Axis & Allies Pacific

	Rating	Grade (1-10)
	Graphic Presentation	8
	Rules	9
	Playability	4
	Replay Value	4
	Overall Rating:	6

PRO	Great graphical presentation, very clear, comprehensive rules
CONTRA	Totally crowded gameboard, odd overall game balance

Do you have a different opinion or want to write your own review? Don't hestitate to do this - we will gladly publish it! Send here.

Axis & Allies Pacific
Review #1
written by: Denny Koch

Graphical Presentation Very well done - as always with MB / Hasbro products. The game contains 345 detailed plastic figures which show different unit types (infantry, tanks, planes, different ships), a large, mounted mapboard representing the entire Pacific region and South-East Asia. The map consists of several areas and is designed in an old / classic map style. Besides this there are more components in the box, for example a battle board (which is looking much better than the A&A battle board), a dramatic National Production Chart and - a novum in the series - so-called "Task Force Markers" which prevent crowded sea zones: entire fleets can be placed on a small card next to the map while a Task-Force Marker is placed in the respective sea zone. The plastic figures are manifactured very carefully and detailed and their design differs from nation to nation. Visually, this game looks great, the presentation is fabulous and the colorful detailed components invite to play this game. A&A Pacific isn't a simple "expansion" to the A&A classic game, so you don't need the basic game to play the Pacific variant. It is a "standalone" game, you can play it without even knowing the original A&A game and its rules. Everything you need to play is included in the box.

Rules The rules are very well written, too, and don't leave any questions unanswered. The game contains a 35-page, english rulebook which is written in a very clear and simple language, together with many additional illustrations and examples. The first page lists all differences to the A&A system, but as I already said, the game can be played without even knowing another A&A game. The rulebook is newbie-friendly and perfect for getting unexperienced players quickly into action. The rulebook can be read while learning and playing the game - it starts with the setup and leads through the Sequence of Play step by step. Important aspects such as the victory conditions etc. are explained thoroughly. The rulebook leaves a positive impression by its clear structure and good layout. The final chapter contains descriptions of all units and illustrated examples of a typical sequence of play. Even very unexperienced players will have no problems with playing this game since the rulebook doesn't contain "black holes" or poorly wordings - in contrast to many other games...

Playability Here we face the main problem of the game - considering the rules, there is no doubt: the game can be learnt quite fast and it's easy to get into it. Practically, this game has a huge problem, though - the map board is far too small to allow smooth gameplay! This is a common problem with all Axis & Allies games, including the original one. We solved this problem in "Axis & Allies" by enlarging the map up to 1,50 m (4 ft 11 inch), laminating it and glueing it on a wooden board (picture), but we played Pacific "out of the box" with the original map. Thus, after a while, we had the problem of crowded sea zones (in spite of using the Task Force Markers). Even during setup we suffered from space problems, because the Japanese get a gigantic fleet. The lack of adequate space increased during the game until it became quite disturbing. The playability suffered from congestion, narrowness and that wasn't very funny because you fought more against the chaos on the map than against the opponent! In addition, we thought the game balance to be problematic (which is a common problem to the entire A&A series, too), so that after finishing our playtest games, we were not sure about how to win against the completely overwhelming japanese forces. The Americans start the game with an enormous income, but they lose almost their entire fleet by the special japanese first turn rule in the 1st round. The British in Indochina are wiped out by this red flood (the japanese figures are red in this game) quite fast. The game balance tends strongly in favor of the Japanese which eventually kills all fun. The only relief would be by using a bidding system (or other house rules), but this shouldn't be the only way to allow a good playability of a game - the publisher should provide a working system without forcing players to develop methods of balancing the game by themselves.

Replay Value The two above mentioned factors - the unbalanced game and the crowded board - decrease the replay value down to zero. You just have to think of the stuffed, crowded map to be reluctant to set up another game. In the beginning, the nice improvements of the classic A&A system invite to play this game because they seem to offer more possibilities and introduce new features. But very quickly, the disadvantages of the game dominate over the positive aspects - for example that - as a Japanese player - you simply feel like a hot knife slicing through butter while the allies watch their defeat. This is why (in my humble opinion, of course), Pacific is not a game which will entertain you for many, many years - something I expect from a good game.

Creativity Compared to A&A, Pacific offers some improvements which IMHO enhance the system. Bombers can be accompanied by fighter squads (which makes air combat more interesting); ships and submarines are improved and offer new abilities as well. The game now contains destroyers and US marines, it introduces convoy routes which can be attacked; planes have some new features, sea zones contain naval bases which have impact on the mechanics; Japanese can conduct kamikaze attacks and so forth. In addition, the Japanese have a special first turn ability for destroying the entire allied fleet in the 1st turn (which didn't convince us and wasn't even fun for the japanese player). This attack simply was too cheap; we couldn't see any use in minimizing the opponent's units in large scale, not allowing him to recover from this first turn during the rest of the game. I don't know if all these larger and minor changes of the - much simpler - original A&A rules can be called an "innovation", but at least they offer some advantages over the original game.

Simulation Value The simulation value is, as always with this type of fun wargames, quite low. A&A Pacific tries to portray the events in the Pacific theatre during World War 2, but its scale and unit types are much too vague to offer an accurate simulation - athough the game doesn't want to be a simulation, to be true. It is designed as an entertaining family boardgame which can be played in an evening with "beer and pretzels", only using a WW2 background to tell its story. It is aimed at entertaining the average boardgamer who prefers a low difficulty and complexity. So it refers to the Pacific war, but doesn't portray it; so no simulation value can be expected here.

Solitaire Playability Low. A&A Pacific is a multiplayer family boardgame and doesn't allow detailed strategic studies solitaire at the table. The game lives by the interaction of the opponents - the more, the better - and it's much too boring for solitaire players because it lacks any strategic depth.

Can be compared to A&A Pacific can be compared to the original Axis & Allies game and to A&A Europe. Europe is the corresponding version covering the European WW2 theatre. Both games can be played combined (by special house rules you can find on the internet, because some clubs use them), but if you really want to combine these two unbalanced and crowded games is actually a different question... Pacific uses and enhances the A&A basic rules and offers more variability. But I wouldn't prefer it over the (alas very static) A&A game because of its strong imbalance. A&A Europe is as unbalanced as the Pacific variant, so these 3 games can be compared to each other in more than one way. At least, all three games offer a similar high quality of their components.

Short review
As you already may have recognized, I'm not a fan of Axis & Allies: Pacific. The visual presentation and overall impression of its components and especially the playing pieces are attractive and invites you to unpack the box and start playing. The improved and extended rules promise a more interesting game compared to the static original A&A game. Alas, the game doesn't fulfill its promises offered by the graphic presentation and the well written rules. The ideas may be cool and an overall improvement to the system, but you get unnerved by the crowded and far too small mapboard really fast. It's difficult to recognize the single units on this map and the zones are so stuffed that units even extend into the adjacent zones - which makes it impossible to decide which forces belong where. It is quite deadly in a strategic game when you even cannot judge the strength of your opponent's fleet (nor your own) with a quick glance at the map and when you don't know to which zones his units actually belong to. In addition, the game experience for the allied player is quite strange if he is confronted with an always winning Japanese - and the japanese player cannot enjoy his victory either, because he knows that it wasn't his own achievement and performance which led to this victory but just this special rule making a victory rather likely.

Pacific is a good looking fun wargame with a WW2 Pacific background, but isn't one of my favorite games (together with the other A&A variants), because it suffers from too many problems to be considered as a good game. You can play it with a beer and some friends if you aren't interested in too much strategy but want to fight some dicey battles, but it's the wrong game if you want to sit at a table for hours and think about an optimal strategy. There are far too many good, balanced and more simulative games about the Pacific war to spend so much time (it takes hours and hours to finish one game!) with this unrewarding game. It definitely consumes too much playing time for the limited strategic options offered.

Back to Review overview

Here by accident? Mainframe missing? Continue to the HFC-Mainpage

Axis & Allies Pacific Review #1	written by: Denny Koch
Graphical Presentation	Very well done - as always with MB / Hasbro products. The game contains 345 detailed plastic figures which show different unit types (infantry, tanks, planes, different ships), a large, mounted mapboard representing the entire Pacific region and South-East Asia. The map consists of several areas and is designed in an old / classic map style. Besides this there are more components in the box, for example a battle board (which is looking much better than the A&A battle board), a dramatic National Production Chart and - a novum in the series - so-called "Task Force Markers" which prevent crowded sea zones: entire fleets can be placed on a small card next to the map while a Task-Force Marker is placed in the respective sea zone. The plastic figures are manifactured very carefully and detailed and their design differs from nation to nation. Visually, this game looks great, the presentation is fabulous and the colorful detailed components invite to play this game. A&A Pacific isn't a simple "expansion" to the A&A classic game, so you don't need the basic game to play the Pacific variant. It is a "standalone" game, you can play it without even knowing the original A&A game and its rules. Everything you need to play is included in the box.
Rules	The rules are very well written, too, and don't leave any questions unanswered. The game contains a 35-page, english rulebook which is written in a very clear and simple language, together with many additional illustrations and examples. The first page lists all differences to the A&A system, but as I already said, the game can be played without even knowing another A&A game. The rulebook is newbie-friendly and perfect for getting unexperienced players quickly into action. The rulebook can be read while learning and playing the game - it starts with the setup and leads through the Sequence of Play step by step. Important aspects such as the victory conditions etc. are explained thoroughly. The rulebook leaves a positive impression by its clear structure and good layout. The final chapter contains descriptions of all units and illustrated examples of a typical sequence of play. Even very unexperienced players will have no problems with playing this game since the rulebook doesn't contain "black holes" or poorly wordings - in contrast to many other games...
Playability	Here we face the main problem of the game - considering the rules, there is no doubt: the game can be learnt quite fast and it's easy to get into it. Practically, this game has a huge problem, though - the map board is far too small to allow smooth gameplay! This is a common problem with all Axis & Allies games, including the original one. We solved this problem in "Axis & Allies" by enlarging the map up to 1,50 m (4 ft 11 inch), laminating it and glueing it on a wooden board (picture), but we played Pacific "out of the box" with the original map. Thus, after a while, we had the problem of crowded sea zones (in spite of using the Task Force Markers). Even during setup we suffered from space problems, because the Japanese get a gigantic fleet. The lack of adequate space increased during the game until it became quite disturbing. The playability suffered from congestion, narrowness and that wasn't very funny because you fought more against the chaos on the map than against the opponent! In addition, we thought the game balance to be problematic (which is a common problem to the entire A&A series, too), so that after finishing our playtest games, we were not sure about how to win against the completely overwhelming japanese forces. The Americans start the game with an enormous income, but they lose almost their entire fleet by the special japanese first turn rule in the 1st round. The British in Indochina are wiped out by this red flood (the japanese figures are red in this game) quite fast. The game balance tends strongly in favor of the Japanese which eventually kills all fun. The only relief would be by using a bidding system (or other house rules), but this shouldn't be the only way to allow a good playability of a game - the publisher should provide a working system without forcing players to develop methods of balancing the game by themselves.
Replay Value	The two above mentioned factors - the unbalanced game and the crowded board - decrease the replay value down to zero. You just have to think of the stuffed, crowded map to be reluctant to set up another game. In the beginning, the nice improvements of the classic A&A system invite to play this game because they seem to offer more possibilities and introduce new features. But very quickly, the disadvantages of the game dominate over the positive aspects - for example that - as a Japanese player - you simply feel like a hot knife slicing through butter while the allies watch their defeat. This is why (in my humble opinion, of course), Pacific is not a game which will entertain you for many, many years - something I expect from a good game.
Creativity	Compared to A&A, Pacific offers some improvements which IMHO enhance the system. Bombers can be accompanied by fighter squads (which makes air combat more interesting); ships and submarines are improved and offer new abilities as well. The game now contains destroyers and US marines, it introduces convoy routes which can be attacked; planes have some new features, sea zones contain naval bases which have impact on the mechanics; Japanese can conduct kamikaze attacks and so forth. In addition, the Japanese have a special first turn ability for destroying the entire allied fleet in the 1st turn (which didn't convince us and wasn't even fun for the japanese player). This attack simply was too cheap; we couldn't see any use in minimizing the opponent's units in large scale, not allowing him to recover from this first turn during the rest of the game. I don't know if all these larger and minor changes of the - much simpler - original A&A rules can be called an "innovation", but at least they offer some advantages over the original game.
Simulation Value	The simulation value is, as always with this type of fun wargames, quite low. A&A Pacific tries to portray the events in the Pacific theatre during World War 2, but its scale and unit types are much too vague to offer an accurate simulation - athough the game doesn't want to be a simulation, to be true. It is designed as an entertaining family boardgame which can be played in an evening with "beer and pretzels", only using a WW2 background to tell its story. It is aimed at entertaining the average boardgamer who prefers a low difficulty and complexity. So it refers to the Pacific war, but doesn't portray it; so no simulation value can be expected here.
Solitaire Playability	Low. A&A Pacific is a multiplayer family boardgame and doesn't allow detailed strategic studies solitaire at the table. The game lives by the interaction of the opponents - the more, the better - and it's much too boring for solitaire players because it lacks any strategic depth.
Can be compared to	A&A Pacific can be compared to the original Axis & Allies game and to A&A Europe. Europe is the corresponding version covering the European WW2 theatre. Both games can be played combined (by special house rules you can find on the internet, because some clubs use them), but if you really want to combine these two unbalanced and crowded games is actually a different question... Pacific uses and enhances the A&A basic rules and offers more variability. But I wouldn't prefer it over the (alas very static) A&A game because of its strong imbalance. A&A Europe is as unbalanced as the Pacific variant, so these 3 games can be compared to each other in more than one way. At least, all three games offer a similar high quality of their components.
Short review	As you already may have recognized, I'm not a fan of Axis & Allies: Pacific. The visual presentation and overall impression of its components and especially the playing pieces are attractive and invites you to unpack the box and start playing. The improved and extended rules promise a more interesting game compared to the static original A&A game. Alas, the game doesn't fulfill its promises offered by the graphic presentation and the well written rules. The ideas may be cool and an overall improvement to the system, but you get unnerved by the crowded and far too small mapboard really fast. It's difficult to recognize the single units on this map and the zones are so stuffed that units even extend into the adjacent zones - which makes it impossible to decide which forces belong where. It is quite deadly in a strategic game when you even cannot judge the strength of your opponent's fleet (nor your own) with a quick glance at the map and when you don't know to which zones his units actually belong to. In addition, the game experience for the allied player is quite strange if he is confronted with an always winning Japanese - and the japanese player cannot enjoy his victory either, because he knows that it wasn't his own achievement and performance which led to this victory but just this special rule making a victory rather likely. Pacific is a good looking fun wargame with a WW2 Pacific background, but isn't one of my favorite games (together with the other A&A variants), because it suffers from too many problems to be considered as a good game. You can play it with a beer and some friends if you aren't interested in too much strategy but want to fight some dicey battles, but it's the wrong game if you want to sit at a table for hours and think about an optimal strategy. There are far too many good, balanced and more simulative games about the Pacific war to spend so much time (it takes hours and hours to finish one game!) with this unrewarding game. It definitely consumes too much playing time for the limited strategic options offered.