Preview Copies of 1940 Second Edition Arrived

@shadowhawk said in Which side is it easier to win on, Pacific or Europe A&A 1940 Global?:

abuse your advantage and leverage it.

:)

@krieghund said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

@andrewaagamer said in Mongolia again (groan) Global 2nd Edition:

Two ways to look at this:

Reason A is dominant and supersedes and cancels any other Reason. (Which leads to your ruling) Reason A is limited to the Soviet/Japan conflict and does not override Reason B which leads to my statement.

The first way is correct, as indicated by the phrase, “In all other respects and for all other purposes”.

Ahhh, I didn’t put enough emphasis on “In all other respects and for all other purposes”. That makes more sense to me now.

The tipping point for me is if Reason A is dominant than if any other Allied Power rather than Russia, (US, UK, ANZAC or France), attacks Mongolia, Mongolia WOULD NOT turn Pro-Axis. This goes against every other instance regarding Neutrality in the rules. A standard is if a Neutral is attacked it becomes Pro to the opposing factions.

Yes, that’s true, but Mongolia is an exceptional case. Its ties to the USSR against Japan are so strong that an attack upon it by another Allied power would not change its stance to pro-Axis, and it would remain strict neutral. The same is true if an Allied power attacks another strict neutral.

Wow - that’s cool. THANKS for explaining that!!!

@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

While I understand your not wanting to read the whole rule book, I recommend that you do SEVERAL time before playing .

Wilk,

I read through some of your posts. You seem to have a lot of questions. We’re happy to help, but I have to ask what materials you have for AAG40?

Do you have the actual game to reference or are you part of a group and there’s only one copy you guys are sharing?

One answer that might help is that the second edition of Axis&Allies Global 1940 has the most up to date official rules set. The alphas were for the first editions.

If you have the manual you will want to read the rules very carefully and thoroughly.  Its easy to miss things in this edition.

As for a picture I don’t know of one available that will suit your needs. Even if there was one, because the game is so large your avaerage sheet of paper is too small to see enough detail to use as a handout most likely. CWOMarc’s suggestion of taking a picture would be your best bet.

I hope this helps.

Since were all talking about G39…
Does anyone know if there is a simplified version of G39?
I have the latest map, it’s beautiful. But a little too complex and too many outside pieces required.
To me G40 is a great ruleset.

I would love to play a version that is G40 style with 39 setup on the 39 map.
It would also be much more appealing to new players.

@CWO:

@knp7765:

Yes, the Pacific 1940 2nd Edition uses the thick, heavy duty cardboard like Europe 1940. Not that thin stuff like in Pacific 1940 1st edition.

And as I recall, the roundels in the 2nd edition of Pacific 1940 and Europe 1940 are both printed on thick, black-backed cardboard.  In the 1st edition, I think one of the games had white-backed roundels.

You’re right Marc.

@13thguardsriflediv:

Planes were mostly used to attack sz 111, 112, Yugo and France. It is why sz 110 did not get hit. The other seazones west of England and east of Canada were hit by subs. No German fighters landed in southern Italy to help against Taranto which was an oversight.

UK would have thought twice if without the cruiser and facing three fighters. But maybe not, sometimes I like dicey battles (no risk no glory).

If the U.K. pulls that carrier out of the Med. then it can join the Indian fleet to help defend the Indies and if the U.S. is building enough navy in the Pacific the allies can put a lot of pressure on Japan. Japan cannot move south unless they bring a sizeable navy which will leave the home islands open to invasion by the U.S.