The game is probably balanced but I think it is harder to play the axis. They need to balance defense and offense when the go into Russia with Germany, Japan needs to be careful if it does not hold Hawaii because then its captial could become in danger if its initial starting air force and navy is off conquering the world. Also Gilbartar can cause all sorts of problems for the axis if they are not careful, the allies can hit a lot from there. Italy can get jacked up by Britan if Germany does not at least threaten Sea lion and the Brits fly 4 planes to Africa from Pacific.
It is too early to know for sure if such a huge game is balanced but I still think it is at least close. Those are just the observations I have made about the Axis being harder to play.
The AA50 game we just finished the US bombed the hell out of Germany. We used the unit counter chips (red-5, gray-1) to show damage. It worded ok. Even if there is a mix-up and chips go flying (which happened) you tend to remember how many damage there was. What seems to get mixed up is how many tanks vs inf you had. Even if you had different colors to show damage (good idea), you might need two damage colors to show increments, other wise you could have towers in some cases. For at least 2-3 rounds Germany was damaged into double digits.
That’s your best bet. Plus you’ll get a lot of extra units so you don’t have to use poker chips.
That is what I did with AA42. My boys didn’t want their copy so I bought it, with 1 game played, for $20 to add to mine. Now I need a bigger table so I can print one of IL’s maps for AA42 to have a good sized board for more pieces and less chips used.
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. 😛
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.
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.
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.