Axis and Allies

[DJShaddycat]

Which edition should I buy next guys? The girlfriend and I have gotten into play A&A 1941 and have been having a blast. Considering swinging by a local game shop to see if they have another edition. Any A&A fans here have a recomendation for which one I should pick up next? I've heard the World War I edition is good, but I'm open to picking up anything.

 

[Neuromancer]

WW1 has a very different feel, and it's an absolute blast, but it's also slower. The biggest thing about it is that when you move to attack a province you only roll once, as does the defender, and if there are units of both sides after the roll the province becomes contested, denying its resources to the defender. On their turn the defender can move units into the contested zone and counter-attack, and the process continues on and on. There's a lot more little differences here and there, but the core of it remains the same. If you're looking for something different, then WW1 is probably the best bet. The 1940 games are a lot more strategic and a good amount more complex, and though a blast (I've spent multiple weekends playing with 5 friends 1940 "global", where you combine both 1940's into a monstrously big single game) it's somewhat more hardcore due to having a good amount more micromanaging and planning ahead.

 

[DJShaddycat]

WW1 has a very different feel, and it's an absolute blast, but it's also slower. The biggest thing about it is that when you move to attack a province you only roll once, as does the defender, and if there are units of both sides after the roll the province becomes contested, denying its resources to the defender. On their turn the defender can move units into the contested zone and counter-attack, and the process continues on and on. There's a lot more little differences here and there, but the core of it remains the same. If you're looking for something different, then WW1 is probably the best bet. The 1940 games are a lot more strategic and a good amount more complex, and though a blast (I've spent multiple weekends playing with 5 friends 1940 "global", where you combine both 1940's into a monstrously big single game) it's somewhat more hardcore due to having a good amount more micromanaging and planning ahead.

If we aren't quite ready for something terribly large (Like both 1940's together), would you still recommend one of the two 1940's on their own? Or are they both about the same levels of complexity, just scaled up if you combine the two?

 

[Neuromancer]

If we aren't quite ready for something terribly large (Like both 1940's together), would you still recommend one of the two 1940's on their own? Or are they both about the same levels of complexity, just scaled up if you combine the two?

Do understand that by complexity I mean that the amount of units on each side (which are a good amount more than 1941), combined with the more detailed maps (lots more provinces) leads to needing to micromanage more, and that it matters more. The rules themselves are pretty simple as per 1941. It's just due to all the possible moves you can make in a single turn can get potentially overwhelming. I would advise you take a look at pictures of starting unit positions and such before considering buying either to get an idea of the amount of units you deal with.

I would say that 1940 Pacific is the more complex of the two due to the navy playing central stage. You have to plan for transport ships moving the land units at any point of the pacific, including moving them from island to island. There's a lot of tight micro going on in that regard. If you're interested in trying out the 1940 games, you should start with Europe. That one's more straightforward with the direction of the moves you can make (with perhaps the exception of the UK, who is a bit of a playmaker and has to do a bit of home defense and African expansion at the same time) and is largely a land unit game.