer break. I have jumped into a few games, its been fun (they've been able to kick the old guy around the board a bit). They are waiting very patiently for Aug 24th, as I am. Timing is kinda bad though, because they'll be starting classes around then.

Most likely one of the youngest members, if not the youngest, I'm 11 years old.

Wow their getting younger and younger. Good for you Dylan. By time your a teenager you'll be a pro.

Here is a copy of Larry's (in depth) post of a global game he is involved in at the present time. He was responding to a post about bringing ��� aircraft to Europe. He is in the 8 th round, and it sounds like ��� is having some trouble. I thought is was a great read, and it was quite fitting to this this topic.

Larry's quote:
Well if you insist on bringing Japanese aircraft to Europe by all means go ahead.

I kind of think Japan is going to need all the aircraft it has and then some.

I’m in the middle of Global40 game. You know… that’s the combined A&A Europe 40 and A&A Pacific 40 games. It’s about the middle of the 8th round presently, Britain’s turn actually.

The general situation is as follows:
Germany and Russia have turned Ukraine into a back and forth battlefield littered with burning tanks from both sides. The Germans, early on, build a minor factory in Romania. This factory has become the hub of the advance on Stalingrad but the Russians have been stubbornly holding the line at Ukraine in spite of massive German Luftwaffe and armor attacks.

Germany has fared much better with its Northern Army. It appears, by the way, that the German advance into Russia consist of 3 armies. The Northern Army, focused on Leningrad, the Central Army, primarily out of Eastern Poland, and focusing on Russian resistance in Belarus and Western Ukraine, and finally the Southern Army, more on them in a minute. They, the Northern Army have managed to get into Novgorod (where Leningrad is located) and have managed to collect a bonus for Leningrad’s capture and occupation. Russia is one tough nut to crack, however, and the Germans are beginning to understand just how deep and far away Moscow is.

Speaking of Russia… It has not attacked or been attacked by Japan. Presently there are 18 Soviet infantry units in 3 blocks of 6 infantry each and each located in Amur, Sakha or Siberia. The Japanese maintained a good counter balance with its forces heavily represented in Manchuria. That situation has dramatically eroded, however. Japan has been forced over time to slowly recruit fighters and dive bombers from the Manchurian occupation force. The Russians have managed to keep the tensions along this border to a minimum by never consolidating its entire Far Eastern army along the Manchuria/Amur border. Not feeling threatened, or enticed by Russian weakness, the Manchurian Japanese army has felt secure enough to slowly dwindle away and now are alarming weak should the Russians make a play in that part of the world.

That’s only one of many problems Japan has been having. The British and ANZAC forces have managed to bring “some” land units and “lots” of aircraft to Java and managed to turn that island into a fortress of sorts. This has proven to be frustrating to the Japanese efforts to capture all of the Dutch East Indies. In fact, this little island defense has managed to keep the Japanese combined fleets at virtually a stand still. It could be argued that the Japanese have waisted too many turns trying to figure out how to take this heroic fortified island with its limited number of Japanese transports and land units in that part of the world.

In the meantime the US has been constantly building a reasonable force centered around Midway and the Hawaiian Islands. This, I might add, has been at the expense of the European effort. With no real Japanese forces between them and Japan itself, the Americans have managed to conduct air attacks against much needed new transports and other ships being built of the Japanese coastline (sea zone 6). The Americans have managed to do this in spite of Japan’s ability to scramble large numbers of fighters and tactical aircraft. The last US raid on sea zone 6 bagged a brand spanking new Japanese battleship that the Japanese player felt obliged to construct, what with the ever growing US Navy presence in the North Western Pacific. This need to build a battleship at this point of the game is the direct results of battering they took when the two giant fleets finally did collide. That happened when the Japanese player absolutely and reasonably concluded that he had to move his Southern Asiatic fleet North and destroy the American Navy... Both sides took big hits but the US prevailed and came out on top. The Japanese also experienced some silly loses of precious cruiser and destroyers on several ill fated adventures against the ANZAC islands around New Guinea early on in the game. Arrogant bastards!

In China… I think the Japanese, in spite of their constructed minor factory in Kiangsu (Shanghai), have been outfoxed by the elusive Chinese. This is in spite of the 3 tanks per round being built directly in China. To be as kind as I can be… they have not shown much results for their time and money. Case in point, the Burma road has only be closed twice (if I remember correctly).

At this late point in the game and Japan not doing so well, the Japanese player is wondering where it all went wrong. But for a few tanks in Kiangsu and an infantry unit in Kiangsi, Japan is completely out of China – except of course for its relatively small force in Manchuria consisting of 4 infantry, a mechanized infantry unit and one of those tiny Japanese cannons with those round Napoleonic type wheels. I do believe that Russia will not be able to resist the forbidden fruits of Manchuria for much long. Speaking of this Russian force… Stalin felt it best to keep them in the Far East to maintain a balance of power or at least make it unattractive for the busy Japanese from venturing into that meat grinder. At the time, the distance between the Soviet Far East and the frontlines around Moscow seemed impossibly distanced from one another – so they stayed put, and that may turn out to be a good thing. Its true that the Germans are whipping ass along the eastern front but there seems to be a never ending line of new Russian infantry with a sprinkling of t-34s along the line. It’s kind of like an elephant attacking an ant hill. The elephant stumps on one hell of a lot of ants but eventually the ants are going to end up eating the elephant… burp! I’m not really being fair to the Germans… That fight is far from over, and who knows… perhaps the elephant my kill all the ants… stump, stump stump!

It did get hairy for the Russians when an Italian armor unit assisted by an Italian fighter managed to cross over into the Caucasus from Iran, but that small force was pushed back. Still, the Russians hated to expend resources in that direction, what with the battle for the Ukraine and Rostov being so hotly contested. Even at this point It’s not sure which way this battle will go. The side that wins it will probably win the war – at least in Europe.

What’s happening on the Western Front you ask? Where is the 2nd front!? Except for some strategic bombings of the major factory in Western Germany, the Brits have not managed to gather and implement an invasion fleet. The Germans have masterfully combined submarines, operating off the French coast Normandy/Bordeaux, and tactical bombers and fighters, located in Holland/Belgium and Western Germany, in such a way that the British fleet has never been able to gel.
The largest British ship concentration is a carrier with a tactical bomber and fighter – in other words fully loaded along with a cruiser that began the game off the Uruguay/Brazilian coast. In the same sea zone, at the outer mouth of the Mediterranean, the US has a modest presence… 6 transports that shuffle back and forth between the Eastern United States and Morocco and a couple of escorting destroyers. Three transports always coming and three transports always going. The French navy, at least what’s left of it, is also at this precarious gathering. The problem – and there is one … is that if any of the three allies withdraw from this gathering the remaining force will get clobbered by the Italian navy that is safely setting in the same sea zone as the island of Sicily, which I might add has its own airbase and lots of ready and willing fighters that can scramble to the defense of its 2 cruisers, 2 destroyers and a battleship should the allies dare attempt to eliminate that force and venture back into the Med. You see, the Italians, like the allies, are both being served by strategically important naval bases (Gibraltar and Southern Italy) that permit both sides to move 3 spaces. Neither one wants to be the first to attack the other. The Italians are fairly better off however, but nonetheless, the allies, spearheaded by the Americans are moving East across North Africa. There will most certainly be a showdown at Tubruk.

Egypt fell way back when… The Italians AND the Germans (with two armor units) have a rather large force there. The Italians took a risk and built a minor factory in Egypt. It has served them well. They now reach as far south as the Belgian Congo and Tanganyika Territory. They only thing stopping the Italians from overrunning all of sub-Sahara Africa is the South African factory frantically producing 3 armor units a turn. How did the Germans get to Egypt you ask… Well they built a transport in Sud de France, they could do that because the German and Italian player agreed that it would be better if the Germans had the IPCs for the territory but more importantly, that the Germans have access to a Mediterranean coastline. Eventually the German player moved a couple of tanks to Egypt and picked up a fairly nice income bonus of 3 IPCs per turn for just being there! How did those transports slip by the Allied aircraft and ships… Easy, they were surrounded by Italian war ships that begged that they be attacked so that they could destroy the attackers in piecemeal. That attack never came.

Anyway this is one of the latest games of Global 40 I’ve played. I need to get ready for Gencon you know… This game has been a blast, as they all have been actually. I kid you not. Playing these combined games is a totally new experience. It feels wide open and extremely epic in scale. The territories don’t feel crowded. The way they connect and interact provides for many more possible ways to skin a cat.

Oh what about that Russian battleship in the Baltic…? It was only after it set sail and managed to knock out two German subs and a valuable transport that the German player even took notice of it. Prior to that the German navy and air force had other pressing things to tend to. In any case the German player finally attacked the battleship. He only managed to damage it, however. As soon as the German turn was over the crippled Russian Battleship made its way back to Leningrad and was finally sunk along with a transport that happened to be present. By the way… this same combination of Russian ships did manage to conduct an amphibious assault against German occupied Finland. That alone should have driven home the message that that battleships should be a high priority target – but noooo. They were part of a two prong attack against Finland that proved successful and threw the Germans high command into hysteria what with the threat to Norway and all.

At this point, turn 8, the Germans have still not been able to recapture Finland. There are no Russian units actually left in Finland. They’ve all been long ago eliminated by German air attacks, but the Germans are so hard pressed by advancing Russian hordes of infantry that they dare not detach a force to actually grab it. verdammten Ameisen (Damned ants).

I'm in agreement w/McMan. Japan won't be able to evacuate Manchuria to go all out on China, then India (like in Pac40). If it does Russia will swoop in and Japan will have to detour its attacks. So what you get is a smaller ��� force trying to take out China, because it now has to defend its Russian boarder. I'm glad there is no NAP, because that would have just created yet another acme wall and ��� would not have to worry about Russia coming in (just like in Pac40). Then when China makes its last stand, Russia backs them up (maybe w/AA gun a couple inf, a plane and a tank), delaying ��� yet again. ��� starts the game with limited ground troops in Asia as it is, so it will definitely be looking to build an IC early. Putting an (major) IC in Manchuria will be good for def/attack Russia & China, but is a long way from India. In the Global game will it still be as good a strat to try and eliminate China early, or would it be better to take what you can from China (to limit what they can build), and go straight for India. India will come with its own new problems, as UK can now bring in reinforcements if it wants to.

Anyway ��� will have many more challenges in the global game, it will not be able to just do as it pleases. It will have to choose a direction, but stay flexible. It now has 4 allies gunning for it, and will get little (or no) help from its own friends. The allies will get multiple cracks at ��� in each round if they plan it right because of turn order. As for Mongolia, I don't see what the big deal is here, in AA50 you couldn't even enter it. Now at least you can move/fight through it to cut off your enemy, but it will take a few turns to do it, and may cost you a couple of units.

I thought Oz did a nice job on this based on the info that was given at the time. Its not exact (he knew that) but its not to far off either. I liked the fact that he was open to other peoples thoughts and made changes along the way. That's when this forum (and Larry's) is at its best.

What, have you been living in a cave the last 8 months? (just kidding)

Ah yes, I did forget to mention the USSR was also neutral (or slightly on the axis side initially with their invasion of poland a few weeks after the Germans started).

Yes in Euro40 Russia will start off neutral to the Euro axis. It will collect income and build, but can't attack until round #4 unless it is attacked. In the global game Russia will be neutral to the Euro axis as above, but any thing goes on the ��� side (there is no NAP).

Is that how the new game will work, round 4 or by axis invite or is this how an existing version works with neutral allies?

Yes, that's how it works in Pac40 w/US. See below

So a neutral would be able to have full IPC income and build up, do non-combat moves but no attacks and presumably not reinforce existing non-neutral countries' territories?  Are certain sea zones restricted?  Would the neutral countries fleet not block either of the other two waring parties fleets?  It sounds like a pretty cool extra dimension to the game.

In Pac 40 the US starts off neutral, and can't make attacks or move into its eventual allies tt until rd #4 (unless its brought into the war early). ��� can attack them at any time bringing the US in early (an unprovoked ��� attack on UK/Anzac will also bring the US in early). The US starts w/17ipc income, but gets a 40ipc increase the turn it enters the war (in its collect income phase) for 57 ipc tot. As far as I know Russia doesn't get a war time income bonus (it will already have a good size economy). I don't know what the war time bonus is for the US in the Euro40 game, but I understand that it will be 30ipc/round in the global game.

As far as the sea goes, neutral powers can share sz w/eventual allies, or potential enemies. Neutrals can't block movement. Also say in Europe Germany and UK are at war (will start that way), if the US (neutral) moves ships into a sz w/UK ships, Germany can ignore the US ships and attack only the UK ships. Germany could attack both fleets if it wants to, but would first have to declare itself at war w/US (presumably at the beginning of its turn). The US would then be able to attack on its next turn, and the war time economy would start as well at US collect income phase (end of US turn). Speaking of the sea, you will have to control certain tt to pass though the 3 straights on the Euro side (Denmark, Gilb, and Turk) similar to how canals work.

Because of the early start date (June 1940) there will be a lot of countries that start off neutral, and will be in play. Some will be pro axis, some pro allies. If a country is pro to your side you can move in during the noncombat phase and take ownership, its standing army (if it has one) joins your side. If its pro your enemy then you must defeat the standing army in combat to take ownership. There will also be true neutrals in the game (countries that have been off limits like Turkey, Spain, Saudi, and Sweden) that you can invade. Invading a true neutral could have consequences though (like attack one and others turn on you) not sure at this point, but it will make things interesting for sure.


The political rules add a lot of flavor to the game, but can be confusing. The Pac40 rule book is now posted on the Avalon Hill web site. I would suggest you also print the Faq/Errata for Pac40, as there are many changes. The political rules and new units will carry over in the new Euro40/global game, so getting familiar with them now would be a good idea (or buy Pac40), August 24th is just around the corner.

When I said UK's allies could be neutral the first couple of rounds I was referring to the US, and Russia for game play (neither can attack until round #4 unless axis invite them into the war early). I know that the UK Commonwealth threw in w/England very early on, and that will be represented in the game with all those English IC's and the Anzac.

If Canada is its own power, it would be about the same size as the Anzac in Pac (13-15 ipc w/NO). The UK will get hammered the first couple of rounds because its allies may still be neutral. I could see the axis gaining control of Africa, and the Middle east plus having ships (subs) around England very early on (convoy's). UK will become like India in Pac, a very poor minor power. We would be talking about a round 3 London crush, just like there is the India crush in Pac, and there would be noway to stop it (bye bye UK). Look at the bright side though, Canada would still be a minor power in play (not that it could do anything) .

You have to keep in mind that there is normally no fighting going on in North America, so why would you want to be forced to mobilize units there and then fly/transport them over to where the fighting is (you would be creating a mini US w/o the resources to make a difference). As the UK I want to get units into Africa (S Africa IC), or ships directly into the waters surrounding England. Don't handicap game play for UK for symbolic reasons. I like the fact the Canada gets a minor IC (that shows it importance). If UK it unable to drop ships in the water due to axis presence, the Hudson, or Quebec coast will be a great addition to the game for building navy in a safe zone. You could use all UK resources and drop in a carrier, and or BB (not just 10-15 Canadian ipc's), then bring them over on your next turn and add to them creating a formidable force (a great option).


 

If I'm playing UK then no I don't want to be forced to spend $ in Canada then transport or fly it over. UK will need its units that round, not placed in Quebec then be available next round (especially navy). As a separate power I think Canada would just be an air plane factory. That would be the safest way to get units over. I like the fact that Quebec has an IC, if UK chooses to use it. Say it's not safe to drop ships in the sz around UK, so build in the Hudson, as the UK I like having options, not being force fed by some house rule. Then there's give Canada an NO. Ok, but would you not have to also give the axis an NO too, or do you feel that splitting Canada from UK is hardship enough to warrant just an ally NO.

After playing the game several times we might toy with a house rule allowing Canada to be its own power, but I can't see it being used more then a few times in our group. Canada becoming a minor power to continue the fight after UK falls is very intriguing to me though. That's why I checked the maybe box.

I was talking more about for game play. The Canadian minor IC will be in Quebec. It will most likely come w/AB & NB too. Seems like that alone is showing where the important tt is in Canada as far as game play goes. Ontario is the politically correct capital, but if you capture Quebec, you shut down Canada's ability to contribute. Putting the VC in Ontario (Ottawa), just gives the allies an advantage. The Euro axis would have to first take Quebec (a difficult task in itself), then push on to Ontario. This would be plenty of time for the US to react from E US to block, or counter attack, making it nearly impossible IMO.

Well then wouldn't it be better to just make Montreal the VC. Rather than move a nation's capital to the wrong place.

#576

To me that would have made more sense, but that's not how things are. Ottawa is the VC, and is nestled deep in North America. I guess you could try for it after a successful sea lion (still having a navy), but you would be facing the US w/two major IC's gunning for you. There is noway you could keep it for more then a round or so. For that matter, holding Quebec (Montreal) for any length of time would be next to impossible as well IMO, the US can toss to much at you.

I did just think of something though. Say you did do a successful sea lion and the axis navy is intact still w/several transports in the sz NW of England. Being that Quebec is the industrial center, Ontario may not have many units on it. You could send a small force through the Hudson to take Ontario (Ottawa), and send the bulk of your force to knock out Quebec in the same turn. Taking Quebec (depending on the map layout) should block the US from being able to retake Ontario (Ottawa) directly from E US. It could work if the axis need one more VC for the win I guess holding it past the US turn. The US player would either have to be sleeping, or have spent all his money in the Pacific to not see this coming though. You have to figure the US should be building a force somewhere in the Atlantic between E US and Iceland.

I think your first situation is correct but I'm having a hard time understanding the benefit of the second situation, unless I'm misreading it. If you are engaging in combat in the sea zone and the coastal territory (with the SZ the only access point to the territory), why wouldn't you just bring the transport along with the naval attack to assist in capturing the territory?

If the blocking ship was not on the coast (one sz out), you could kill him in combat and move transports in during non combat to off load them onto the  coastal tt you just took. Assuming that you indeed did take the coastal tt by other means.

So let me get this straight, in sea battles, you can kill an enemy blocker ship (destroyer) in the combat phase and move your fleet past that SZ into the next SZ in the non-combat phase assuming that none of your fleet is engaging in a combat move. Is this correct? If so this really changes things for me in Pacific...

Yes that is what I was referring to. You can kill the enemies ships in combat (using just a few ships or planes even). Then in noncombat move into the cleared sz (1st move) with your ships that where not involved in the battle. Then (2nd move) to the coast to off load your transports on to the coastal tt you also took during combat. Of coarse the 2nd sz could not be hostel. You can also do this to join two of you fleets together. It doesn't come up to often, but in P40 it could be useful to both the allies or Japan (especially when you consider NB).

Actually, for the Hawaii, India, NSW Japanese NO, they get 5 for each one they have

Yea but the 3 VC I talked about are in those tt, so it boils down to the same thing.