My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

In my experience with Europe. As Germany I always get Russia, it is really easy to take, especially under a g1 dow and especially with low luck.

The allies should try to get something going before Russia falls on g5 or g6

It comes down to taking norway with usa, africa corp with uk, and later mass drop spain.  There really isn’t much Russia can do, if Russia lives long, allies win automatically.

@Oyvind:

Could someone explain the “bid” in the first question?

It is a way of evening up the playing field when it is generally considered that one side has an advantage over the other. Using this as an example:

@Colt45:

Personally, i take Axis with a 3 bid otherwise il take Allies.

Colt45 554 has said that they’ll take Axis if they are given a bid of 3. This means that at the start of the game before the first turn they either get to put down units to the value of their bid, 3, in any of their territories, or accept 3 bonus IPC into one of their countries for spending at a later time.

In a general bidding arrangement, the opponent would have the opportunity to take the Axis for a bid of 2 if they thought they could win with that and that process repeats until a bid has been determined and teams are set.

A bid of 3 is considered a pretty well balanced game. I believe the current bid for 1940 Global is sitting between 20-30 for the Allies. We can read into that that people think that playing the game without bids leads to many more Axis wins than Allied wins by evenly matched players.

When I play test, I set up the board and try to find counters to an idea as I work though the turns, so no opponent. Obviously, that will not mean the idea works until I try it live. Its just to test the concept. If the concept is sound, I use it in a live face to face game and see how the other guy(s) respond.

This first game I focused on the subs for blockading. That part does not seem reasonable at this point. Its still interesting that it delayed the US transports and gave Germany a nice income, but I don’t think the axis will pull a win out of the bag. By the way, when I meant to blockade I would leave the surface fleet back in the face of a large air force and wait for additional subs, you could then counter attack a DD build with air and sea, taking the air units off so that the carriers can stay back. Even convoy raiding for 22 IPCs would be nice.

Next test, I want to build a G2 transport wave as well, this will force UK to keep with Infantry making Italy’s job easier, and give me the resources to secure S. America while the US is neutral, with enough, I hope to divert 3 towards West Africa again, as having the German land unit in Egypt is a nice thought. I realize UK is the same amount of IPCs as S. America, but I’m testing the concept of taking an area out of America’s way plus they have multiple factory sites if it seems possible to use them.

There are some early risks I discovered. The G2 move to Gibraltar in the first game put the German Fleet of CV,BB,CA,2FTR in range of a UK CA,3 FTR and TAC…a bold player might take that shot. I also had UK do a weak attack [CV+FTR+CA] on the Italian fleet, it worked [damaged CV with a CA] while leaving the Tac for London.

Turkey was a tight fight G3, as I only had 5 inf, 3 arm, 1 tac, 1 bomber in range…I ended with 1 inf, 3 arm and the 2 air. Losing 2 units in Greece could have made it 4 inf for the assault. Turkey missed a lot, I could see losing armor in the future as an outcome.

Other concerns are if Russia stages north and drives on Norway, Germany’s income would plummet. With many transports, I hope to discourage that option.

I had UK protect Quebec, but I’m curious about how many players would suspect a G3 three transports full landing on Quebec? The potential to send planes staged in Gibraltar to sz 101 has merit as building carriers in 106[Quebec] would allow them to land and enable a weak looking axis force to “surprise” the US navy round 4. The transports can then hit Venezuela, West Indies and/or Central America turn 4. [This may prove to be a great move for a failed Sea Lion as sinking a US fleet would delay the US a round or more.]

The South American concept seems crazy since the US can just build large amounts of land forces. However, the US must choose fleet or land, and typically will go fleet, meaning there is “some” time for early gains and possible factories. I’m trying to limit the investment to two German productions as I want turn 3 and 4 builds to prevent Russia from getting their foot in the door.

I agree. It’s funny because the game is not that hard to comprehend. I started playing A&A at 12, and while my first few games I was playing wrong, that was mainly because I never really read the rule book. Once you sit down and read it once, the only time you have to use it again is if you are doing something like an amphibious assault or shore bombardment, something that maybe only comes up once or twice in a game. Other than that the basic premise is really easy to understand.

The latter.

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.

Duh!!