GLOBAL MAP AVAILABILITY FOR MOUNTING AT HOME

My own version. Feel free to correct and commentSetup Charts A&A 1940 2nd edition.pdf

Another issue is that they are out of print–they remain popular in the Tournaments and so they are even re-building starters/boosters I believe (by re-bagging the correct rarities of the available loose pieces) because the sealed boxes ran out a few years ago.

I think four player is the best.  As the Allies it’s easier to be on the same page and everyone has a more to do.

The setup I prefer:

Germany & Italy
Japan

Russia, UK, France
USA, China, Anzac

The USA player should control Anzac since they’ll be working closely with them.

@aequitas:

@knp7765:

Or how about Germany? In our game, it’s 1 battle and done. In reality it took the Allies on both sides from December 1944 to May 1945 to conquer all of that single country and that was with their main thrusts involved for the US/UK and USSR.

That was because the Americans dragged it out because of the good Food here in Germany.
Name one american who can resist Bratwurst and  Sauerkraut or Schweinsbraten??

Oh and 'mericans love Castles so there you go, they got a lot of them here.
(Not to mention the good beer,though)

Well, I do like a good Bratwurst. Don’t care for Sauerkraut (although I loved it as a kid) and I don’t even know what a Schweinsbraten is.
I must admit, castles are pretty cool too. And who doesn’t love a good cold beer (especially if it’s served up by a lovely blond fraulein)?

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

Is Global domination rules just playing until one side controls all the territories? Any clarification would be appreciated.

In practice, a global domination variant is one where the sides ignore the official victory conditions, which are based on controlling a certain number of victory cities for a turn, and instead play until one side concedes.  You could play until all territories are controlled, but that outcome is usually determined well before the last enemy territory is captured.  Typically, experienced players can decide if a game is worth continuing after one of the major capitals falls.

As some have pointed out, this type of game can be less interesting because the Allies’ economic might encourages them to grind out a longer game until they can pour all their resources into crushing Germany or Japan.

Conversely, it presents a greater challenge for the Axis while also making the Allies less defensive as Cow mentioned.  The problem as I see it is that any game that lasts longer than 10 turns becomes a de facto Allied victory because of the economic imbalance.  Consequently, we’ve been trying to formulate a bid to help even things out, but not break the game in the first 3 turns.  It’s a bit of a round peg/square hole problem, but it’s good to get people talking about it for those of us who cling to the old “global domination” victory rule.

the full germany push to russia is generally the way to go.

I just am skeptical of japan doing early russia play, because the income japan gets out of it is small and he gives up much in his setup. Makes dealing with china / uk pac / anzac / usa really hard especially at a low income.

I am a full believer in a strong japan going for his objectives. It makes allies commit more and makes allies have less income as a whole

Once again I doubt if you missed the American units at the west coast that starting TUV means anything. If it cant be protected in force its useless unless its out of range.

They be coming soon.

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=16012.75