Few newbie (to AA40, not to AA) questions

1. It will probably take at least 2 days to get to the point where it’s obvious who’s winning.
2. No; we have been coming up with a new setup and ruleset to balance it at harris game design
3. It’s the most historical so far, but still not too historical
4. Very replayable; many options for all sides
5. Kill Russia first is probably the optimal strat(as it should be) while the optimal allied strat(with the new setup) will be to focus on both theaters.

Correction: Japan’s optimal strat is not to attack Russi(at least not until China has been destroyed) but to divert US forces from Europe.

@Black:

cheers,
I’m thinking about buying both AA40 Pacific and Europe versions as a late Christmas present for … well, for me  :-D

Few questions before proceeding:

a) is it playable? I mean: how long it takes finishing a game?

b) is it balanced? if not, do you guys already come with a bid for any side?

c) how historical is it?

d) what about re playability?

E) This is VERY important and it’s related to © and (d): does the game allows for different global strategies or are my friends and I ending up with Allies playing KGF (or KIF) always, while Axis will ALWAYS play Kill-Russia because those are the best strategies and all the rest only works if you’re playing with a moron?

thanks so much!

It takes us about 12 to 14 hours in two sessions to finish a game. Changes have been submitted by Larry Harris to play test for balance. It is not historical. If it was the axis would lose every time. Lots of different strategies possible. It will play out a little different each time even with the same people. Axis will probably not win a long drawn ot war fighting on two fronts so knocking the Soviets out is important as always. But  new units and rules make it a different game.

@Black:

a) is it playable? I mean: how long it takes finishing a game?

b) is it balanced? if not, do you guys already come with a bid for any side?

c) how historical is it?

a) It could take anywhere from 12-20+ hours depending on your players and how the game plays out. I played it in one sitting twice, and I will not try that again, I was so mindf**ked by the end of it.

b) The Alpha+.1 rules on the Larry Harris Design website felt a lot more balanced that OOB.

c) I feel that the game represents a snapshot of 1940 as historically accurate as possible considering it’s a boardgame where both sides need the chance to win, otherwise it would just be a re-enactment. With the political rules and national objectives it is the most historically accurate version of A&A to date.

I’ve played Russia twice, and both times I was not attacked on G1 so I created the 1 infantry buffer on the front line and set up for counter attacks. Pretty sure all you can do is hold out and absorb the weaker offensive rolls with your defense. My hub is Bryansk as to not get split by the Pripet Marshes.

I have seen Germany go for London (aka Operation Sea Lion) twice and succeed, but we are noobs and I’m not sure if it will happen again.

The road for Moscow via the north is very long for Japan, and there are no territories where you can build minor IC’s for effective re-inforcements… it’s possible but I think it’s more important to take out China in order to keep the coastal territories. Again, we’re just noobs.

Not sure about San Francisco… If USA detects an advance they can easily just dump some units there instead of on the European effort.

Well, if Germany focuses on Russia, it will probably be a race to take Moscow. However, if Germany decides to focus on the UK, then Russia can go on the offensive aand invade Poland, Romania, or Hungary and force Germany on the defensive.

I have never seen japan go after San Francisco. There’s no need to: with the newest rules, if Japan takes and holds 6 VCs on the Pacific map, the axis win. Thus, it can take 2 of Hawaii, India, and Sydney, which is easily done if the UK puts everything in Europe.

…iff the US(not the UK) goes all into Europe