EXACT pieces count for Pacific/Europe 1940 Second Edition

@tincanofthesea thanks! I’m going test it next time I play. Whats your feedback? @GeneralHandGrenade

@GEN-MANSTEIN oh I thought you had a rule set. I didnt know you meant you made an entire game. LOL. Nice

@Commando:

@ghr2:

@Commando:

@ghr2:

Brando, why would you leave 1 inf in each territory?  The only ones that matter are rostov and Baltic States.  You will lose 6 ipcs in units for not much gain in epl/bess.

I leave 1 Inf in each territory, so the Axis/enemy can’t just walk in. Inf have a 33% chance of a hit. Prevents a country from just taking a territory w/1 Inf. Usually the attacking country has to attack w/2 ground units, just in case your Inf gets a hit. Also prevents the enemy from sending just one ground unit on a long walk across your territories(i.e. when Japan starts marching across the Soviet Far East). I don’t always do this. Like in China, I consolidate the Chinese Inf whenever possible. But in Russia, I always try to leave at least 1 Inf in each territory. One thing to point out, I don’t leave 1 Inf in each territory, unless the enemy has a chance to take that territory.

Because they only have a 33% chance to hit, I would not want to risk giving away nearly free infantry kills to Germany unless they are defending something valuable.  Each infantry you put in his way is 1 less body defending something critical for a 33% chance to kill 1 thing.

It’s not just a 33% chance of killing something. It’s making the enemy commit more than 1 Inf/1 ground unit to take the territory How would this hurt a country like germany that will have mechs constantly reinforcing and the positioning does not screw him?. Maybe you didn’t read my entire post. Again, I don’t always leave 1 Inf behind in each territory(i.e. China and other territories) Japan can just send 1 inf and air, it really won’t hurt him if he wants to.. However, leaving 1 Inf behind on such things as islands, even 1 IPC islands. Your enemy would most likely have to commit at least 2 ground units to take the islandIt depends on the value of the island and the likelihood he/she would go for it.. Therefore, forcing your opponent to commit more resources to take territories and have less units to use elsewhere. I understand what you mean, but this is also a game of economics and efficiency.  If your opponent does not need to go for it, or is not even affected by it, the one infantry won’t be an issue.Like I said in my explanation, Soviet Far East is a good example. There are 13 IPC’s from Soviet Far East to Vologda/Samara. If your strategy is to leave these unguarded for Japan to just take w/1 Inf, then go for it. In my opinion, over the 26 years I’ve played A&A, it’s the wrong stategySince russia can easily stop japan from taking it unless Japan commits more to the front, it really is not an issue.  Also, with mongolia, it won’t be unguarded.

Good to know. Thanks

New sculps from aa 1940 second edition are ugly, bad builded, look like a really bad job.

But the 16 new scupls from aa 1941 are beautiful with lots of detail.

Can anyone explain to me this huge difference between the quality of the units?

I always leave my jap fleet off the Philippines. You can hit so many places. there is an already built naval and air base ready for you. it makes it harder for ANZAC to support UK on the mainland. plus if you build a second fleet in japan, this will split the americans attention, because then they will have to defend Hawaii, and attack you. also when i take dei i also take western Australia, anzac never have land troops there, plus it will cause them to spend more on land units instead of navy or air.

@calvinhobbesliker:

In some Guadalcanal games, they switched the US and Japanese cruisers. Thus, we had an orange US cruiser and a Green Japanese cruiser

Wow, I never even noticed that before. But I dont have any of the green Japanese cruisers. Very strange.

As soon as I have anything official, I’ll post it.