@Private-Panic said in NML 1914 team game 16:
@Elrood Your Turks were lucky! But then your Austrians were not.
leave me alone! I am not the bad guy here! :-O
1914 NML UK vs Us
-
@Private-Panic talking to yourself doesn’t count.
-
@Wittmann Surely you have realised by now that when you tell everyone else what to do you may as well be talking to yourself?
-
Pick a new map and let’s go. I’m pretty flexible.
-
@Private-Panic This game is very simple. (Hence I am no good at it). Each of us would only have two or three moves per nation.
There are 11 powers . If we played 3 would take the Roman Alliance, as they have 6 amd the other two would have to take the 5 Carthaginian partners.
No idea how to choose sides , but once chosen, I thjnk the first player takes Rome, his ally takes Greece and Pergamon, then the Carthaginian pair have their 5 goes. The third Roman ally then does his two , followed by the Roman player doing Armenia, then his next aRoman go. -
@Wittmann I have not played this since I last beat you, so my memory is hazy. However, I remember it as being similar to Napoleon in complexity. I thought it a fun game, certainly worthy of an occasional visit. However, I am not pushing for a game of TAW - it was just an attempt to suggest something diverting and new for a laugh. As I said above I am happy to play anything except WaW.
It is pretty hard to agree a game without any response from @captainwalker though. I hope he has not caught the dreaded virus. Do our colonial cousins know how he is and/or what his thoughts are?
I presume you have taken a look and are right about the number of powers in each side. However, I don’t see why that necessitates 3 players being the 6 Rome/Allies, leaving 2 players for the 5 Carthaginian Bloc. When we play 1914 we don’t mandate that 3 players take the 7 Entente powers and 2 the 4 CP nations.
Instead why don’t we keep the US vs UK format (which adds a little fun to the proceedings) and play 2 games with a change of sides.
-
@Wittmann Oops! Should have also said that others prefer to split the powers the way you suggest then fine with me.
-
@Private-Panic I"m around…just been busy working. TAW is fine with me…let me know when it’s ready.
-
@captainwalker Thanks for the reply. We are all agreed to give TAW a go.
@captainwalker @redrum @Degrasse We have 2 suggestions for playing it. Which do you prefer?
Option1:
@Wittmann said in 1914 NML UK vs Us:
There are 11 powers . If we played 3 would take the Roman Alliance, as they have 6 amd the other two would have to take the 5 Carthaginian partners.
No idea how to choose sides , but once chosen, I thjnk the first player takes Rome, his ally takes Greece and Pergamon, then the Carthaginian pair have their 5 goes. The third Roman ally then does his two , followed by the Roman player doing Armenia, then his next aRoman go.Option 2:
@Private-Panic said in 1914 NML UK vs Us:
I presume you have taken a look and are right about the number of powers in each side. However, I don’t see why that necessitates 3 players being the 6 Rome/Allies, leaving 2 players for the 5 Carthaginian Bloc. When we play 1914 we don’t mandate that 3 players take the 7 Entente powers and 2 the 4 CP nations.
Instead why don’t we keep the US vs UK format (which adds a little fun to the proceedings) and play 2 games with a change of sides. -
you guys just pick what side you want and we’ll go from there
-
I like the idea of playing two successive games switching side for the second game,
-
@Degrasse Happy Easter Jamie.
Do you want to set it up and play Rome? Then Ron or Steve can play The Greeks and the third nation. Adam and I can take the Carthaginians.
Please note that the units are all expensive and I remember that finding the cash to recruit enough of them, was always a problem. Good luck! -
@captainwalker Or you, Steve , if you are on line .
-
@Wittmann Give me a few minutes I will get a game set up
Suggested Topics
