Overall unit additions/changes between both editions
Soviet Union +12 total IPC gain (+2 from new armor/AA cost)
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
Atlantic/Med
Asia
Pacific
Overall strategic outlook changes
Soviet Union
Germany
UK
Japan
US
Conclusions
Thanks Hobbes. Never bought 1st Ed, so interesting to know.
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?
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.
Karelia use is no different between maps then….
Interesting read however.
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…
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.
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.
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.
@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
@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.
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.
@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 ;)
Do you think it is better for germany to not buy ships and go hard after Russia?
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.
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.
@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.
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).
@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.
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.
@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.
