One problem with 1914 is warfare on the western front. It usually just dissolves into two giant stacks going at it in one territory, and the allies win that battle 90% of the time because they can get units there faster. One reason this happens is because people aren’t aggressive enough. Also, its too easy for people to combine their forces because flanking maneuvers aren’t very deadly in Axis and Allies. So I would make on slight adjustment to the moving out of contested territories rules:
When a unit moves out of a contested territory they may not battle. They may still move into contested territories containing units belonging to their power, but they may only reinforce not battle there. Also, I was really intrigued by @Arreghas idea about contested territories. You can see his forum here: https://www.axisandallies.org/forums/topic/34163/1914-contested-territories-an-interesting-tweak
Canadian Territories
-
Excellent point. I suppose it could be tweaked a bit. Make some more difficult NO’s, and perhaps not add any units. I’d put an infantry in British Columbia and that’s about it. I’m not terribly good at the game and I’d prefer to have more playing options to have more fun. I’m not really worried about balance issues since I’d probably lose anyway, even if I gave Canada 10 battleships at the start. But I can understand from your point of view.
-
You dont have your capital in canada….its a separate power, it cant attack with the UK, which is an enormous detrement to the UK, and the UK is collecting 7 less IPCs a turn
Also, now economic raids and strategic bombing against the UK is deadly, now that they are at only 21 IPCs!
If your raiding a UK territory, then that brings Canada down to 12…and if the US isnt in the war canada is at 7.A sucessful bombing campaign and sub campaign would bring the UK to its knees. Leaving canada producing at 7-17 IPCs. Which is much more realistic than the “sealioneverygame” and “whoops my sealion didnt work, lets play something else”
I guess changing the UK all originals was a little drastic…ill look into that
-
Here’s an idea to use the Canada/ANZAC Commonwealth and make the UK not so weak: eliminate the UK Pacific and make it ALL simply UK. Calcutta would no longer be a capital but simply a victory city with a Major IC for UK. The UK income would now be 38 IPCs to spend wherever they wished. Particularly, this would make Sealion not so easy, which I think it would be easier with UK’s income cut to 21.
If you do this, perhaps you could also incorporate a rule where if London does fall, then Calcutta could be a secondary UK capital. This way, even if London falls, the Brits could still put units in South Africa and not just totally end up giving Africa to the Italians. -
The fear there is that the UK will ignore Japan and just try to crush germany fast
Giving them India’s money would make Sealion impossible
-
Yeah, I thought about that after I entered my post. With that much more money, UK could really give Germany and Italy hard times. I was trying to think of a way to make UK not too weak and ended up making them too strong.
-
I like a lot of these ideas, yet I think it might be best if the game was not changed so much in a “canadian variant” Like so:
Canada would be played like UK Pacific in the Global game as in it is played on the same turn as the UK but is it’s separate economy of 7 IPC that must be spent at the Canadian IC.
Canadian NO
3 IPC if all Canadian territories are unconquered and London has not fallen.
2 IPC if there are no German subs on Europe board except sea zone 113-115
A one time 5 IPC bonus if Canada captures or liberates a European territory and holds it for at least one round.
I’m wondering if this will leave UK too open to Sea Lion with less IPC at hand. It will have to be playtested to see. I will soon and of course this would be best if you used historicalboardgaming.com’s canadian units and control markers. :) I’m ordering them now and will be using them to play at the end of the month.
Suggested Topics
