Would it be possible in Global 1940 to add a separate box for the facilities and AA guns? I mean the AA guns from First Ed. I mean, the new edition of Anniversary Edition from 2017 has a separate box for industrial complexes and AA guns and the like.
Is it me or did the developers mess up by not adding a separate box for the facilities?
@djensen said in Army count for 2nd edition:
@Patchman123 Oh, I fixed the table in the sense that it previously didn’t look like a table, just a lot of ||||| characters between things. It didn’t look pretty like it does now.
Is it available for download? You can PM me, if you want.
@djensen said in Army count for 2nd edition:
@JeeVeeDee39 I fixed your tables.
So Dave, where are the corrected tables? Do you have a version for download?
@CWO-Marc said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
@Patchman123 said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
Is one color for Europe 1940 and the other color for Pacific 1940?
I have no idea beyond the guess I previously made, which evidently was wrong. My primary interest is the A&A sculpts, so I’ve never paid close attention to the cardboard chips; somewone more knowledgable about A&A game history than me will have to provide an answer to your question.
Who would that be?
@CWO-Marc said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
@Patchman123 said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
What do the black and white colors on the back of the A&A Facilities (A&A G40), such as Major Industrial Complexes and Minor Industrial Complexes? Also for AA guns?
What’s the difference between the two? The whites ones and the black ones?
I think they come from different editions of the game (white =1st ed, black =2nd ed, if I’m not mistaken. Note also the front of the chips in your first picture are slightly different shades of gray.
Second Edition does not really use those AA gun pieces, it uses a nation-specific plastic sculpt for the AAA guns, what the Sec. Ed manuals call “Anti-Aircraft Artillery” (or AAA).
I mean these.
And here are the backs of said AA guns markers (the separate piece for A&A Europe & Pacific 1940 First Ed.).
Is one color for Europe 1940 and the other color for Pacific 1940?
@CWO-Marc said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
@Patchman123 said in Infantry Pieces and Numeration/Nomenclature:
? I am having trouble sorting out the pieces for all of them and I have EVERY single Axis & Allies game ever made, from the 1984 edition to the latest reprint of Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition.I am using these numbers to sort out many thousands of pieces
Your collection of A&A games sounds similar to mine, and I can relate to what you’ve said about the challenge of sorting out thousands of sculpts. It depends, however, on what you mean by sorting. If you’re talking about unscrambling a bunch of mixed-together sculpts and figuring out precisely which game each one came from, the basic answer is: it’s easy for the game-unique sculpts (like the blockhouses from D-Day), but anywhere from difficult to impossible for everything else because many sculpts have been re-used identically in several games. And by “identically” I mean identically down to the finest details, as opposed to sculpts which have undergone subtle (or not-so-subtle, or even flagrant) changes of design at some point or another. An example of a flagrant change is the Japanese artillery piece, whose towing struts were closed in the original version and are open in the current one. An example of a not-so-subtle change is the “refreshment” of the design of the five main power infantry units which occurred at some point; compare, for instance, the helmet shapes of the older and newer US and USSR infantrymen. An example of a subtle change is the American destroyer, which gained (or lost?) a notch in the funnel area of its superstructure, or the British Spitfire fighter, whose wings went from upturned to flat.
On top of all that, there’s the added complication of changes which may be intentional design changes or may just be manufacturing inconsitencies. The American Sherman tank, for instance, has many kinds of turret shapes and many types of semicircular hatch covers on top of the turret. An an extreme example: one of the German strategic bombers I own has a decidedly odd variant shape, even though it’s clearly the same plane (a Junkers JU-88) as all the other ones in my collection, and I can only conclude that it’s some sort of factory error caused by, perhaps, the injected plastic cooling in an abnormal way. (I jokingly designate it as the Fuhrer’s private airplane, even though his transport of choice was a three-engined aircraft).
All of this applies to colours and shades too. Some colour uses have a single possible source (e.g. the cherry-red Japanese units, which are from the first printing of the original Pacific game), while others are found all over the place. And shading differences which are evidently manufacturing inconsistencies further complicate the picture: I have some Europe 1940 / Pacific 1940 sculpts (some units are unique to those games, and some are even specific to either the first or second editions) in two different shades for the US and for Germany, even though the basic colours are the same.
The way I deal with all this, personally, is to keep identical sculpts together (sorted in plastic tackle boxes) without bothering about which game they come from. Just distinguishing between identical and non-identical ones already provides ample differentiation for me, given all the factors that have to be judged to decide whether two give sculpts are or aren’t exactly the same.
Incidentally, I’ve sometimes wondered about those infantry base numbers too and I’d be interested in hearing an authoritative answer from anyone who happens to know it. I don’t think the numbers are game-specific; my impression is that in any given game, each infantry sculpt from a given country has its own number. But that theory may not be correct…and it still doesn’t explain what purpose (if any) the numbers serve. Maybe they just have some sort of manufacturing-related function.
What do the black and white colors on the back of the A&A Facilities (A&A G40), such as Major Industrial Complexes and Minor Industrial Complexes? Also for AA guns?
What’s the difference between the two? The whites ones and the black ones?
@Striker said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:
I think black_elk was referring to 1942 3rd edition, not a 1940 europe/pacific/global 3rd edition.
I a bit a of side rant, but I doubt updated French pieces will be a priority even if there is a 3rd edition for 1940. It would be cool purely for a collectors stand point, but only that, as from a game standpoint France falling is a forgone conclusion in Europe 1940 and feels more like busywork after the novelty of doing it the first time. The interesting strategy/decision making is everything else. The balance of destroying british navy/threatening sea lion/Blitz Russia/aiding Italy.
Yes, France does in fact fall, but after liberation by the Allies, she becomes a pain in the neck to Germany and Italy, with the help of the other Allies on the Global board.
France returns after liberation, so it’s not a complete loss.
@DoManMacgee said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:
If we’re going to talk about the G40 line, I might as well throw out my personal wish. Give us a 1939 (or even 1936) scenario. I love the idea of having a few turns to prepare for the war in your own way, as opposed to being handed a largely predetermined set of units by the developers.
It would let you explore zany what-if scenarios to your heart’s content, too.
This guy has one right here.
@Black_Elk said in Grand Plans, 3rd Edition?:
For a long time now I’ve been hoping to see an official digital platform for A&A (one with at least some kind of connection to the designers and publishers) that could be used for alpha testing a new game before its actually released in print. I mean like a tandem release, where the new physical game follows the online drop.
Analog playtesting the way A&A has been handled in the past is pretty laborious and time intensive, as a cursory look back at the larry boards will reveal. Even with an open alpha and tons of feedback on forums and such for each proposal, its still a challenge to aggregate everything and to rely on anecdotal after action reports. I get the impression that there is never really enough time to hold the kind of informal FtF tournaments that would be required, or to get enough people all going gangbusters at the same time to actually get enough data beforehand to determine whether its fully cooked before running it to the printers in china and pushing it out on the shelves.
With a digital alpha you could speed up the whole process considerably and have gamesaves to use as evidence, to help parse the overall play-pattern and player experience in each iteration.
I think A&A online could provide a real opportunity, if ever we got a shot on a re-issue of 1942. Even a re-release using the same base map could be fun. I admit new maps get me more excited than the existing ones (there were a couple changes from Spring to 2nd Ed so least there’s a precedent), but even using the same map as 2nd ed, with set up changes or a rules change or two there are a lot of ways to get at a new take on things.
I guess what I’m hoping for is that A&Aonline goes beyond just offering a way to play 1942.2 or any of the existing A&A games digitally, and might eventually serve as a hub for developing the next A&A games. A place where the players could actually be more involved with that process, and provide feedback on things when it might still make a difference, e.g. before its shrink wrapped and sent off to stores.
I know there are some core table toppers who would probably never really play A&A on a computer, but who might reconsider doing so, if hopping online also meant possible glimpses at the next upcoming board. Or having other ways to get involved, provide feedback while it might still influence the basic set up/balance design, or otherwise engage with something that they eventually get to put on an actual table. I think we could see a pretty strong 3rd edition going at it that way.
Anyhow, just a few thoughts. To me the real longer term promise of an online A&A project would be something like that. And why I get exicted about things like possible toolsets or map/scenario editors.
How about a 3rd edition with more historically-accurate pieces for France? I was basically thinking “No more Soviet pieces painted blue for France!” I think that France should have its own molds. I think that it is rather silly for France to have Soviet Union molds repainted blue for France. France didn’t exactly like the Soviets, either. Dewoitine D. 520 for a fighter, Breguet 690 for a tactical bomber, Char B1 bis for the tank piece, Farman F. 220 for the strategic bomber piece, Schneider AMC P16 for a mechanized infantry piece., Canon de 75 modèle 1913-17 Schneider for France’s AAA piece, The French 75 for an artillery piece, Dunkerque class for a battleship, Béarn class for an aircraft carrier, La Galissonière Class for a cruiser piece, Redoutable class for a submarine, Le Fantasque for a destroyer, and so on.
If anyone has anything different, I’m all ears. 
@Young-Grasshopper said in A&A Global Setups & Components (under construction):
50th ANNIVERSARY EDITION COMPONENTS
COMMON UNITS & ACCESSORIES:
1 - Rulebook3 - Game Boards
1 - Battle Board6 National Setup Charts (one for each power)
1 National Production/Research & Development Chart6 Nationality boxes
2 Community Boxes70 Plastic Chips (Gray)
10 Plastic Chips (Red)7 Black dice
7 Red dice22 Damaged Factory Markers
18 Researcher Tokens
18 Victory City Tokens24 - Factories
24 - AA Artillery Guns30 One IPC Bills (green)
30 Five IPC Bills (red)
30 Ten IPC Bills (blue)GERMANY:
20 - Control Markers25 - Infantry
12 - Artillery
14 - Tanks12 - Fighters
6 - Bombers8 - Transports
12 - Submarines
10 - Destroyers
6 - Cruisers
2 - Aircraft Carriers
4 - BattleshipsSOVIET UNION:
20 - Control Markers25 - Infantry
14 - Artillery
14 - Tanks12 - Fighters
4 - Bombers6 - Transports
6 - Submarines
6 - Destroyers
4 - Cruisers
2 - Aircraft Carriers
2 - BattleshipsJAPAN:
20 - Control Markers25 - Infantry
10 - Artillery
8 - Tanks12 - Fighters
6 - Bombers10 - Transports
10 - Submarines
10 - Destroyers
8 - Cruisers
6 - Aircraft Carriers
6 - BattleshipsUNITED KINGDOM:
20 - Control Markers25 - Infantry
10 - Artillery
10 - Tanks12 - Fighters
8 - Bombers10 - Transports
10 - Submarines
10 - Destroyers
8 - Cruisers
4 - Aircraft Carriers
4 - BattleshipsITALY:
20 - Control Markers20 - Infantry
6 - Artillery
6 - Tanks6 - Fighters
4 - Bombers4 - Transports
6 - Submarines
6 - Destroyers
2 - Cruisers
2 - Aircraft Carriers
2 - BattleshipsUNITED STATES:
20 - Control Markers25 - Infantry
12 - Artillery
12 - Tanks12 - Fighters
8 - Bombers10 - Transports
10 - Submarines
10 - Destroyers
8 - Cruisers
6 - Aircraft Carriers
4 - BattleshipsCHINA:
15 - Regular Infantry
Where’s France’s total number of pieces?
