Map and Strategy Differences between 1st and 2nd Editions

[Hobbes]

Overall unit additions/changes between both editions
Soviet Union +12 total IPC gain (+2 from new armor/AA cost)

• +1 IC (Karelia)
• 1 INF upgraded to ART (Karelia)
• -2 INF (Asia)
  Germany +41 total IPC gain (+7 armor/AA cost), +1 income gain
• +1 SUB (SZ8)
• +4 INF (Morocco, Baltic States, Finland)
• +2 ARM (Baltic States, Northwestern Europe)
• 1 destroyer upgraded to cruiser (SZ5)
  UK +43 total IPC gain  (+1 from armor/AA cost), +1 income gain
• +1 IC (India)
• +1 INF (Burma)
• +1 ART (Egypt)
• +1 DD (SZ10 - Atlantic)
• +1 CA (SZ39 - Pacific)
  Japan +40 IPC total IPC gain
• 2 DD (SZs 60 and 61)
• 4 INF (Manchuria, Kwangtung, Kwangsu)
• 3 ART (French Indochina, Philippine Islands, Kwangtung)
  US +15 IPC total IPC gain (-1 armor/AA cost)
• 2 DD (SZ53 and 56 - Pacific)

Allies: +62 IPC, 6 additional units (-1 Soviet, 5 UK, 2 US)
Allies, total (1st Edition): 644 IPC, 107 units
Allies, total (2nd Edition): 714 IPC, 113 units
Axis: +81 IPC, 16 additional units (7 German, 9 Japanese)
Axis, total (1st Edition): 586 IPC, 98 units
Axis, total (2nd Edition): 667 IPC, 114 units

Map Differences

Europe/Africa

• Karelia now starts with an Industrial Complex and increased importance.
• Eastern Europe split to Baltic States and Poland (2 IPC each) - Poland is the best location for German armor since it allows to threaten both Karelia and Caucasus.
• Ukraine’s value reduced to 2 IPC - some map changes like splitting Southern Europe, also make Ukraine less important.
• West Russia is still the pivot point for Russia to stop the Germans. However both advancing routes (Karelia and Ukraine) are more separated than before.
• Southern Europe split between Italy (3 IPC) and S. Europe (2 IPC)
• Norway split into Norway (2 IPC) and Finland (1 IPC)
• Northwestern Europe added (2 IPC)
• Balkans renamed Bulgaria Romania
• Gibraltar can be invaded from both Atlantic and Mediterranean
• Morocco added (1 IPC) - road bump on Africa for Allies
• Sudan added (0 IPC) - road bump on Africa for Axis

Atlantic/Med

• UK now only has 3 SZs bordering it, all in naval/fighter range of SZ5 (Baltic) and NW Europe/France.
• The distance between E. Canada and Morocco is now 2 SZs.
• The distance between E. US and UK is now 3 SZs. Now the US can’t reinforce the UK directly from E. US.
• SZ16 (Black Sea) now doesn’t border SZ17 (Egypt).
• France/NW Europe/Norway can only be directly invaded from North America from E. Canada.
• German naval presence increased with an additional sub in SZ9 and the destroyer on SZ5 upgraded to a cruiser.
• UK gains a destroyer to join the transport on SZ10 off E. Canada

Asia

• India starts with an IC.
• Evenki now borders Archangel and a new territory, Vologda (worth 2 IPC).
• Chinese territories increased to 4 - better chance of the US fighter surviving J1.
• Japanese mainland territories increased to 4, now Manchuria is the best Asian land option for IC. Despite the changes, it still takes 4 rounds (the same as 1st Ed.) for Japanese units to reach Russia through Chinese territories, although the other routes now take longer.
• Quickest route to Russia is now Kwangtung - Szechwan - Kazakh - Russia (4 territories).
• 2nd Chinese Route: Manchuria - Anhwei - Sinkiang - Novosibirsk  - Russia (5 territories).
• Northern Route: Buryatia - Yakut - Evenki - Novosibirsk - Russia (5 territories, used to be 4).
• Indian Route: (FIC) - Burma - India - Persia - Kazakh - Russia (5/6 territories).
• Japan starts with 6 more ground units on Asia, the Allies with only 1 extra (-3 Soviet, +2 US, +2 UK).
• However, the additional territories and the Indian IC will add more time required for Japan to secure the beforementioned territories.

Pacific

• The SZs around Australia/DEI/New Guinea have been redesigned. East Indies can’t be reached from the Solomon SZ but the UK fleet off Australia can now reach East Indies.
• Iwo Jima and a corresponding SZ have been added, which now prevents SZ60 to be reached from the Solomons SZ.
• East Indies cannot be reached from the Solomon Islands SZ also.
• US and Japan both gain 2 extra destroyers, the UK gains 1 additional cruiser off Australia.

Overall strategic outlook changes

Soviet Union

• Faces a stronger German presence (additional 3 INF and 2 ARM) and starts with less 1 unit.
• Needs to deny use of Karelia IC to Germany (can merely trade it with G).
• Has more time to deal with Japanese pressure due to more territories, specially if Allies go KJF but has less units to do so.
• On a KJF the question is when it falls to Germany.
• Has the option to sending the Moscow fighter to Egypt to prevent its fall on G1.

Germany

• Stronger army on the Eastern Front.
• With the additional sub and new SZ can threaten and sink nearly all of the Allied fleet on Atlantic/Med on G1.
• The map changes allow for it to contest/deny the Atlantic longer against the Allies.
• Germany is affected the most by the new increased armor cost.
• Karelia is now a bigger step towards control of Europe.
• The odds of the G1 attack on Egypt are now lower (74%).
• When facing a KJF Germany needs to pressure Russia and Africa as quickly as possible.

UK

• Atlantic more vulnerable to German air/naval - more time required for Allied landings.
• Will need to either protect/delay conquest of the Indian IC or use it on a KJF.
• Can attack East Indies fleet to try KJF but at 66% odds.
• On the Indian Ocean UK either swings to hit Japan or to deny Africa to Germany or splits to hit both. The choice is either SZ37 or Egypt/SZ17, SZ61 and possibly New Guinea.

Japan

• Defense or offense? Does UK hit SZ37 and sink it and the Allies go KJF or it’s back to the Moscow race?.
• Regardless of KJF, the main target for Japan is to press/conquer the Indian IC.
• Two key VCs are located on Asia, Honolulu and Calcutta - conquer both and keep control of Leningrad and the Axis win.
• On the other hand, lose Manila and Shanghai for the Allies and if the Russians keep control of Karelia, then the Allies win.

US

• It now takes 3 fleets to threaten Germany and 2 fleets just to keep a steady flow of troops to France/Morocco/Finland, if the US goes KGF.
• It also takes longer to reach Japan/East Indies due to the redesigned Pacific SZs, if the US goes KJF.

Conclusions

• After 3 games the setup seems to favor the Axis due to the Allies steeper learning curve. It feels balanced but it’s too early to say.
• The new edition is designed to increase the odds for a KJF, but a) most players will have no idea of how to perform/stop it due to lack of experience; b) for best odds it depends on the Germans not attacking on Egypt on G1 (also there’s a 25% chance it wiil not succeed) so that the UK fighter on Egypt can attack SZ37 on UK1 (2/3 odds of winning)
• The starting Indian and Karelian IC can be a distinct advantage for both sides - together with the new VC, Honolulu they switch the logic less from conquering Moscow to other solutions for a 9 VC win.
• The addition of the Soviet FTR to Egypt on R1 secures the SZ37 attack but it isn’t clear yet how much essential that move is for the Allies, or if they should have Germany try its luck on Egypt.

[Witt]

Thanks Hobbes. Never bought 1st Ed, so interesting to know.

[digitallimit]

Any impressions as compared to the first edition? I’m tempted to buy the second edition since I own the first edition already and want to double up pieces for the larger map (I did some work at Kinkos), but at the same time, I’m worried I’ll wish I had just doubled up on the original for the significantly cheaper price ($25) and the fact that it comes with ICs and same-modeled units.

Any feelings on that?

[Witt]

This is my 1st new game since Global came out. Have Anniversary too since it came out. Was expecting more. Think it is too expensive.

[Jennifer]

Karelia use is no different between maps then….

Interesting read however.

[lozmoid]

Wittman,

I appreciate your sentiment mate. Have you purchased 1942 2nd Ed yet? I am just waiting to hear back from my FLGS to see how much they’re selling it for…

[Witt]

SorryLoz,  thought I had said. Had it 5 days. Done one round with my pharmacist friend over Maddy’s 3rd birthday. (Is her Godfather.) He is back in 3 weeks for 2 nights. Nice to have a new game, but feel was too expensive(£55).
Still waiting on Cool Stuff’s 1941.

[Hobbes]

Just played my first game yesterday, winning as Allies.

Soviets started with a West Russia and Ukraine attacks, with the latter failing to kill the tank and fighter. Germany sunk SZ7, 14 and 17 but failed the attack on Egypt, took Karelia and stacked Ukraine.
UK bought 2 ftrs, 2 inf and 1 art, sunk German fleet on SZ17, captured New Guinea and eliminated the German cruiser on SZ7 and the transport on SZ5, placing the infantry on India.
Japan went for Pearl lite, 2 Chinese territories (leaving out the one with the US fighter) and tried to kill the UK fleet off New Guinea but pulled back after losing a fighter.

Afterwards the US went full Pacific and with the Indian IC managed to contain Japan on Asia but advance on the Pacific was slow. The UK managed to drop a fleet on the Atlantic on UK4 but meanwhile the Germans had crushed the Soviets on Caucasus and on turn 6 tried to get Moscow but failed and my opponent conceded.

[Cow]

Well this is the third edition actually.

1942 is 1 territory different then revised, same setup except the allies battleship was nerfed to a cruiser, transports don’t defend themselves, no instant kill with bombardments, and industrial damage puts damage counters. Basically it went from allies favored to axis favored by rules changes, which would be fine except the pace is much slower.

This version at least opens up opportunities for allies to be hyper aggressive, unlike the previous edition, which was much less aggressive.

There are more strategies in this version. Map is different, west europe has two landing pads for allies.  more spots for UK to drop in on as far as the baltic goes.

It is harder to take back africa because of the extra space, so games can be won or lost there, because of the income it provides.

India as a complex opens up a KJF strategy for allies.

Not a bad map.

[Yavid]

@Cow:

Well this is the third edition actually.

1942 is 1 territory different then revised, same setup except the allies battleship was nerfed to a cruiser, transports don’t defend themselves, no instant kill with bombardments, and industrial damage puts damage counters. Basically it went from allies favored to axis favored by rules changes, which would be fine except the pace is much slower.

This version at least opens up opportunities for allies to be hyper aggressive, unlike the previous edition, which was much less aggressive.

There are more strategies in this version. Map is different, west europe has two landing pads for allies.  more spots for UK to drop in on as far as the baltic goes.

It is harder to take back africa because of the extra space, so games can be won or lost there, because of the income it provides.

India as a complex opens up a KJF strategy for allies.

Not a bad map.

They also dropped NAs, changed some unit cost and values, and changed AA guns but yes it’s Revised Verision 3.0

[Hobbes]

@Cow:

Well this is the third edition actually.

5th edition - first was the Nova edition, then Classic, Revised, Spring 1942 1st Ed and now 2nd Ed.

[Cow]

OK well I count classic and the nova edition… but I guess if revised was a revision of classic, I got to count it.

so yes, welcome to 5th edition LOL.

[Hobbes]

@Cow:

so yes, welcome to 5th edition LOL.

:)

I’ve played so far two games (and won both as Allies) of the new version and I am pleased with the changes - nothing too complicated but at the same time the possibility or not of both G1 attack on Egypt and the UK1 attack on SZ37 really determine the game’s flavor towards KJF or not.
On my first game I skipped SZ37 and instead sunk the German fleet off SZ17 (after a failed Egypt, where he killed the UK fighter but failed to take the territory). On the 2nd, the Germans decided to reunite both Baltic and Med fleets (and actually try a Sea Lion strategy later but failed) and the UK hit SZ37 and sank the entire Japanese fleet.
Both I went KJF and on both the Germans went for a naval purchase on G1 and later (the UK simply kept building fighters) and as a result the Germans couldn’t then advance against the Soviets… some things didn’t change on this edition ;)

[Petebu]

Do you think it is better for germany to not buy ships and go hard after Russia?

[Hobbes]

@Petebu:

Do you think it is better for germany to not buy ships and go hard after Russia?

IMO, the best naval units for G would be submarines because they are immune from single planes but that only works until the Allies drop a fleet strong enough to defeat it.

It’s really that Germany needs to control Karelia as quickly as possible, either on KGF or KJF - then Germany can either focus on pushing towards Moscow or dealing with Allied landings.

[Witt]

Hi Hobbes. Icannot see much point in Subs in this game, unless it is to cause the other side to invest 2 more IPCs to counter buying Destroyers. As there is no convoy disruption they seem to have lost purpose and worth.
I feel no need, for example, to waste a DD and Ft to kill Russia’s starting Sub. Would rather keep a DD with my capital ships and let it sail around the new(and pretty) map to its heart’s content.
Equally buying Subs for the Baltic as Germany( with no scramble to help defend) a UK/US DD and Air attack will sink them and still allow an amphibious landing in 1 of 5 territories.
I would definitely buy Naval on G1 and G2, just not a Sub.

[Hobbes]

@wittman:

I would definitely buy Naval on G1 and G2, just not a Sub.

To me that is precisely the moment where you need to buy ground units to use against the Soviets 1-2 turns later.  * Germany can stack Karelia on round 1 or 2 (with enough units so that Soviets can’t retake it), depending on Soviet purchases and moves.

• Or, Germany can stack Ukraine on round 1-2, again depending on Soviet purchases/moves.
• Either move forces the Soviets to keep a stack on West Russia or to move it to Caucasus, giving Germany more leverage on the Eastern Front and facilitating Japanese advance (unless there’s a KJF in place)
• The Baltic fleet is not that important - it is convenient to have a way to drop 2 INF on Scandinavia or Karelia but if you can get a stream of German infantry moving into Karelia then it is much more useful than having the Baltic fleet.
• Putting more resources to the Med is wasteful. Germany starts earning 3 IPC from Africa and if it conquers Egypt it gets to 5 IPC. Just sending 1 INF and 1 ARM to Africa costs 9 IPC to Germany - invest too much with Germany and you’ll only get your investment back if you conquer the whole of Africa and keep it for a few turns.
• Also, any units sent to Africa are less units to be used against the Soviets. Since Germans and Soviets are usually earning 40 and 29 IPC by trading Karelia, Belo and Ukraine, sending those 9 IPC means that that Germany and Russia are deploying the almost same number of units per round against one another. That is not good, if you are trying to reach Moscow while Japan is facing a KJF :)

With the new VC the Axis strategy really changes - on 1st Edition it was conquer Moscow, then get the necessary VCs to win. Here it depends on KGF (conquer Calcutta and Honolulu, secure Leningrad, Paris, Rome and Berlin) or KJF (conquer a combination of Calcutta/Honolulu/Leningrad/Moscow, while securing enough of your starting VCs for a win).

[Mallery29]

@wittman:

Hi Hobbes. Icannot see much point in Subs in this game, unless it is to cause the other side to invest 2 more IPCs to counter buying Destroyers. As there is no convoy disruption they seem to have lost purpose and worth.
I feel no need, for example, to waste a DD and Ft to kill Russia’s starting Sub. Would rather keep a DD with my capital ships and let it sail around the new(and pretty) map to its heart’s content.
Equally buying Subs for the Baltic as Germany( with no scramble to help defend) a UK/US DD and Air attack will sink them and still allow an amphibious landing in 1 of 5 territories.
I would definitely buy Naval on G1 and G2, just not a Sub.

Big fan of subs still…it slow down the US/UK fleet in time for me to get to Russia and hurt them.  The BB I only need to risk one SS, so I save one, so I should have 2-3 not counting my buy of one SS.  With my planes and Subs, the fleet won’t come till its really ready, and I don’t know if that’s going to be enough to save Russia.  With a second Bomber, I make the Allies really think and probably force them into a KJF strat…which is glorious for Hitler.

[Witt]

I am new to 1942, so thank you for your ideas.
In Anniversary games I have played,  both sides  used to have a DD build up and Subs seem to have been ignored. 1940 has seen the Sub’s resurgence for good reasons. Just seemed they are not as necessary in 1942.
I love conquering Russia and understand you have to match them unit for unit, or you won’t defeat them. Buying  Baltic Navy does not help Germany, I know. Without NOs or a VC in Egypt, you are right, Africa can become a sideshow unless you take it all and bankrupt the UK.
And they can always build a Factory in SA and stop you.

[Hobbes]

@wittman:

I am new to 1942, so thank you for your ideas.
In Anniversary games I have played,  both sides  used to have a DD build up and Subs seem to have been ignored. 1940 has seen the Sub’s resurgence for good reasons. Just seemed they are not as necessary in 1942.

The baseline is still the 42 1st Ed. I haven’t played much Anniversary but I never went for German naval builds as well there, even though they are common. With the Allies going KGF any German Baltic fleets are toast, the question is how long they can survive and harass the Allied naval buildup, while on KJF you’ll rather need the 14 IPCs spent on a carrier rather to be on land. Just the surviving German subs and its airpower are usually enough to deter any UK naval build up on round 1 and the Indian IC sucks up a lot of the UK’s income.

I love conquering Russia and understand you have to match them unit for unit, or you won’t defeat them. Buying  Baltic Navy does not help Germany, I know. Without NOs or a VC in Egypt, you are right, Africa can become a sideshow unless you take it all and bankrupt the UK.
And they can always build a Factory in SA and stop you.