Number of pieces in the box

No no no. He meant time limit. The war is only so long. Ex specially for the Frenchys.

@Patchman123 said in EXACT pieces count for Pacific/Europe 1940 Second Edition:

@Midnight_Reaper said in EXACT pieces count for Pacific/Europe 1940 Second Edition:

@Patchman123:

What am I looking for is NOT a combined count for Pacific and Europe 1940 put together as one whole game, but rather, how many infantry there are in Pac. 1940 Sec. Ed? Not just infantry, but ALL pieces.

How many pieces for all the games? PER GAME, NOT combined.

Question already answered: @Midnight_Reaper:

-Midnight_Reaper

Where is it exactly? I notice that there are pieces with nummeration on the bottom for sorting them out all by country, minus ANZAC, which has none on any of its infantry pieces in Second Edition.

The change of forum software has borked some of the old links to on-site posts. Here is a link to what can be found in a copy of Europe 1940, SE and a copy of Pacific 1940, SE: read for yourself.

-Midnight_Reaper

@knp7765:

The only issue I had was with the giant ANZAC infantry units. They are a head taller than all other nations’ infantry and really look weird on the board.

Also, their round base has a larger diameter than the standard A&A infantry base, so they don’t fit in the central depression of standard A&A mini poker chips, which is a bit annoying.

@Make_It_Round:

I think it is possible, however tedious, to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game, and to guess at one’s enjoyment threshold in terms of these.

It is utterly impossible to count the number of meaningful choices that players have in any given game because each “meaningful choice” is a product of the other “meaningful choices” that were made previously. Furthermore, each “meaningful choice” is then subject to all of the possible dice outcomes, and thus multiplied by all of those possibilities and then multiplied by all of the “meaningful choices” offered by the various non-combat possibilities as they are determined by the dice outcomes. As you can see we get into these massive factorial situations where we are multiplying massive exponentials by even more massive exponentials until what is essentially infinity.

To make a comparison: In chess there are only 20 possible moves to make on the first turn. (16 pawn moves and 4 knight moves) The opponent is faced with the same. So the possible combinations for the opening 2 moves (1 each) in chess is 400. None of which are absolutely stupid. there are 8,902 possible moves by 2 each and by move 7 there are almost eleven MILLION possible positions. That’s without dice, with only 2 players, with a much much much more limited scope for unit movement, no scope for adding units and far far fewer spaces.

Now you asked about the “meaningful choices”. Some work has been done in this regard in chess and it seems that in the average game of about 30 moves (moving a single piece at at time. There are over 4.5 MILLION games outcomes in smart competitive situations. Now, multiply that by the factor of dice, multiple movement of units, game spaces, purchases and the fact that most AA games will see over 100 times that 60 units move factor and you have an utterly infinite combination of outcomes.

Which is part of the reason it is so much more entertaining than chess.

…or maybe just because we get to play with little tanks and planes.

Thanks for the post, Frank.  Yep, you pretty much summed up a few of the many reasons why OOB is fatally flawed, and you have the 30-35 games to back it up.

I get the feeling from my few games of Alpha2 so far (not going too crazy playing it - just a couple games at a time because it will probably be changed anyway) that the Allies still have a significant advantage in Alpha2.  But I have to admit none of the games have lasted even more than a few rounds (with the Axis getting obliterated each time) so maybe those oil field NO’s could really come into play sometimes I suppose.

To me, Russia and USA have suffocating power (Russia is very deep, and as Larry himself acknowledged - he wondered if it was 1 territory too deep), and the UK can be very powerful as well.

@questioneer:

These look really good, but they are taking forever to produce it seems.  I’m waiting for the whole set to be available…at this rate, they won’t be done til late 2012.  Sooo long… :-(

Yeah really… I am itching to paint my pieces but I don’t want to begin if there are cooler ones coming out. The production process is taking very long… Italy was in the works back in August if I am not mistaken and they are still not deliverable yet.

I use tool boxes too. They are great, but a little expensive

yours look a bit better than mine,mine are a soft plastic,and smaller,but only cost 5 euro,thats not very expensive

@thoes426:

Plano Stowaways!
Thoes426 :evil:

I like that idea….

IMG00097-20100824-2330.jpg