Looking back at the “enjoyability” of all my Axis and Allies experiences, I have to say the first version of A&A Pacific may be the best. It was quick, engaging, dramatic, and user friendly. Global 1940 may be the “greatest,” but it requires real dedication and a level of experience not easily acquired. A&A Pacific had few flaws, excellent design, and real balance. It always provided an intriguing/entertaining game. (Yes I know India crush is possible, but at least even newbie players could see it and go for jugular with the US)
Indeed Karl, lots of fun. I loved the task force markers and kamikazes, that made the game fun and unique.
We always seemed to play Europe 1999. The oil fields and convoy zones were a nice balancing factor, as well as the $12 IPC allowance the Germans and the Allies split between themselves. We always gave that money to Russia for more troops on the front,
Looking forward to giving HBG Global a try soon, I own the AA game but have never played.
It is also one of the best looking sets.
I loved it too, for the reasons you mentioned Karl. I just prefer the Germany/Russia slog to Moscow, or retreat to Berlin.
Will try to play some over Christmas as it should be shorter than a 1940 game and being on this forum has awakened feelings for it!
Still my favorite of all the games. Cherry red Japanese and the greatest looking board of the series all goes towards contributing to a fun and balanced game.
All the times of yelling Banzai as I launched Kamakazies in a last ditch effort to defeat the US invasion fleet and by myself some time. Or that feeling of relief as the 4th battle off the coast of new Guinea ends in a Australian victory with the pacific wide open.
Just picked up this and A&A Europe(1999) for $30. Both sets in excellent shape. Had both back in the day but sold 'em in 2002 when I moved. Don’t remember having the red Japanese and Russian pieces back then. Were they issued with first edition or later editions?
@Larry:
Just picked up this and A&A Europe(1999) for $30. Both sets in excellent shape. Had both back in the day but sold 'em in 2002 when I moved. Don’t remember having the red Japanese and Russian pieces back then. Were they issued with first edition or later editions?
First edition had the Cherry Red Japanese and bron Chinese pieces. Latter editions had what it is now.
This was a great game I don’t think it was the best though. Anniversary is still the best. If global had a 42 start date I think I would vote for that.
I like Anniversary too, but it seemed just a shy less interesting than Xeno’s World at War. Also, I remember opening the box to anniversary and being immediately disappointed by the map. Sure, better than revised, but still had all sorts of silly territorial cuts.
Agree with above posts. This was the best A&A game in my mind. I feel that it models WWII the best in that Japan starts with a ton of ‘stuff’ but the USA is gonna roll you eventually, so you’d better get your victory points in to get to 22! Balance is less of an issue if it is supposed to be unbalanced- only bid is in the # of victory points needed.
Plus it was fun having huge Navies, Naval task forces, etc.
I also like the UK revenue splitting between ANZAC and India- by far the best method of playing the UK. Wish it were implemented better in the world versions. (As in… why have an ‘ANZAC’ player if no ‘India’ no ‘Canada’ no South Africa’?)
Our new episode of the Dicetruction Podcast coming out tomorrow is our first round game of this one. We liked it but found the USA being able to drop unlimited units at Hawaii made them a bit overpowered. As it’s our first group game of Pacific we figure we screwed up the rules a bit here and there and didn’t really get any ideas for strategy since we weren’t even sure we were observing the rules properly. It was fun, check out the episode if you want and let us know where we screwed up.
@Most:
Our new episode of the Dicetruction Podcast coming out tomorrow is our first round game of this one. We liked it but found the USA being able to drop unlimited units at Hawaii made them a bit overpowered. As it’s our first group game of Pacific we figure we screwed up the rules a bit here and there and didn’t really get any ideas for strategy since we weren’t even sure we were observing the rules properly. It was fun, check out the episode if you want and let us know where we screwed up.
You can only place a number of units equal to the IC value of a territory…unless I’ve been lied to my whole life.
I think it said Original IC’s were unlimited.
Hmmmm….well just play with the IC cap and it’s a blast :wink:
Sounds like that’s the way it should be. USA is just too powerful when they can start that much closer.
It shouldn’t matter that the US can drop all units it buys in Hawaii. They still take 3 turns to get to Japan.
Japan should take extra risks turn 1- (defenders roll on a 1!), and should be able to get 40 IPCs (and thus 4 Victory points) round 1 (round 2 at latest). Then Japan should buy several submarines/round to block the US fleet at all times (yes subs block in this version). It can be close near the end, but Japan should be able to do:
4+4+4+4+3+3+2 to win.
I wonder if it would be better limiting Hawaii production to 12 IPC per turn and then requiring Japan to get to 25 victory points.
Yes i really miss all of the unique rules these older games had to offer. Like the j1 kill everything rules, or the allies paying for oil rule in europe. Convoying was wayyy beter in these games, but the problem i have with it is that its not an attack. Maybe we should have the ships roll dice and whenever they hit, the other player loses money, ON THE TURN OF THE AGGRESOR! The problem i have is that by the time its the enemies turn, they have destroyed you fleet that was blockading you convoy. Having it be an attack would fix so many issues when it comes to convoying.
