My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

[D_Runyon]

@Dylan:

@D_Runyon:

These are sourced from DJensen’s photos of the map on the main page (and lots of squinting). I’m uncertain on a few; they have question marks.

Pro-Allies:
Eastern Persia, 0, 0
Northwestern Persia, 0, 0
Persia, 2, 2 INF

Is Persia all together considered one or is it considered different?

The three Persian territories are separate territories. Only one has a value/national forces. I assume each territory will ally individually.

[djensen]

I’m having a little trouble getting a crisp photo of the combined map. I have the article about the rules for Global ready but the photo is being troublesome. I’ll try again tonight, I have some ideas.

[SilverAngelSurfer]

I think most of us would be happy with just the plain text article until you get the photo fixed… :wink:

[Almano]

@SAS:

I think most of us would be happy with just the plain text article until you get the photo fixed… :wink:

What he said :-D

[Bob_A_Mickelson]

I also prefer a text review to no review.

[Lunarwolf]

can you add a unit count to the next review =)

[SilverAngelSurfer]

We got the setup in the first review, what do we need a unit count for?  You can just add it up from that, right?

[calvinhobbesliker]

@SAS:

We got the setup in the first review, what do we need a unit count for?  You can just add it up from that, right?

I think he means how many pieces are provided with each game? i.e the unit count for German mechs will be 3

[SilverAngelSurfer]

Oh, got ya.  That makes sense.  I was confused.

[Woodstock]

@Shakespeare:

I wonder: jensen did not say that the Soviets place the 2 units into Novosibirsk for free

when I read that I initially thought he meant that if the Soviets do indeed build/deploy units in a turn they must deploy at least 2 inf into Novosibirsk; in other words, if the Soviets build or deploy units thay have to buy units as usual, but at least 2 inf must go into Novosibirsk

I just thought it was clever way to not allow the Soviets to stack the borders in anticipation of the German attack they historically were indeed unprepared for.

So are those 2 inf units free or do they cost the Soviets but are still a mandatory placement?

I would like to see this confirmed aswell. Anybody any clue?

[Lunarwolf]

@calvinhobbesliker:

@SAS:

We got the setup in the first review, what do we need a unit count for?  You can just add it up from that, right?

I think he means how many pieces are provided with each game? i.e the unit count for German mechs will be 3

haha yeah this i what i was asking for how many different pieces come with each country like germany will get blank amount of each unit

[Krieghund]

@Woodstock:

@Shakespeare:

I wonder: jensen did not say that the Soviets place the 2 units into Novosibirsk for free

when I read that I initially thought he meant that if the Soviets do indeed build/deploy units in a turn they must deploy at least 2 inf into Novosibirsk; in other words, if the Soviets build or deploy units thay have to buy units as usual, but at least 2 inf must go into Novosibirsk

I just thought it was clever way to not allow the Soviets to stack the borders in anticipation of the German attack they historically were indeed unprepared for.

So are those 2 inf units free or do they cost the Soviets but are still a mandatory placement?

I would like to see this confirmed aswell. Anybody any clue?

They’re free.

[maverick_76]

I’m guessing that is to simulate conscription forces, am I right?

[Flashman]

Or to reflect the fact that this region was the main centre of Soviet weapons production after 1941.  I think there should be a factory here; tanks produced here can reach beyond all Soviet starting borders in 3 turns.

[Krieghund]

They represent Far Eastern forces being recalled.

[Upside-down_Turtle]

@Flashman:

quote oztea:

It would seem that Larry went this way with it because of the side to which the people of the country were leaning as opposed to their governments.  Why?  We don’t exactly know.

It seems so, but isn’t this in contradiction to the rest of the board?

Surely control in A&A is about military and government power, not the shifting sympathies of the proletariat.

You may as well make Egypt pro-Axis, as it was under a shaky and unpopular pro-British government.

Larry justifies his Pro-Allies Persia by the fact that Persia traded most of their oil with the Allies.  Iraq had the same economic relationship with Germany that pre-dates WWI, hence the Alliance with the Ottoman Empire.  It seems clear to me that Larry was considering neither the governments, nor public opinion, but the economic relationship of each country.

[Napoleon]

When can we expect the next preview?..…It’s been a long time :oops:

[Tralis]

@Napoleon:

When can we expect the next preview?..…It’s been a long time :oops:

I’d love to see the NOs.

[shintokamikaze]

what the hell,why is ireland pro allied,as an irish man this is an insult,ireland refused to let britan and usa use their ports,and station planes and troops in the republic,from fear of them not going after the war,ireland detained downed axis and allied flyers during the war,allso the british closed the border with the north,for fear of spies and sabatours,ireland has all way being a strict neatrul and all ways will be,i am proud my country has never hads a foreign war. but this will meen uk will have to station troops is ireland with no bonus of ipc or infantry,cos germany could use ireland to bomb the usa

[SilverAngelSurfer]

I agree that Ireland probably should’ve been a strict neutral, but it probably won’t make a difference gameplay-wise, as Germany most likely will never get troops into Eire or if they do, it won’t be for long.  There’s not much incentive for anyone to occupy Eire with no IPC value and no infantry and not even island status for scrambling…  And it doesn’t connect to anything strategic.