@Admiral:

I can see Wolfpacks becoming more prominent in A&A E40’, rather than just a few lone submarines racing through convoy boxes in the Atlantic.

Well at Harris Game Design forum, Larry said that US ships will be able to reach iceland in one turn, and then move to England the next turn.  He also said this island will start with an airbase.  So we can expect allied transport will transit via the sea zone adjacent to Iceland and they will keep some destroyers there and a bunch of aircraf for scrambling.  It would still represent a diversion of ressources… Also, with the US not starting at war, Germany migh be able to take control of that corridor for a while.

Convoy disruption will probably happen more  in the southern atlantic costal sea zones, to cut off IPCs from Africa and South America.

Cheers

I know, but now it is impossible for the axis to win without taking Cairo (unless they invade UK, US). Also, the middle easts income is now a factor and UK would be limping without Middle East/Africa income. Italy would also be earning 40+.

Yeah but you are trying to just throw a bunch of random countries together to create some kind of Frankenstein country just so that there will be enough IPC’s to make it viable. It is not very realistic and furthermore, we don’t need any more powers.

Could be a good house rule if the game needs balencing.

WILD BILL,

I’m hoping the IC in Northern France is minor for Germany’s sake; it’ll be an extremely easy IC to SBR from the UK (well within the range of escorts from a UK airbase).  The UK airbase also might put UK and American fighters within range of baltic fleets, but if those straight rules are true the subs will be perfectly safe.  That really kinda lames things up, Germany just has to leave 1 sub in the Baltic.  I just dont think its feasible for Germany to hide a sub with the Naval bases, it’ll be way too vulnerable trying to get across the map and even if it meets up with Japan the US can catch it.

It seems to me WOTC didn’t take into account a free India, a possible repeat of the Bolshevik Revolution in WW1 or NAFTA.  Why are you just limited to having the same countries throughout the game?  Where’s the army for the Vatican?  Why is Somalia worth 1 IPC as opposed to being a unique “-3” territory?  Such a waste of $100, where do I get my refund?

As I said, the only time this would be good is if Russia holds all its territories and is about to attack Germany, and so Japan captures 1 territory to stop them.

Well of course that is understood.  Why would any Army Airforce plane look normal on a carrier?

A set with a P-38, a P-51, a F4U, and a F6F or SBD would be nice.

@reloader-1:

My friend… a little searching never hurt anyone. The top thread in the Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 board has what you are looking for:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=17094.0

This is better than anything WOTC will make.

Well at least FMG is almost done with their Italian pieces.

@lnmajor:

by the way,
reading all the posts on french territorys in africa. all great ideas, with bases in dakar andsub bases in madagascar, but how in the world can they fit those places in on the upcomming AAE40 and keep it in scale with the AAP40 map? somebody explain how this can possibily work.

I am sure they made both maps before they released Pacific or at least had a good idea of what it was going to look like.

Yes definitely this is not only a good idea for US, but for any country with a strong economy.

No.

Like other posters have said, they do give some flavor, but most of them just make the game try to follow the track of the actual war. Say for instance, the ‘Russian Winter’ NA for the Soviet Union. Needless to say when playing Germany, it left me in the cold.

Marines are also not a national advantage, several countries had marine/amphibious assault units. Or partisans, several countries resistanced and conducted sabotage operations, not just people in Soviet territories.

So yeah, adds flavor, but opens up a can of worms too.  :lol:

@Yoper:

I gave you the answer that I feel he will give you since it is similar to that which I believe he has given before.

Plus, it is better if you do the asking.  If you feel that it is a big deal, then take the time to ask a thoughtful question of him on his site and he should answer you.

Maybe I will. Who is the moderator on that site?

The original Europe game is in the stable version.

Okay, I have started the typing project on this. For now, it will be a plain white background until I can insert something “pretty”. To start, I’m typing the Pac40 book verbatum with all the new errata included where appropriate. At least we’ll have an “updated Pac40 book” to start with. I would also like to include a popular “house rule” section at the end. Let’s work on a list most of like and I’ll put that in too.

@SilverAngelSurfer:

I’m guessing that most of us are guessing about most of the rules about this game since it hasn’t come out yet and all Larry said that I know about ends in “Get my drift?”, but other than that, you’re right. :roll:  It only seems logical, but I’m not claiming that my logic will be followed.  If you have a better idea, be my guest to share it; or if you want an “official” answer, try Larry’s own board (Flashman provided the link) or just wait for the game to come out, since most of the stuff on Larry’s board seems to be speculation as well. :-P

Okay, your guess is a good as mine, in fact it’s better cause I didn’t even hazard a guess. I guess we will all find out soon enough.

@WILD:

This came from Larry in a Q&A Feb 4th, I thought that’s what this topic started with.

[Q1]: What is the ‘pro-axis’ and ‘pro-ally’ mechanic for neutrals and how does it work?
Let me say this… rules related to Pro this or pro that will be consistent with AAP40. However, neutrals will play a MUCH greater role in Europe than Pacific.

[Q3]: Will there be any nation-specific ‘boosts’ in Europe (like Kamikazes are for the Japanese in Pacific '40)? No. I did not see the need.
I probably should point out that when a power enters a friendly neutral during a NCM the neutrals standing army converts and the actual units are placed on the board. This can make for some interesting developments in Greece and Finland as just two examples.

The true neutrals being linked together (or some of them) and all going pro the other side if one is attacked was mentioned by Larry very early on, but he didn’t confirm it to be the case for sure. I think they were still working it out back then. He hasn’t said anything more about true neutrals as far as I know

I still don’t like the idea of simply moving in and gaining allegiance.

It’s the French connection 8-)

Well id like to see Italy only able to take one at the start of the game, because taking both would be risky becuase they might not win both battles. And if they dont win either, the remaining units become those of an allied power….and then get to act before italy gets a chance to attack again.