Why I am Excited About Axis & Allies 1941
First, as this is a very personal set of reactions, I would like to provide a little about me. I own many copies of Axis & Allies games from the Milton Bradley 1986 edition to the 1940 Global game. I have played many, many enjoyable hours of Axis & Allies over the years, though I now play a much wider variety of board games with games as different as Dominion, Agricola, and Battlestar Galactica being among my favorites. Axis & Allies, however, retains a special place in my personal gaming history.
I find myself more excited for the 1941 version than any edition since Anniversary. Why you might reasonably ask? The board is so small compared to Anniversary or 1940. There are many fewer pieces and fewer nations. Isn’t it another money grab by the Hasbro corporate suits to drain money from the coffers of those who have given the company so much money already? Yes, yes, and maybe, but despite all of that, I am still excited and I am glad to be able to post my thoughts about it somewhere.
The Shorter Playing Time: My fondest memories of Axis & Allies are Friday nights during high school when my friends and I would routinely play not one but two games in one evening, switching up sides and nations. This made up a lot for the fact that in some games your plans went awry quickly or the dice betrayed you. It also encouraged folks to concede when things looked bleak instead of dragging things about hoping for a dice miracle. When you are only playing one game in an evening, what is the incentive to give in? If the new playing times are correct, and the game is 1-3 hours, my friends and I can again play two games in one evening even if we no longer have the 8-10 hour endurance power of our youth!
The Clever Rule Changes: I have long been an advocate for finding ways to shorten the existing Axis & Allies games to a single evening’s play. I have tried very hard with the Global boards, and I have been moderately successful by coming up with a new starting setup for a 1942 Global. The fact, however, is that the 1940 game was designed to be a monster game, ideally set up and left up to be played over multiple sessions. What those of us who want a shorter game really needed was a more thorough reworking and simplification of the basic game. The Spring 1942 release didn’t work for me because the playing time was still too long for the trade offs in complexity, units, and nations. What I think is great about the 1941 game is that the designer and the developers have really rethought the game while keeping to the game’s original core – a strategic and logistical (if simple) simulation of all theaters of World War II that includes cool plastic pieces, is not too complex to be taught to my friends, and can be played in a relatively short playing time. The most interesting and I think exciting rules changes are the new (lower) income production levels of the game. I predict that this will speed up the game tremendously, reducing analysis paralysis that comes to some players as they weigh how to spend their IPCS (it even impacts veterans in Global when you have so much to spend). I still think the decisions made about how to spend the IPCs will be critical to success, but luck will inevitably play a larger role in any version of Axis & Allies with fewer units. With a short playing time, however, I think the role of luck is tolerable (and perhaps essential to replayability).
The Historical Angle: I have long accepted that Axis & Allies is not meant to be a perfect simulation of World War II, understanding that historical accuracy had to be sacrificed in order to give the Axis players a fair chance and to make the game more fun. I am still fine with that, but one issue that has long bothered me is that the production values were way out of proportion to what was historically possible. For example, Germany had about 235 divisions in 1941 but only about 350 divisions at its peak in 1943-1944 (and many of those were not complete divisions). Yet, German players in Axis & Allies could easily double, triple, or quadruple their infantry divisions in a few turns. I think this will be harder (though not impossible) with the new IPC production levels. While I accept that this was not that big a deal and just one of the unrealistic aspects of the game, I am excited that this new edition will minimize this particular historical concern of mine.
So, do you share my excitement with the 1941 release? If so, why are you excited about the 1941 edition? Do you think Larry Harris is right that this might become the most played edition of Axis & Allies?
I am super excited! I love me a game of Axis and Allies, but a weeklong game is to long even for me. I like them around the 8 hour mark at most. A 1-3 hour game sounds perfect! Plus, with such a “short” play time, I can finally convicne all my lame friends who don’t play already to play.
And then the game just looks fun. I’v been going crazy thinking of awesome random things to pull off! Next Stop, Japanese invasion of Panama!!!
I will toss in a vote for the NOT excited crowd. (Just to be a downer :))
Maybe If I moved to a new city and couldnt find ANYONE to play AA with, this would be a good way to get them warmed up. But frankly I think the old MB edition or even a good game of RISK would do that just as well.
I sincerley hope that this becomes the most played edition of Axis and Allies because it will spawn a new generation of players, some of whom will graduate to the upper ranks of players. But you can probabaly count me out of them. I have consistently had more and more fun with each sucessive edition of the global game MB, Revised, Anniversary, 1942, and now 1940 (I actually see the last three as the TRUE 1940, 1941 and 1942 editions) partly because they have each added new and interesting aspects to the game and especially because each edition has managed to add evermore historical aspects to the game steering it more toward the realistic restraints faced in the actual conflict. (As least, more than the game before.)
So for me, this edition is really a step backwards (my playgorup can manage a 1942 game in a day and other versions I just play online). I guess for me it just doesn’t seem like that much fun. It’s like asking a chess player to buy a brand new checkers set with new sculpts for black AND red! Whoo hoo! Sure checkers might be fun but you’re probbaly going to be frustrated by the lack of twists and turns it will take after repeated play.
…unless of course that Jap invasion of Panama turns out to be a bigtime game-changer. ;)
Like I said, I really, really hope this game gets played by a lot of people, but that all depends on how WOC markets the game, which will take a lot of cash that they probably don’t have. And, just like chekers, we might find that a lot of these new players happen to be the age of our kids.
I am glad for the simpler version because I hope my younger children will get into it for that reason. Only my oldest son will play G40, but it is too long and too complicated for my other sons. I am thinking that they would play 41 and then as they understand the game they may be drawn to the more complex version. G40 is the tops for me - fantastic and worth the time in my opinion. But I play few games because we try and do things that all the family can be a part of.
In this way I share Canuck’s hopes that 41 spawns a new generation of players that graduate upwards to G40.
I am guessing that of all new people that are talked into playing, roughly half might go on to keep playing A&A. Here are my predictions:
25% will love the game and gradually want to get into more complex versions like 1942 and even Global 1940.
25% will like the game but only want to stick with 1941 because of it’s simplicity.
25% will not care for the game for a variety of reasons: don’t like the historical aspect, DO like the historical aspect but don’t like when it becomes ahistorical (Axis trouncing the Allies), or perhaps they just like different types of board gaming.
25% will not like it at all and probably only played due to badgering by one of us A&A fanatics. These people will end up playing one time and then go running back to their gameboys, play stations, online games or whatever else they are into.
So, we may yet get some new recruits for the A&A army.
It will become the best board game in the world eventually, if it isn’t already.
having a stream lined version after the massive global/europe and pacific games is a smart move but im actually afraid they haven’t done enough to cut down on the play time since from the sounds of it this will still be a 2+ to 4hr game.
I think they should have really looked at something like 1812 the invasion of canada to see how you can stream line something but still keep the theme/personality of the conflict.
I think they should have really looked at something like 1812 the invasion of canada to see how you can stream line something but still keep the theme/personality of the conflict.
So long as the white-house gets burned down, I’m game.
I think they should have really looked at something like 1812 the invasion of canada to see how you can stream line something but still keep the theme/personality of the conflict.
So long as the white-house gets burned down, I’m game.
ironically neither the columbia games or academy games version of the war involved that territory .
I think they should have really looked at something like 1812 the invasion of canada to see how you can stream line something but still keep the theme/personality of the conflict.
So long as the white-house gets burned down, I’m game.
ironically neither the columbia games or academy games version of the war involved that territory .
Curious if either of those games were designed by Canadians or Brits. Surely if they were there would be a DC and a token for a flaming White House.
As to 41. My hard core group plays, at best, twice a month. I’m hoping to to play at least once a week with my kid with this new game.
@Most:
I think they should have really looked at something like 1812 the invasion of canada to see how you can stream line something but still keep the theme/personality of the conflict.
So long as the white-house gets burned down, I’m game.
ironically neither the columbia games or academy games version of the war involved that territory .
Curious if either of those games were designed by Canadians or Brits. Surely if they were there would be a DC and a token for a flaming White House.
As to 41. My hard core group plays, at best, twice a month. I’m hoping to to play at least once a week with my kid with this new game.
academy games one is designed by canadians, columbia games has at least 1 american but gamma 2 games the original was a canadian company.
Having played both they play in less then 2 hours and the columbia games one can be finished in as quick as 30 minutes if the game goes sour for another player. The key is that they are quick to set up and each tiny move is a month and after each year/winter you check for Victory points/conditions to declare a winner, I don’t know if that is possible with axis and allies/ww2 but I think they should have tinkered with the formula more to lower the playing time because 3hours on the short end is still a long time.
