Just a lot everyone know Jen Cate adjusts the set up, but it is a time game with 15 minute turns again for hours and 45 minutes 15 minutes. So it is a very different game than a normal game has the most victory cities wins at four hours and 45 minutes.
Great video! I actually just finished my first game with Larr'ys proposed new set-up. The allies won and the game went about twelve rounds. Berlin fell, then the Japanesse knew they would eventually be licked by the other three allies. Fun game though! Axis defiantly have to work harder to secure a victory.
Thanks Karl! Out of curiosity, do you recall what Germany's opening looked like in your game? I've been exploring possible Turn 1 options with them under this new setup.
Jonathan Meyer I do recall. As you can expect Russia did attack Ukraine because getting rid of that German bomber is always nice. Russia also took the usual West Russia and moved its sub with the British B-ship and destroyer and transport for cannon fotter. With Germany I bought a bomber to replace my dead bomber, a destroyer to protect the med fleet, and seven infantry units. On the German attacks I was limited as you can imagine. Losing a bomber and down a sub and the U.K. Cruiser out of sea zone 14 really put pressure on my German Air Force and navy. I was able to take out the main allied fleet in sea zone 7, I took out the UK cruiser at sea zone 13, but I wasn't able to attack the fleets at sea zone 10 and 11 due to lack of resources. The allies counter attacked on the first round wiping out what was left over with my Germany navy in the Atlantic. So at the end of turn 1 the allies had secured naval dominance in the Atlantic. After that I had to focus on Russia and couldn't keep up in a naval race in the Atlantic against the western allies. So losing a bomber and subtracting a sub really puts Germany on its knees in the Atlantic early. Unless you roll great dice lol :-)
This is incredibly helpful, thank you! Just to clarify: The Allies attacked both your fleet in Sea Zone 7 and your fleet in Sea Zone 13 on Turn 1? Or did you not have a fleet in Sea Zone 13 at the end of your first turn?
Jonathan Meyer that is correct. I had a cruiser left over at seas zone 7 and I had a sub left over at sea zone 13. The allies wiped out both naval units on there first turn, leaving my Atlantic fleet empty. 😩
Love this game . About to get the second edition 1942 after I played the 1941 edition with 1 of my friends for a couple of games . Sadly I don't know a lot of people that play the game though living in Houston .. ;(
I know I am getting in on this late, but instead of adding a DD off the east coast of Canada, what about adding a US DD off the US Atlantic Coast. It seems to me that it's the german move that destroys the US Atlantic fleet on G1 that is devastating and keeps the US from mobilizing in time to save Russia. The UK doesn't have enough initial ground units (or IPCs) to really make a big difference IMHO.
Half infantry cost $1.25, attack 0, defense 1, move 1. Regular infantry cost $2.5 , Assault infantry cost $3.75 and replace the artillery unit, now replace a few frontline Russian regular infantry with twice as many half infantry, the Russian winter offensive is over even if russia goes first in this SPRING 1942 game turn, it's about the SPRING German offensive... Russia can certainly afford a lot of half infantry. I've got a couple holes in the idea but it seems like a way to trade some Russian offense for more Russian defense and still not create a SPRING German defense along the eastern front. Taking away from the big German offensive seems wrong, adding defences to Russia's opening set up seems more better. India could gain a few 1/2 infantry for defense and later add Assault infantry(Artillery) and these 1/2 infantry now have a 1 attack from the assault infantry. I've thought about adding several axis submarines and several plus mostly unescorted transports, transports almost defend on a 1, but actually they simply escaped, battle over for that unit (shared zone status) this would assure a more randomness regarding naval balance. The battleships always seem to get screwed over in the atlantic, by spring 1942 the battleships were much less vulnerable than the carriers, early 1942 did see a carrier sunk in the mediterranean, put a carrier with a fighter in gibraltar and a battleship protected one zone away, england must have a battleship for certain and another battleship as a possible survivor cf german turn 1 attacks. Using a $4 half destroyer unit is another interesting option, attack 1 defend 1 move 1...next youll need a $5 minor air unit attack 1, defend 1 move 3. Antiaircraft hits turn $10 foghters into $5 minor air, $12 bombers become minor air units +$2 recycling paid to the owning players.
After playing a few games using the updated setup described in this video, I've found it to be pretty balanced. I had initially (at the time of this video) been concerned that these updates went too far, but after seeing them play out over a few games I feel that my initial feeling was incorrect. If you go to this link (www.headlesshorseman2.com/origins.html) and click "1942 2nd. Ed. Tourney Rules" that will cause a PDF to download showing a full write-up of the Origins/Gen Con rules. Half the way down the page in green, you will see their revised setup.
@@JonathanMeyer84 Hey thanks, with that in mind, using the balance patch, what would you say is then the bid to play allies? iv seen online forums say in tournaments with the patch the bid is around 7 to 12. And; what would you spend that so called bid on, and then where would you place it? thanks
@@DeviousXP 6-9 seems about right. I think I'd get either a tank (6) or an infantry and artillery (7), or a tank and an infantry (9) and give them to Russia. I'd need to think about 8 a little more.
Hi Jonathan, glad you made a video on this. My group have played a couple games with the new setup now, with one Axis and one Allied victory. The German player in our last match was also not too fond of having his bomber in the Ukraine! I guess my question would be, what are you thoughts on how you would adapt G1 strategy to having one less sub, and assuming that the Soviets destroy that bomber in their first turn (as they really should do).
That's an excellent question. I've been spending some time thinking about that. Here's an opening I'm considering: 1) 1 sub in SZ 9 to SZ 13 with at least 1 fighter. 2) 1 sub from SZ 9, 1 sub from SZ 5, and 2 fighters to SZ 7 3) Battleship and transport in SZ 15 to SZ 17, doing an amphibious assault in TransJordan (thereby blocking naval movement through the Suez Canal) 4) Possible additional moves: 1 cruiser in SZ 5 to SZ 7 (this leaves your transport in SZ 5 vulnerable, but if you're planning on building some navy it could still be okay). 1 additional fighter to SZ 13 (it would have to land in Morocco)
Thanks for the reply! I like those moves, especially moving into Trans-Jordan. The British pacific fleet can really make a nuisance of itself in the Mediterranean.
I like to balance by giving each side equal dollar value, I don't recall if transports defend in this version, giving the Germans more subs and the English more destroyers is balance, and some units can be placed "Far away" from 1st or 2nd turn main theater action. 4 extra subs with 4 new allied transports specifically placed to draw the subs attentions .. further from the main theaters. Table Tactics years ago had 2 A&A expansion game sets introducing several new unit types with piece's, WW1 & WW2, the first called Central Powers had $5 cannon, attack 1, defend 4, one of these cannons, one AA & 4-6 or more infantry in the Ukraine is almost always very annoying and often an Axis springboard to the Caucasus, practically guaranteeing an Allie's retreat to Moscow, letting the Axis walk into Karelia often without battle, or in a disorganized allied retreat, expensive allied units destroyed by infantry.
Revised with LHTR and maybe one of the G40 Balance mods are basically the only "balanced" (bids are under 10) A&A games. I feel that instead of messing around with bids they should just mess with the starting setup to make Germany's position a little less strong. Either that or remove the factory from Karelia, since giving Germany basically a free Factory two tiles away from Moscow and one tile away from the pivotal West Russia tile puts an insane amount of pressure on the Allies to play one particular strategy (all-out defense of Karelia). The bids in this edition are a little absurd (like +15 Allies), iirc. Also; can you link me to the discussion with Larry? I wasn't even aware that he was still involved with the community (the forums at the "Harris Game Design" site have been dead forever).
Although 42 first edition isn't bad either, even though it's basically the Revised Map with Anniversary's ruleset (changes to destroyers/transports/subs/strategic bombing, cruisers existing, but tanks still cost 5).
I'll leave the whole tournament play aside(I don't play in them), but what gets me is that it seems that people have been complaining about balance one way or the other ever since classic version. It's out of balance in favor of the allies, so an adjustment is made, then it's out of balance in favor of the axis, and so on, and so forth. I would caution a minimalist approach. The changes you mention(and as you said) are equivalent to a bid of over 20. If someone was in a bid situation where it was 20 plus, would anyone find that fair? Or balanced? Not in any way implying I know a way to make it better, but all together, this does seem out of whack.
Thanks for the comment! Personally I feel that a bid of 20 plus is excessive, though I did read that's what the bid was in the GenCon tournament last year (I didn't play in that one). Quite frankly, I've been licking my chops at the prospect of securing a bid by going slightly lower (around 18) and still getting more than I think is needed to balance things out (between 14 and 16). Of course, I could be totally wrong haha. We'll see.
Excellent channel you have, Jonathan. I have played AA in some form for years, since my family played it back when I was a kid, in the early 80's. I remember the original version they had, there would always be a huge stack of Russians in Karelia, and a huge stack of Germans in the other one opposite, and eventually there would be a huge final fight where Germany would attack, and depending on how that ended up, one side or the other (my uncles or my grandpa) would resign - lol. I know they changed the boards dramatically over the years, and I've played many editions of it since then, including the giant special edition released several years ago, which had Italy and China, as their own mini-nations, if memory serves. Anyways - good stuff and I'm glad I discovered you here, a few days ago :-)
I've played over 100 matches of this version I love the game and think it's fine as is but what I might consider is maybe adding 1 AA gun in favor of the Russian side near the Far East that borders Manchuria like how global has I believe 2 AA and some 18 along with the Mongolian rule which really keeps the japense from attacking at least for a few turns in 1942 I really just see like 3 or 4 infantry used as a meat shield for the heavy air support Japan has and so not many other units will be seen there hopefully with the aa it would mean devoting more tanks or artillery which would also help indias case as well.It's also strange because in my groups we pretty much think the u boats in sea zone7 should sink the us destroyer and transport to set them back in terms of mobilization unless the Germans go for a 1 Sub to each boat strategy near eastern Canada and eastern us the brits normally have that fleet remaining what do u think about the AA addition? and also what country to do enjoy the most playing?
I'm not too sure about that extra aa move. It would slow down Japan's moves against the Soviet far east region, but that isn't a critical component of their front. They'll push through China/India just as quickly while postponing their drive into the Soviet Union until their land forces are a little stronger. Granted, that means the Soviets have more production they can use to fight Germany, but those territories are only worth 1 IPC a piece so the impact would be minimal. When it comes to playing, I enjoy Russia, Germany, and Japan. I'm not as big a fan when it comes to England and the US.
@@JonathanMeyer84 An AA (we add one in Leningrad/Karelia too) can not attack and does take a hit instead off an infantry when attacked. Just slows the Axis advance vs the Soviets marginally (without any SOviet offense capability added) really.
If I had a bid of 21, I'd be loading up Russia like nobody's business. Three infantry and three artillery all going into Caucasus and subsequently into Ukraine. An extra 6 2s on defense (and potentially as many on offense) would throw the German Eastern front back for two to three turns, and give Russia the ability to strike deep into German territory (Belorussia, Poland, and Bulgaria/Romania) on Russia Turn 2 if not beyond. Plus that has implications for the British Navy. Can Germany really afford to devote most/all of its air force against Britain's navy when Russia is knocking on the door? I think not.
We played with Extra AA on the Soviet-Japan border and Archangelsk +2 inf NE of Moscow. No attacking power turn 1 but does help sustian . I favor the add bomber in Moscow though, it helps Soviets but is just ONE hit per turn, unlike 5 inf that can turn the game if extremly lucky...
UK and US have to send fighters to help protect and I seem to be able to win every time with a strong navy in the Atlantic. UK attacking France and the US shipping troops into Archangel (helps fortify the Russian defence and helps keep the Japanese back). India and Hawaii are still key and the small UK / US navy in the Pacific has to hold and protect those two spots and not let Japan get to Africa.
I totally agree with this and it actually really put me off this version. I'm used to playing the revised edition and enjoyed the battle for Russia. When I first saw this game I was shocked by the jack of Russian forces. I know that you can get a bid to play Russia or rebalance as is suggested in this video, but I really just want a game that is balanced and can be played straight out of the box.
Just a lot everyone know Jen Cate adjusts the set up, but it is a time game with 15 minute turns again for hours and 45 minutes 15 minutes. So it is a very different game than a normal game has the most victory cities wins at four hours and 45 minutes.
finally the axis feel the burn of starting units lost t1.
Great video! I actually just finished my first game with Larr'ys proposed new set-up. The allies won and the game went about twelve rounds. Berlin fell, then the Japanesse knew they would eventually be licked by the other three allies. Fun game though! Axis defiantly have to work harder to secure a victory.
Thanks Karl! Out of curiosity, do you recall what Germany's opening looked like in your game? I've been exploring possible Turn 1 options with them under this new setup.
Jonathan Meyer I do recall. As you can expect Russia did attack Ukraine because getting rid of that German bomber is always nice. Russia also took the usual West Russia and moved its sub with the British B-ship and destroyer and transport for cannon fotter. With Germany I bought a bomber to replace my dead bomber, a destroyer to protect the med fleet, and seven infantry units. On the German attacks I was limited as you can imagine. Losing a bomber and down a sub and the U.K. Cruiser out of sea zone 14 really put pressure on my German Air Force and navy. I was able to take out the main allied fleet in sea zone 7, I took out the UK cruiser at sea zone 13, but I wasn't able to attack the fleets at sea zone 10 and 11 due to lack of resources. The allies counter attacked on the first round wiping out what was left over with my Germany navy in the Atlantic. So at the end of turn 1 the allies had secured naval dominance in the Atlantic. After that I had to focus on Russia and couldn't keep up in a naval race in the Atlantic against the western allies. So losing a bomber and subtracting a sub really puts Germany on its knees in the Atlantic early. Unless you roll great dice lol :-)
This is incredibly helpful, thank you! Just to clarify: The Allies attacked both your fleet in Sea Zone 7 and your fleet in Sea Zone 13 on Turn 1? Or did you not have a fleet in Sea Zone 13 at the end of your first turn?
Jonathan Meyer that is correct. I had a cruiser left over at seas zone 7 and I had a sub left over at sea zone 13. The allies wiped out both naval units on there first turn, leaving my Atlantic fleet empty. 😩
Karl Szemeredi Where did your Mediterranean battleship end up Turn 1?
Love this game . About to get the second edition 1942 after I played the 1941 edition with 1 of my friends for a couple of games . Sadly I don't know a lot of people that play the game though living in Houston .. ;(
I know I am getting in on this late, but instead of adding a DD off the east coast of Canada, what about adding a US DD off the US Atlantic Coast. It seems to me that it's the german move that destroys the US Atlantic fleet on G1 that is devastating and keeps the US from mobilizing in time to save Russia. The UK doesn't have enough initial ground units (or IPCs) to really make a big difference IMHO.
Half infantry cost $1.25, attack 0, defense 1, move 1. Regular infantry cost $2.5 , Assault infantry cost $3.75 and replace the artillery unit, now replace a few frontline Russian regular infantry with twice as many half infantry, the Russian winter offensive is over even if russia goes first in this SPRING 1942 game turn, it's about the SPRING German offensive... Russia can certainly afford a lot of half infantry. I've got a couple holes in the idea but it seems like a way to trade some Russian offense for more Russian defense and still not create a SPRING German defense along the eastern front. Taking away from the big German offensive seems wrong, adding defences to Russia's opening set up seems more better. India could gain a few 1/2 infantry for defense and later add Assault infantry(Artillery) and these 1/2 infantry now have a 1 attack from the assault infantry. I've thought about adding several axis submarines and several plus mostly unescorted transports, transports almost defend on a 1, but actually they simply escaped, battle over for that unit (shared zone status) this would assure a more randomness regarding naval balance. The battleships always seem to get screwed over in the atlantic, by spring 1942 the battleships were much less vulnerable than the carriers, early 1942 did see a carrier sunk in the mediterranean, put a carrier with a fighter in gibraltar and a battleship protected one zone away, england must have a battleship for certain and another battleship as a possible survivor cf german turn 1 attacks. Using a $4 half destroyer unit is another interesting option, attack 1 defend 1 move 1...next youll need a $5 minor air unit attack 1, defend 1 move 3. Antiaircraft hits turn $10 foghters into $5 minor air, $12 bombers become minor air units +$2 recycling paid to the owning players.
So im new to 1942, what would be your reccomendation for balance changes bullet pointed for me to use as my setup?
After playing a few games using the updated setup described in this video, I've found it to be pretty balanced. I had initially (at the time of this video) been concerned that these updates went too far, but after seeing them play out over a few games I feel that my initial feeling was incorrect.
If you go to this link (www.headlesshorseman2.com/origins.html) and click "1942 2nd. Ed. Tourney Rules" that will cause a PDF to download showing a full write-up of the Origins/Gen Con rules. Half the way down the page in green, you will see their revised setup.
@@JonathanMeyer84 Hey thanks, with that in mind, using the balance patch, what would you say is then the bid to play allies? iv seen online forums say in tournaments with the patch the bid is around 7 to 12. And; what would you spend that so called bid on, and then where would you place it?
thanks
@@DeviousXP 6-9 seems about right. I think I'd get either a tank (6) or an infantry and artillery (7), or a tank and an infantry (9) and give them to Russia. I'd need to think about 8 a little more.
Hi Jonathan, glad you made a video on this.
My group have played a couple games with the new setup now, with one Axis and one Allied victory. The German player in our last match was also not too fond of having his bomber in the Ukraine!
I guess my question would be, what are you thoughts on how you would adapt G1 strategy to having one less sub, and assuming that the Soviets destroy that bomber in their first turn (as they really should do).
That's an excellent question. I've been spending some time thinking about that. Here's an opening I'm considering:
1) 1 sub in SZ 9 to SZ 13 with at least 1 fighter.
2) 1 sub from SZ 9, 1 sub from SZ 5, and 2 fighters to SZ 7
3) Battleship and transport in SZ 15 to SZ 17, doing an amphibious assault in TransJordan (thereby blocking naval movement through the Suez Canal)
4) Possible additional moves: 1 cruiser in SZ 5 to SZ 7 (this leaves your transport in SZ 5 vulnerable, but if you're planning on building some navy it could still be okay). 1 additional fighter to SZ 13 (it would have to land in Morocco)
Those are just the moves pertaining to England. You'll also want to hit Russia (most likely in Ukraine and Karelia).
Thanks for the reply!
I like those moves, especially moving into Trans-Jordan. The British pacific fleet can really make a nuisance of itself in the Mediterranean.
I like to balance by giving each side equal dollar value, I don't recall if transports defend in this version, giving the Germans more subs and the English more destroyers is balance, and some units can be placed "Far away" from 1st or 2nd turn main theater action. 4 extra subs with 4 new allied transports specifically placed to draw the subs attentions .. further from the main theaters.
Table Tactics years ago had 2 A&A expansion game sets introducing several new unit types with piece's, WW1 & WW2, the first called Central Powers had $5 cannon, attack 1, defend 4, one of these cannons, one AA & 4-6 or more infantry in the Ukraine is almost always very annoying and often an Axis springboard to the Caucasus, practically guaranteeing an Allie's retreat to Moscow, letting the Axis walk into Karelia often without battle, or in a disorganized allied retreat, expensive allied units destroyed by infantry.
Revised with LHTR and maybe one of the G40 Balance mods are basically the only "balanced" (bids are under 10) A&A games.
I feel that instead of messing around with bids they should just mess with the starting setup to make Germany's position a little less strong. Either that or remove the factory from Karelia, since giving Germany basically a free Factory two tiles away from Moscow and one tile away from the pivotal West Russia tile puts an insane amount of pressure on the Allies to play one particular strategy (all-out defense of Karelia).
The bids in this edition are a little absurd (like +15 Allies), iirc.
Also; can you link me to the discussion with Larry? I wasn't even aware that he was still involved with the community (the forums at the "Harris Game Design" site have been dead forever).
Sure, here you go: www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=18945
Although 42 first edition isn't bad either, even though it's basically the Revised Map with Anniversary's ruleset (changes to destroyers/transports/subs/strategic bombing, cruisers existing, but tanks still cost 5).
Thanks!
I'll leave the whole tournament play aside(I don't play in them), but what gets me is that it seems that people have been complaining about balance one way or the other ever since classic version.
It's out of balance in favor of the allies, so an adjustment is made, then it's out of balance in favor of the axis, and so on, and so forth.
I would caution a minimalist approach. The changes you mention(and as you said) are equivalent to a bid of over 20.
If someone was in a bid situation where it was 20 plus, would anyone find that fair? Or balanced?
Not in any way implying I know a way to make it better, but all together, this does seem out of whack.
Thanks for the comment! Personally I feel that a bid of 20 plus is excessive, though I did read that's what the bid was in the GenCon tournament last year (I didn't play in that one). Quite frankly, I've been licking my chops at the prospect of securing a bid by going slightly lower (around 18) and still getting more than I think is needed to balance things out (between 14 and 16). Of course, I could be totally wrong haha. We'll see.
Excellent channel you have, Jonathan. I have played AA in some form for years, since my family played it back when I was a kid, in the early 80's. I remember the original version they had, there would always be a huge stack of Russians in Karelia, and a huge stack of Germans in the other one opposite, and eventually there would be a huge final fight where Germany would attack, and depending on how that ended up, one side or the other (my uncles or my grandpa) would resign - lol. I know they changed the boards dramatically over the years, and I've played many editions of it since then, including the giant special edition released several years ago, which had Italy and China, as their own mini-nations, if memory serves. Anyways - good stuff and I'm glad I discovered you here, a few days ago :-)
Thank you!
I've played over 100 matches of this version I love the game and think it's fine as is but what I might consider is maybe adding 1 AA gun in favor of the Russian side near the Far East that borders Manchuria like how global has I believe 2 AA and some 18 along with the Mongolian rule which really keeps the japense from attacking at least for a few turns in 1942 I really just see like 3 or 4 infantry used as a meat shield for the heavy air support Japan has and so not many other units will be seen there hopefully with the aa it would mean devoting more tanks or artillery which would also help indias case as well.It's also strange because in my groups we pretty much think the u boats in sea zone7 should sink the us destroyer and transport to set them back in terms of mobilization unless the Germans go for a 1 Sub to each boat strategy near eastern Canada and eastern us the brits normally have that fleet remaining what do u think about the AA addition? and also what country to do enjoy the most playing?
I'm not too sure about that extra aa move. It would slow down Japan's moves against the Soviet far east region, but that isn't a critical component of their front. They'll push through China/India just as quickly while postponing their drive into the Soviet Union until their land forces are a little stronger. Granted, that means the Soviets have more production they can use to fight Germany, but those territories are only worth 1 IPC a piece so the impact would be minimal.
When it comes to playing, I enjoy Russia, Germany, and Japan. I'm not as big a fan when it comes to England and the US.
@@JonathanMeyer84 An AA (we add one in Leningrad/Karelia too) can not attack and does take a hit instead off an infantry when attacked. Just slows the Axis advance vs the Soviets marginally (without any SOviet offense capability added) really.
The problem in this game is the Soviet Union, it is just to weak.
If I had a bid of 21, I'd be loading up Russia like nobody's business. Three infantry and three artillery all going into Caucasus and subsequently into Ukraine. An extra 6 2s on defense (and potentially as many on offense) would throw the German Eastern front back for two to three turns, and give Russia the ability to strike deep into German territory (Belorussia, Poland, and Bulgaria/Romania) on Russia Turn 2 if not beyond. Plus that has implications for the British Navy. Can Germany really afford to devote most/all of its air force against Britain's navy when Russia is knocking on the door? I think not.
We played with Extra AA on the Soviet-Japan border and Archangelsk +2 inf NE of Moscow. No attacking power turn 1 but does help sustian . I favor the add bomber in Moscow though, it helps Soviets but is just ONE hit per turn, unlike 5 inf that can turn the game if extremly lucky...
Pathetically weak.
UK and US have to send fighters to help protect and I seem to be able to win every time with a strong navy in the Atlantic. UK attacking France and the US shipping troops into Archangel (helps fortify the Russian defence and helps keep the Japanese back). India and Hawaii are still key and the small UK / US navy in the Pacific has to hold and protect those two spots and not let Japan get to Africa.
I totally agree with this and it actually really put me off this version. I'm used to playing the revised edition and enjoyed the battle for Russia. When I first saw this game I was shocked by the jack of Russian forces. I know that you can get a bid to play Russia or rebalance as is suggested in this video, but I really just want a game that is balanced and can be played straight out of the box.