2nd Edition Economy

Not to be confused with the 1st Edition This is a larger game... bigger map and more units. The game was released this past summer (2012)
This promises to be the core game and it will be around for many years to come.
Post Reply
Black_Elk
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:10 am

2nd Edition Economy

Post by Black_Elk » Tue Jan 14, 2014 5:18 pm

I know many people have moved on already to the 1940 games, or are playing AA50, but I still consider this board the current flagship board for the franchise.

It's the only one you can buy at most chain stores, it remains reasonably priced, the scale is manageable (two sessions on the physical board for most players), 5 powers and it has a 1942 start date. I appreciate the excitement surrounding the earlier start dates, but 42 is the year I associate most with A&A. It seems traditional, and for overall game balance (Axis vs Allies) it remains my favorite. So I continue to play this map and promote it in my gaming group.

That said, I still have to point out that the economy on this board feels out of sync with the other changes that have been implemented since Revised.

Since Revised...
A dozen new land territories have been added to the board
A number of sea zones have been re-aligned
2 new starting factories have been added
A new unit has been included
A new unit cost/ability structure has been implemented (aa guns, transports etc.)

And with all that, the starting money has remained essentially unchanged. Well OK, 1 ipc for Germany and Britain, but that's chalked up to a misprint/miscount.

Russia, which has been the consistent weak link for Allied gameplay since Classic, still has only 24 ipcs to start, even though they have more territory and factories to cover than ever before.

Britain remains at 30, despite the fact that they have an India factory to defend, and get virtually wiped out of the Atlantic in the first round.

America is still hovering at 42, even though they have to buy twice as many transports now to cross either ocean.

So basically, even with all the changes to the gameboard and gameplay the essential starting values are still...
R 24
G ~40
B ~30
J 30
A 42

I just want to focus on the Russian 24 here, since it just seems prohibitively low to me. Almost every one I know bids out Russia for at least 10+ ipcs in the opening round. If their starting economy was closer to 30 ipcs they'd be able to fight more effectively, and have a better chance at holding the center of the map (which is clearly the key to winning for either side), and afford more armor, artillery etc. It would also more accurately reflect the fact that WW2 in Europe was essentially a slog between Germany and the Soviet Union. In the actual War the Russians were able to hold their own pretty effectively, in A&A not so much. Even with a full prop up move by the Western Allies, they are still getting hammered.

So I guess my point is this, wouldn't it make more sense to start with the requirements of the map and the unit set up, and let that determine the starting money? Because it seems to me that its going the other way round, and the money has remained static, while we change everything else on the board. Like "OK Russia always gets 24 ipcs, because that's just the way it is!" I like the starting factory in Karelia, because it anchors the fighting, but a front line factory with insufficient money to put units in it, is a liability for Russia more than an advantage. What with all those German tanks in range!

I'd be the last person to demand that the numbers have to mirror reality, but just adding up the numbers in these charts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_p ... rld_War_II it seems to me like a boost to the Russians seems entirely appropriate. I think it would make a lot of sense, thinking about any future 3rd edition, to begin with the Russians and balance the rest of the board accordingly from there.

Does anyone else feel this way? Are you happy with Russians at 24?

User avatar
Yavid
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 1:25 am
Contact:

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by Yavid » Tue Jan 14, 2014 6:36 pm

in every printing of Axis and Allies my feelings about Russia has always been the same. They are too weak. To easy to gangbang off the board. Somewhere it seems to be forgotten that 3 years after the '42 start date. Russia was a dominate super power in Europe to the point that both the America and the British were afraid that even with both of them if Russia decided it wanted more territory in Europe there was nothing they could do to stop them. This is the same country that fought Germany not to a stand still but beat Germany. This is the same country that basically marched unchecked from Stalingrad to Berlin after suffering the massive losses of Barbarossa and Blue. If you look at the start date of the game and compare it to what happened in the real war. The G1 would be the opening of Case Blue. Germany and Russia slug it out over the Caucasus and Ukraine (I say Ukraine only because of Sevastopol and the Crimean offensives) Ending in Russia having both the Ukraine and the Caucasus with Germany doing one last despite attempt to retake the Ukraine (Citadel) before moves permanently over to the offensive. All the while being strong enough in the East to keep Japan from even declaring war let alone from marching themselves to Moscow.

I don't know about anyone else out there but that Russia and the A&A Russia are two totally different things.
Behold the Power of Yavid

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 949
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by Flashman » Tue Feb 04, 2014 3:01 pm

If you do not model the Japanese-Soviet non-aggression pact then don't expect the game to reflect history.

If Japan had been at war with Russia, and if it had tanks as good as Russia had, and if it could drive them across central Asia from the Chinese coast to Moscow ignoring the terrain then maybe Russia would have fallen. But none of this is history.

The simplest pact rules:

Japan may not attack the USSR until either Moscow or Washington has fallen

USSR may not attack Japan until Berlin has fallen


Japan still has options i.e. India/Middle East,

But USSR can now concentrate wholly on the German front.

Remember also that in 1942 Germany occupied a huge area of the USSR containing the bulk of its industrial areas.

Of course aesthetically the "Belarus" & "West Russia" tts should be combined into a single Moscow tt; the "Russia" region should be Urals (and still have a factory, yes 4 in totum).

The A&A tradition of placing Moscow in central Siberia is based on the assumption that it needs to be roughly equidistant from German and Japanese production centres.

Black_Elk
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:10 am

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by Black_Elk » Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:33 pm

I like a safe factory behind the Urals, or other ideas for map redesigns. But on the 1942 2ed board as it is, if you go strict Non-Aggression pact (where basically G has to take Moscow to prevail in the endgame) you kind of hamstring the Axis. Makes the north critical because if you can push the Germans off Moscow the Japanese have no way to win. So it's still Moscow-centered except that the Axis only have one way in. I would have to play it, to see. But you also have the issue of the India defense (and conquered territory by Japan being invulnerable to Russian attack.) That would make India even more critical. The Allies shooting troops across Russia with impunity, so long as Moscow and Washington are still in play. Shuts down the endgame where Berlin and Moscow are traded in the same round (Berlin to western Allies, and Moscow to Japan) since Japan can't attack into the center of the board. I'd think the best the Japanese could manage would be the southern swing, maybe an Africa grab and launching fighters to Germany. But it's easier for the Allies to push against Africa with nearby production than it is for Japan. Does Japan have enough money to fight into North America? And if not does Russia have enough money to spend on the India defense? Does sz 16 play better open of closed? Is 24 IPCs enough for Russia if it is opened?

I'm not opposed to the NAPact. Do you think it holds without other modifications to the rules map and starting units?

Black_Elk
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:10 am

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by Black_Elk » Tue Feb 04, 2014 8:38 pm

Could you simplify the rule further, so that the Non Aggression Pact is only in effect until the first capital falls? Because that seems like it would leave more options for the endgame.

adpac740
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:12 pm

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by adpac740 » Fri Jul 18, 2014 9:33 pm

so anyone tried these NA pact rules with good effect?

Concerning the actual NA Pact, it does seem both sides maintained neutrality up until near the end of the war wherein the Soviets broke the treaty?

That said, I might give this game rule a try as well but with a focus on Soviets attacking Japan only after Berlin falls or if either side decides to break the treaty at any point during the game.

User avatar
Imperious leader
Posts: 5207
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
Location: Moving up to phase line red...

Re: 2nd Edition Economy

Post by Imperious leader » Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:08 am

Revised is no good. Germany just buys tanks at 5 IPC. Milton Bradley edition is much better even if it has sub stall.
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests