Obviously the Zombies add rules.  The question is, what have they added those rules to?  And the answer is a simplified version of A&A.

Why do you think SBRs, new ICs, AAAs, etc were not included?

1. Because WotC thought this would improve the game for seasoned players?
   Or,
2. because they wanted a more newb friendly product?

You can believe what you want, but I’m going with 2).

As for the complaint that the Pacific theatre is downplayed, that sounds like almost every A&A game I’ve ever played.  It’s almost always KGF.  If you don’t like that, I (again) recommend using your Zombies as a 1942.2 expansion.  The base game was clearly not intended for those of us who want a deeper experience.  I’m surprised anybody here is even playing it, other than to get a feel for the new mechanics.

@Caesar:

You’re going to argue what we’re told at Wizard….

I’m not aware that WotC have denied this being an entry level game.  Where did they say that?

But as a former MTG player, I can assure you that WotC do not publicise design decisions out of a desire to inform us!  It’s all just PR.  I don’t trust anything they say.

Facts speak for themselves, and A&A&Z is significantly simplified compared to any other title (besides 1941).  What does that tell you?

@robert:

What is needed is new ideas/scale/eras to make the continuing of the series viable.

• The name ‘Axis & Allies’ refers specifically to WWII

• I like variety.  When I play Diplomacy, Supremacy 2020, Conquest Of The Empire, Shogun, etc, I actually enjoy that the core rules and mechanics are fundamentally different than A&A.

players

@Caesar:

The problem is that Zombies is NOT an entry game, it IS a reboot to bring life to an IP that has a fanatical fan base.

How is this a reboot when it is an expansion to 1942.2?

A&A&Z has 2 marketing goals:

• To sell s new toy for enfranchised players

• To entice new/millennial gamers with sexy, pop culture

The first group (I expect) will gravitate to the 1942.2 expansion for a deeper game.

The new board will be enjoyed by vets for the fact that it is a new.  But this is an entry level game.

• Fewer areas?  Check.

• Reduced economy?  Check.

• Fewer unit types?  Check.

• Simplified rules/mechanics?  Check.

The base A&A&Z game resembles 1941 more than 1942.2/AA50/G1940.

1941 was clearly meant as an introductory game, but to the uninitiated it is just another A&A title.  Zombies will lure a lot more new players.  AH/Hasbro know this, and have designed the game accordingly.

@Striker:

Other board games of similar or less complexity to A&A (IE: many of the scenarios of memoir 44, catan, etc.) aren’t locked into an optimal strategy…

Other board games with more strategic options typically involve a lot more random and chaotic elements.  A&A is more predictable, and as such optimal strategies are bound to arise.  A&A players are apparently okay with this, as many of us feel A&A is a cut above.

That said, A&A&Z looks like it offers a more tempting Sea Lion than any other edition.  It also should often end with an economic victory (zombie apocalypse), and it does have a strong random/chaotic mechanic that should make strategic play more “touch-and-go”.  You should be very happy with this game.

Note this is an entry level game.  Deeper strategies should arise in A&A&Z: 1942.

@taamvan:

call of duty

My first introduction to WWII/Nazi Zombies was from Heavy Metal: The Movie (1981).

@robert:

The trick now is to get the creators to joke about an A&A Mediterranean game  :mrgreen:

I feel like the Mediterranean is too large for a tactical game (D-Day, BoB, etc), but too small for a “theatre” game.

Welcome back, friend!

https://www.polygon.com/reviews/2018/10/30/18044142/axis-allies-zombies-board-game-review

@DoManMacgee:

Bummer. I don’t see that being very helpful in 42SE’s China then. Aren’t all those territories worth only 1 IPC each? I doubt 1 INF/turn is going to do much in the face of the Japanese onslaught.

Of course Japan will have to kill each infantry twice…