41 or 42….Help me

[Napoleon]

I have a game this weekend, i dont want to play global 1940 becaus its too long.

So, i decide to be back on anniversary for a game.

The thing is i want a not too long game (5-6 hours) and the most balanced possible.

Dardanelles is closed in boith scenario! NO escort rules

So, for the balance thing, 41 with N-O’s or not? How long is 41 ? Do we need a bid beside the 3 chinese guys that i added?
( For this scenario i always put 1 chinese in those 3 empty chinese territory)

So, for 42, No’s? How long? Do we need a bid?

We play with 6 players for information.

Thanks again! :mrgreen:

[Rorschach]

Almost all of my games, 41 or 42, no bid, with NO’s last about 6 hours tops.

So I think you’re good either way.  I personally prefer 41 … but 42 is nice for a change sometimes.

[Zhukov44]

42 will usually last a little longer, unless Germany is really skilled–then it can be shorter.

Imo a fair bid for Allies is around 10-12 in 42, 8-9 in 41.

3 inf bid to China would work for either edition–I’d add 1 more inf to Egypt, then you are good to go.

[Napoleon]

And do you play with NO’s?

[Zhukov44]

Yes, that includes NOs.

[Napoleon]

Thought that 42 was more balanced and less long than 41, so i was wrong.

Can you explain me, so i can figure out, how the bid systeme works?

[axis_roll]

There is a player help forum (Where I found the following thread about bidding)

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=6187.0

[Darkman]

If you play in a competitive style with your friends, take 42. Most of the 41 games are always the same (Allies concentrate on Europe while Japan is completely neglected) which means that your Japan player won’t have much fun. In 42 US has at least a real option to go Pac.

For the bids, I don’t agree with Zhukov completely but still, the 41 bid ranges from 8-9 to 13 and for 42 from 7-8 to 12, always a bit depending if you play with dice or low luck.

[Cow]

NOs make the game go faster.

[Hobbes]

@Cow:

NOs make the game go faster.

And they are not optional (if you play according to everything the rulebook)

[axis_roll]

@Hobbes:

@Cow:

NOs make the game go faster.

And they are not optional (if you play according to everything the rulebook)

Huh?

National Objective are optional

@Axis&Allies:

National Objectives & Bonus Income
Note: This is an optional rule—players should decide whether or not this rule will be included in their game.

While the goal of the game is to capture victory cities, each power also has an objective related to its historic objectives.
These objectives, if achieved, will grant you bonus income.
The Allies, especially the United States and the United Kingdom, seemed able to meld their individual objectives into one
common cause—the complete and unconditional surrender of the Axis. This was also the offi cial position of the Soviet
Union, but unlike the United States and the United Kingdom, the Soviets had world communism in mind as well.
Germany had its “Lebensraum”, Japan’s was “The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere,” and Italy’s stated objective
was turning the Mediterranean Sea and the territories that border it into “Mare Nostrum.”
In recognition of these known national objectives, each country that reaches its individual national objectives will receive a
bonus sum of IPCs each turn.

[Hobbes]

@axis_roll:

@Hobbes:

@Cow:

NOs make the game go faster.

And they are not optional (if you play according to everything the rulebook)

Huh?

National Objective are optional

@Axis&Allies:

National Objectives & Bonus Income
Note: This is an optional rule—players should decide whether or not this rule will be included in their game.

While the goal of the game is to capture victory cities, each power also has an objective related to its historic objectives.

Oops, my mistake, sorry. I thought they were also standard on AA50 like they are on AAE&AAP40.

[Napoleon]

No and i think that in Anniversary, NO’s boost one side. In 41, the NO’s advantage the allies and in 42 its the axis.

I think no NO’s just balance the game in both scenario, what you think?

[Zhukov44]

@Napoleon:

No and i think that in Anniversary, NO’s boost one side. In 41, the NO’s advantage the allies and in 42 its the axis.

I think no NO’s just balance the game in both scenario, what you think?

I think it’s easier for Axis to earn money from NOs in either edition, so imo NOs favor Axis in both.

I definitely don’t think NOs favor Allies in 41.  Normally Japan gets its 3 NOs by Turn 2 while the Allies have to work hard to get theirs.

[axis_roll]

@Zhukov44:

@Napoleon:

No and i think that in Anniversary, NO’s boost one side. In 41, the NO’s advantage the allies and in 42 its the axis.

I think no NO’s just balance the game in both scenario, what you think?

I think it’s easier for Axis to earn money from NOs in either edition, so imo NOs favor Axis in both.

I definitely don’t think NOs favor Allies in 41.  Normally Japan gets its 3 NOs by Turn 2 while the Allies have to work hard to get theirs.

Yes, agree 100% about the NO’s and whom they help more.  If you want a different game, try 1941 WITHOUT any NO’s in play.  Totally different game.  I have never tried a 1942 game without NOs.  We don’t play many 1942 games.

[Napoleon]

So, if i resume this

• 41 with NO’s = favor the axis a bit

• 41 without NO’s = Pretty even ?….( I always put 3 chinese inf bid)

• 42 with NO’s = favor the Axis

• 42 without NO’S = even or favor a little bit the Allies ?

Is that corect?

[cts17]

@Napoleon:

So, if i resume this

• 41 with NO’s = favor the axis a bit

• 41 without NO’s = Pretty even ?….( I always put 3 chinese inf bid)

• 42 with NO’s = favor the Axis

• 42 without NO’S = even or favor a little bit the Allies ?

Is that corect?

Generally, yes. There is generally a 6-10 IPC bid for both game scenarios when using NO’s. I don’t personally have much experience without NO’s, but I’m pretty certain that '41 without NO’s is quite balanced. '42 without NO’s favours the allies quite heavily, I find.

[Napoleon]

thanks :mrgreen:

[neesorbiree]

Hi Mike,

NICE JOB  bi

Very nice production with the hot-linked Table of Contents and all the active cross references, plus all the reformatting to fit “book” pages. Very clean and usable.

Of course, one of the long-standing complaints about the original online “manual” is that in many places it seems more like a sales pitch than a how-to manual, and that is all you had to work with.  To get better content either takes a lot of dedication or something like a Wiki where lots of people can contribute their tips.  Also of course, there are a few links that still go to on-line locations; you could not include the entire Almeza site in this manual.

This PDF should definitely be a huge help to those folks who have slow connections or are behind corporate firewalls that make it hard to get to the original or to anyone who wants to print something out to have on their desk while they work.

Congratulations,
August