My review copy of Axis & Allies Europe 1940 has arrived

The original AA Europe is fatally flawed.  Germany can win every time by just buying tanks and smashing Russia.  This is a well known problem with that game.  This AA Europe 1940 is much better.

Veqryn rules!

@mastermind93:

I currently have a copy of Europe 1940, and I just recently saw how much they are going for on ebay. If I sold mine, that would make enough money to buy a reprint, but all I hear about a reprint is hearsay. I don’t want to sell mine unless I’m ABSOLUTELY sure there will be a reprint. Thoughts?

If I had it I would probably sell it if I could get something like $200 for it.  Selling out this soon appears to be a good sign to me in terms of a reprint.  I figure there will be a reprint with substantial corrections made, and if I’m really lucky perhaps actual Italian and French figures rather than German and Russian in other colors.

You can stick the decals on the chips. And make them double sided one side axis one side allies and keep it consistent.

@Flashman:

Because the Irish people supported Britain.

The government was not so keen, hence they didn’t join the war and claim the North as their reward.

Another example of the arbitrary assignment of neutral leanings, almost all of which can be questioned.

I like the idea of a set of cards, one for each neutral.  One of these is picked up by each player on finishing his turn until all are collected.  The player can reveal a card at any time to assign “pro” status to that neutral. If an unassigned neutral is attacked it joins the opposing alliance in the usual way.

Maybe a couple of “joker” cards can be included, which allow a player to stage a coup on a revealed but unoccupied neutral thus reversing the alignment.

Then make Spain or something pro-axis.

Yes, but with so much information overload I started doubting my own thoughts and ideas.

@Krieghund:

@GrayBlaZe:

Hey Keighund, got a question; Why could it not be considered to be up to a nine person global game instead of six.  I do understand that playing France, China or ANZAC will be very minor, however, it’s possible for nine people to draw straws and last three places got it get the minors.  Or am I missing somthing?  I’m assuming that it’s just listed as six because that is the max number that would be a good game to spread playing around equally so nobody is just totally eliminated fast with France or having to play limited China.  Is this correct?  Thanx……

You’ve already answered your own question:

@GrayBlaZe:

When they state the number of players, it is just a recomendation.  You could very well play with nine players except; France, China, & ANZAC would be quite boring, unless a newbe or child was playing with you, it would be good for them to play a minor country.  If you are playing with six then some player would play two counties, however, they are still considerd nine different armies; if you play two they don’t mix there income.  So it always be nine indiviual counties weither you play with nine people or two.

The “official” player mix listed in the rules is what we consider to be the best mix for optimal enjoyment of the game.  There’s nothing stopping you from changing that if you have more than six people who want to play.  I do think, however, that getting beyond six will definitely get into territory that could be at least somewhat boring for players of minor powers (ANZAC, China and France).  A seventh player playing all three wouldn’t be too bad, though.

I know, but now it is impossible for the axis to win without taking Cairo (unless they invade UK, US). Also, the middle easts income is now a factor and UK would be limping without Middle East/Africa income. Italy would also be earning 40+.