No, you can only place major IC’s on originally owned territory of that power. So Germany could place is on norway since they originally owned it but no other power could since…well it’s Germany’s original territory.
Preview Copies of 1940 Second Edition Arrived
-
I am not sure why the allies are losing an inf in egypt… the allies suck, you would think they would get a buff somewhere for global.
-
They don’t lose an INF.
They lose a UK INF for +2 ANZAC INFSo they actually gain one.
-
so the global setup is the same as alpha 3 then.
-
Would somebody please tell me what the hell is going on in here? I don’t care about the individual games of Europe & Pacific, we are in the 1940 Global thread, just tell me the set up in Egypt for GLOBAL. Is there or is there not a fighter removed on EUS, and do the Americans start with minors or majors to begin the game?
-
Have you seen the new Concentration camp piece? They’re all over Germany…
WTH are they good for? :P
-
They don’t lose an INF.
They lose a UK INF for +2 ANZAC INFSo they actually gain one.
Compared to latest Alpha UK looses 1 Inf in the global setup
according to
http://www.axisandallies.org/p/whats-new-in-axis-allies-pacific-1940-and-europe-1940-second-editions/djensen wrote:
"Setup
In addition to the normal setup, add the following. …
Amur: 6 Soviet infantry
Sakha: 6 Soviet infantry and 2 Soviet AAA
Buryatia: 6 Soviet infantry
Egypt: 2 ANZAC infantry and remove 1 UK infantry"So that sums up to:
Egypt in Global 2ndEd:
- UK: 1 Infantry (2-1), 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Artillery, Naval Base
- Anzac: 2 Infantry
compared to
Egypt in latest Alpha 3:
- UK: 2 Infantry, 1 Mechanized Infantry, 1 Artillery, Naval Base
- Anzac: 2 Infantry
-
@Young:
…Is there or is there not a fighter removed on EUS, and do the Americans start with minors or majors to begin the game?
The fighter is still there - and US start with minors, too.
-
Does anyone play that Anzac units(thinking of the 2 Inf in Egypt, but is the one on Malaya too) can be transported on a UK TT?
I only ask because of the history of it and the complications of defending Egypt as not all the units are under UK control and go separately, admittedly before Italy. -
I wonder why larry harris would nerf the allies when the axis win most of the time.
It is silly considering how easy it is for the axis to gain an advantage and how doomed an attempt at trying to take a capital is for the allies. Does Larry Harris not understand the serious logistical issue the allies have compared to the axis? He already forces UK1 to be a standard all inf on london or watch your capital go up in flames. There is so little versatility for the allies. Set moves and still destined to be screwed. You get so little room to try something creative.
-
@wittmann:
Does anyone play that Anzac units(thinking of the 2 Inf in Egypt, but is the one on Malaya too) can be transported on a UK TT?
I only ask because of the history of it and the complications of defending Egypt as not all the units are under UK control and go separately, admittedly before Italy.You mean in the UK turn?
-
Am I the only one that prefers the axis, but sees what a disadvantage the allies have? I mean it is really is not fun to roll over the allies like this.
I guess adding 3 more ipc to the bid means more options for the allies, could make for more enjoyable games… but oob is feeling dumb.
I don’t like -1 arty for germany… losing the fight for france round 1 is hilarious but I guess it is easy enough to restart from there. Hopefully that arty is poofed if egypt loses an inf (cos it would mean a higher likelyhood of germany losing mech in france).
-
@Cow:
…
I don’t like -1 arty for germany
…There is no -1 Artillery for Germany.
Egypt is the one and only Setup difference compared to the latest Alpha.
(As long as no one finds something else.)
-
Hi Special Forces, suppose it should be legally done in the Anzac go, but why not the Uk one as they were part of Mongomery’s 8th Army.
Just seems they get to sit and defend Egypt while the stronger and more numerous UK do the attacking.
As an aside, England has always got others to fight their wars, so is ironic that in Global they do their own dirty work!
I suppose it is just one of many discrepancies. -
In my current tournament game the Anzac in Egypt killed Italians in Jordan
-
In my current tournament game the Anzac in Egypt killed Italians in Jordan
Grr!
Are you the dirty convicts Noll? How unfortunate if so.
Which tournament and was it 2 Inf against 1 It unit? Good luck. -
I’m playing the Allies :P
-
I have every faith in you. Does it hurt to sink our beautiful fleet or are you like a medieval mercenary and take it in your stride? Haven’t played against my beloved Italy yet.
-
Well in reality when I play as the allies, USA is a puppet state of Italy, fighting Germany for an Italian euro dominance
-
Thank God for the gift of imagination and fantasy!
Better not to dwell too much in this world in my opinion.
Saluti. Devo andare a vedere la Fiorentina dai miei. -
@wittmann:
Hi Special Forces, suppose it should be legally done in the Anzac go, but why not the Uk one as they were part of Mongomery’s 8th Army.
Just seems they get to sit and defend Egypt while the stronger and more numerous UK do the attacking.
As an aside, England has always got others to fight their wars, so is ironic that in Global they do their own dirty work!
I suppose it is just one of many discrepancies.So, boarding in UK turn and getting on land in the ANZAC turn? I see your point but that would probably make the rules complicated.
I guess a house rule could be (for example) that ANZAC units can board AND leave UK transport ships in 1 turn with the european hemisphere.
But it’s just 2 infantry (put there for defence purposes without increasing UK’s attack strength), is that worth an extra rule?
Suggested Topics
