Starting pieces totals:

[Imperious Leader]

You might want to rethink your proposed ideas for Infantry, Tanks, Fighters, and Bombers.

you missed my point. Im looking purely at the total aggregate military forces. Once its decided what for example the total number of tanks or infantry of each side should be , THEN we reallocate a reasonable set up based on this.

Its not the case where we look at the ACTUAL set up and try to make sence of something that totally flawed from a historical viewpoint.

[Imperious Leader]

Isn't the ship off Hawaiian Islands a battleship? It thought it was laid out for Pearl Harbor repeated? It's pretty clear on the other BGG pic where you see the Pacific better.

I was looking closely at that and had a cruiser and Battleship piece and trying to compare them. I see a Cruiser, but i would think like you that it should be a BB... do what i did and see if you don't have the same conclusion.

[timerover51]

After taking a good look at the one photo on Boardgame Geek,

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/362530?size=original

I would say that the US ship is a battleship, which would make the lineup 1 battleship, and no cruisers.  That helps a little bit, but no cruisers, and 1 battleship.  I figure I will have to wait until more data is available.

[variant]

Balance should always come before historical accuracy.

[Emperor_Taiki]

I still think setup is accurate becasue if you gave the US a big navy at the start of the game they take over the med on turn 2 and that would be almost just as bad historically as the japanese taking moscow.

Plus i can't beleive ILs scaleing becasue in A&A superior forces in quality of soldeirs and equipment are represented by superior quantity of them.

So shouldn't they scaling also change based on country and front

[Romulus]

Looking at this starting setup I have to agree with Emperor_Taiki.
We have to remeber two things. First A&A pieces are abstract pieces and not historical formations or units. Second the number of units on the board depict not only the quantity but also the quality of the units. Red Army in 1941 was still recovering from the purges inflicted by Stalin and by the Finnish campaign. USSR had the greatest number of tanks, but the great part of them are outdated models and are also employed with inferior tactics.

Moreover, I like the order of play of the 1941 scenario.

[LT04]

With Russia having so much INF at the begining they can splerge and do a 100% ARM build first round if they wanted to.

[captainjack]

With Russia having so much INF at the begining they can splerge and do a 100% ARM build first round if they wanted to.

Maybe even a fighter.  It helps that they start with 30 IPC

[LT04]

That will be nice that Russia get so discretion as is able to be creative beside the normal build INF and don't loose Moscow routine.

LT

[Imperious Leader]

I edited the set up for the Hawaiian battleship

also, on Soviets 1941 they got no air, or armor, so thats what id buy... maybe even a Soviet Bomber!

first 2 fighters
then armor

[Atlantikwall]

1941 scenario:

UK:

1 BB

1 Cruiser
3 Transports
5 Destroyers

I find it`s not quite obvious to figure out what ships are found on the map as still they all look imho too equal. UK is just an exemple.

Could you be please so kind and post the units per sea zone, so e.g. Bb, Trn (sz1), etc...

So are these Cru, Des in sz12 (AZO)?


P.S.: And I also count 11 UK-ships, so that`s propably one more trn I think

[Dagon81]

What is the part of this publicity I dont get...?!

Axis & Allies: Anniversary Edition details:

Designed by Larry Harris, creator of Axis & Allies
Italy introduced as the third Axis nation
Two set-up options: Spring 1941 and Spring 1942
Cruiser class ships join the naval unit line-up
China included as US controlled ally
New sculpts for Italy    , China, and others
Game board measures ~ 24” x 46”
Over 600 game pieces
48 page rulebook

Can someone tell me?

Italian "new" pieces:

infantry = NEW; hurray!!!
artillery = old japanese one;
armour = old japanese one;
fighter = german messerchmitt;
bomber = I really dont know but Im afraid is more of the same "AH new"-old AA German bomber;

battleship = german biscmark?!?
cruiser = "new" german cruiser
transport = old german transport
destroyer = old german destroyer
submarine = old german submarine
bomber = I really dont know but Im afraid is more of the same "AH new"-old AA German carrier;


Now now...whats this deal?! Is AH joking or what?! 100$ ( probably 100€... ) and they reuse the same molds with different colours?!

You know where this will lead dont you? 4 years from now youll see another "development" in the A&A game and another promise of "super-new-molds-for-the-new-old-italian-nation..." probably 150$... they promise 1000+ pieces and we all get happy!!!  Thats ridiculous.

I guess they cant throw a game with all the goodies... they have to squeeze all the juice...and the longer they do it, more $$$$$$$$$$$$$ 

Pieces are cheaper by larger numbers... the only costy thing is the MOLD of the pieces...

So where does this leaves us? Misleading advertising... Why do you think AH didnt give details/images about this game? Only promises... you go with the hype! and pre-order the game like there is no tomorrow...

Well, happy you!

[Romulus]

Yes, Dagon81, this point is the worst point of Anniversry. I was eagerly awaiting for italian units and ... we will have recycled miniatures...

[Krieghund]

To be fair, there are "new sculpts for Italy", just not for all the units. The tank is actually new, it just looks a lot like the Japanese one. All the naval units are the same as the German ones, and the bomber is the same as the Japanese one. On the plus side, the UK gets its own tank.

[Romulus]

To be fair, there are "new sculpts for Italy", just not for all the units. The tank is actually new, it just looks a lot like the Japanese one. All the naval units are the same as the German ones, and the bomber is the same as the Japanese one. On the plus side, the UK gets its own tank.

Krieghund, this is no "fair".