1942 Battle Board - Game Aids - IPC Chart

If you ever decide to try anything like this let me know what you think ….

We usually play AA50th, but …
For 42.2, if we bother to worry about balance, we use a standard bid format (if everyone agrees) based on starting IPC’s (I’ll play axis at +X IPC’s to start … whoever uses the lowest +IPC bid plays the axis).

I wanted to compile a list so we could see at a glance how frequently and by how much the value of specific territories has been changing. I want to highlight some of the more significant changes that have occurred, based on a comparison with the nearest older world map boards (Revised and AA50).

The following territories or regions have seen changes in their total IPC value, which in my mind demonstrates that IPC values are abstract and should be considered flexible. The territories discussed here reflect the same basic space on the map, but different IPCs values depending on which board you look at.

Game: Territories and IPC value

Revised: Southern Europe 6 ipcs, split into two territories afterwards
AA50: Italy 6 ipcs and Balkans 3 ipcs, (for a regional total of 9 ipcs)
1942.2: Italy 3 ipcs and Southern Europe 2 ipcs, (for a regional total of 5 ipcs)

Revised: Norway 3 ipcs, split into two territories afterwards
AA50: Norway 3 and Finland 2 (for a total of 5 ipcs)
1942.2 Norway 2 and Finland 1 (for a total of 3 ipcs)

Revised: Balkans 3 ipcs, replaced with
AA50: Bulgaria-Romania 2 ipcs, and Czech-Hungary 2 ipcs (for a total of 4 ipcs)
1942.2:  Bulgaria-Romania 2 ipcs (for a total of 2 ipcs)

Revised: Eastern Europe 3 ipcs, split into
AA50: Poland 3, Eastern Poland 1, Baltic States 1 (for a total of 5 ipcs)
1942.2: Poland 2, Baltic states 2 (for a total of 4 ipcs)

Revised: Western Europe 6 ipcs, split into
AA50 and 1942.2: France 6 and NW Europe 2 (for a total of 8 ipcs)

Revised and AA50: Algeria 1 ipc, split into
1942.2: Morocco 1 and Algeria 1 (for a total of 2 ipcs)

Revised: Ukraine 3 ipcs, split into
AA50: Ukraine 2, and Eastern Ukraine 1 (for a total of 3)
1942.2: Ukraine 2 (for a total of 2)

Revised: Moscow 8
AA50: Moscow 6
1942.2: Moscow 8

Revised: W. Russia 2, Belorussia 2 (for a total of 4 ipcs)
AA50: W. Russia N/A replaced by Belorussia 1 (for a total of 1 ipc)
1942.2 W. Russia 2, Belorussia 2 (back to a total of 4 ipcs)

Revised: Archangel 2 and Novosibirsk 2 (for a total of 4 ipcs)
AA50: Archangel 1, Novosibirsk 1, and Urals 1 (for a total of 3 ipcs)
1942.2: Archangel 2, Novosibirsk 1, and Vologda 2 (for a total of 5 ipcs)

Revised: French Indo China 3 ipcs, split into
AA50: French Indo China 2, Burma 2 and Yunnan 1 (for a total of 5)
1942.2: French Indo China 2, Malaya 1, Burma 1 and Yunnan 1 (for a total of 5)

Revised: Kwangtung 3 ipcs
AA50:  Kiangsu 2, Fukien 1, Kwangtung 1 (for a total of 4)
Revised: Kwangtung 2, Kiangsu 2 (for a total of 4)

Revised: Philippines 3
AA50: Philippines 2
1942.2: Philippines back to 3

Revised and AA50: Okinawa 1
1942.2: Okinawa 0

Those are the main ones that jump out at me, there are probably more, and if you look back to Classic there are yet other differences in IPC value. But the point to stress is that there is a degree of variation (especially in the range of 1 ipc plus or minus to a specific region.) To me this indicates that A&A is willing to tolerate a margin of flexibility between 1 and 2 ipcs on several areas of the map board. I would suggest going forward that an additional 1 ipc should be added to area/territories of the map that do not see much action. Clearly you know where I’d like to see them (in the Pacific islands!) At least as far as every other area of the map goes, A&A has already proved itself less rigid and inflexible regarding IPC value than it seems to be with the Pacific. Why? Can anyone explain this to me? I find it odd, since on every board the Pacific vs JTDTM dynamic persists without resolution, even after several editions.

I say stop trying to create new territories out of existing ones, or shuffling numbers around, and instead focus on changing the values of those territories which currently have little to no in game value (IPCs). Give them an additional value of 1 ipc the same way all those other territories mentioned above have seen adjustments at 1 ipc. I find the decision to remove yet more ipcs from the Pacific islands in 1942.2 totally baffling. Clearly the gameplay in previous editions (and yet again in the current one) would have recommended doing the exact opposite, if the goal was to make that region of the board more active. Does anyone else see that?

I like them to start with Russia. Tanks and infantry are much easier to deal with than with all the units like Japan.

Start them off by saying, “Bill is your ally. You really need to listen to him until you get a feel for things. And that will take about 2 games.” The first game is always a wash. Always tell the new guy that the first game is just for fun. Because, really, they need to get through it to get an idea of the end game.

Also, I like to play 2 rounds and then reset. Then play Russia for at least 2 games, but preferably 3. It’s up to them at that point.

And it’s important to guide them while letting them make decisions. Keep things simple. New guys don’t need to know the intracacies of every unit type during the first turn. Set them up for the standard buy, and move on with life. Tell them what moves to make and let them roll the dice (because until they understand how combat works, they can’t understand what units to commit to battle, or buy, or even where to place them).

But again, I think it’s important to keep things simple. Don’t explain EVERY battle the other players fight. Of course, use the other battles as teaching moments. Show them the rule book and show them how the rules apply. “See, it says here that enemy subs can be ignored if there are no enemy surface ships.” And, “See how fighters start their movement independent of their carrier. See how they can move three spaces, fight, and then back one, and land on their carrier?” Just don’t pile on rule after rule.

And for several games at least, don’t let them make stupid mistakes. It’s no fun to win because they didn’t understand that bombers can fligh across the US and attack un-escorted carriers in the middle of the Pacific.

Add another destroyer for the States in sea zone 11.  I believe that should bring it close to balanced.  This will allow the 2 transports to survive putting a lot more pressure on Germany earlier in the game.

The files were finally approved. Here’s what I posted in the BGG forum:

I recently uploaded to the BGG files area the following player aids and helper files for Axis & Allies 1942 2e:

Setup and Profile Cards:
Setup (front) and unit profiles (back) for each nation that are easier to read than the ones included with the game. This file is meant to be printed on 5 double sided sheets, one for each nation.

Player Aid with Sea Profiles:
A player aid containing pictures of each sea unit profiles, order of play, turn phases, combat sequence, victory conditions, and a color coded stacking chip chart. This file is meant to be printed on both sides of one sheet of paper.

Player Aid with Unit Profiles:
A player aid containing unit stats, order of play, turn phases, combat sequence, victory conditions, and a color coded stacking chip chart. The back contains the unit profile chart from the manual. This file is meant to be printed on both sides of one sheet of paper.

Victory City Flags:
A collection of Victory City flags. These can be used to create stands to show which side controls each victory city. I printed them on label paper and folded the flag around some small posts to create small flag standies to place on the board.

Enjoy!

We are currently in the process of doing a tournament and we are down to the last semi-final game, but we’ve had 13 completed games so far.  Here are the results:

Allied bid (winner)

16 (Allies)
12 (Axis)
10 (Axis)
9 (Axis)
21 (Axis)
9 (Allies)
11 (Allies)
5 (Axis)
9 (Axis)
15 (Allies)
22 (Axis)
12 (Axis)
20 (Allies)

So we’ve had 8 Axis winners and 5 Allied winners.  The Avg is 13.15.

Obviously, this is a small sample size, but it gives you an idea where bids are coming in for some competitive games.  The Allies have some wins at 9 and 11, but in the more competitive type games your probably going to want to go 13,14+ and get near or above 15 if you can.  The Allies scored 2 more wins at 15 and then 16.
Axis were 6-2 with bids 14 and under.  And then 2-3 with bids 15+.

@Canuck12:

Thanks for the hard work DJ! I read the forums but love the articles too ;)

Any official word yet on whether Honalulu is a VC or not? Book says no, map says yes. I have heard 2 different stories now about which to trust.

Ditto!  I’m hoping there is at least an official word on this before the game arrives, preferably a FAQ. :)