That’s always been my problem. It isn’t too hard to get your troops outside the capitol, bit you have to make sure you’ve brought enough to get the job done. If you only contest the territory the defender can reinforce during the battle and you can’t. So if you don’t take the capitol quickly you’re screwed. Sounds like an entertaining game.
Opening the door for more World War One based games? Your opinion
-
It was the trains that triggered the war. German plans depended on their railway timetables getting them to the front before the enemy could mobilize, hence when Russia mobilized Germany had to put their train based deployment into action immediately.
-
Maybe the game will come in a plastic container, and we can all say it was the ‘tote’ that triggered the war?
-
Maybe the game will come in a plastic container, and we can all say it was the ‘tote’ that triggered the war?
I am glad I was already done with my glass of water before reading this one. Saved me keyboard money.
-
One space equals walking.
Seven spaces equals trains.
Shrug… you could also say it equals mules or piggy-back rides, all answers are valid if you don’t have a definition for how many weeks/months etc. one turn is supposed to represent.
-
Generally a turn is considered to represent 3-4 months.
However with US entry automatic on turn 4 it could be said that in this version a turn represents an entire year. You could go round the world several times on a train in that amount of time…
-
You know Flashman, though I do agree with you on the point, you don’t have to bring in railroads on every thread :-P
-
Sometimes Flashman likes to read his own text (hear himself ‘talk’)
-
You know Flashman, though I do agree with you on the point, you don’t have to bring in railroads on every thread :-P
What’s this about Underground Railroads?
The US can move troops from washington to France WITHOUT SHIPS?!? :P
-
“Harriet Tubman: Unsung Hero of World War 1”
-
What about a set of older games? 7 Years War, Napoleonic War, US Civil War? Each board game would have a different market, with the 7 years war being the most ‘global’ of the 3. I cant imagine the US would want to see a Napoleanic War any more than Europe would be interested in a US Civil War. Maybe an game for the Asian market also but my knowledge of vast Asian conflicts is sadly lacking. Moving further into the past (which to a certain extent includes WWI) will only make the games more and more regional, so a set to cater for all markets.
All 3 conflicts listed here however, were fought over vast areas and could have good strategic possibilities, and all 3 could use ‘similar’ styles considering the the methods of warfare probably changed less between mid-1700’s and mid-1800s than they did between 1914 and 1945. -
I’m up for a good Civil War game.
Knowing the designers though, they’ll use a blue star, or grey roundels, instead of the confederate flag for the south.
Don’t want to “offend” anyone.
-
Age of Imperialism c1870
Yes, i know about the Eagle Games attempt.
-
Are you kidding me? I live in the US and would love a Napoleon war- You could actually have North America in it for a sideshow (war of 1812).
-
I think Napoleon would be cool AA style. Also would like to see 100 years war game. Have up to 6 players play. Each player has a noble or lord for France or England. Pieces would be awesome. Have your castle be your capital once it is lost that player is eliminated.
-
Capture the castle, eh?
Medieval history was nothing like that. An accurate game of the middle ages would be mainly about arranging marriages.
I have such a design, but strangely nobody seems interested in developing it.
-
Got to simplify it Flash. Whats funner wiping out you opponent and his castle or arranging a marriage? At least in a board game I would have to say taking someones castle.
-
Ah, but how did Sir Someone get that castle in the first place?
Because his Grandpappy married an heiress, that’s how. You cannot hold a castle without first having legal title to it.
Gaining more lands/titles/wealth/power was far more about who you married than slinging some big rocks at a castle wall.
Trust me, it would be terrific.
-
Capture the castle, eh?
Medieval history was nothing like that. An accurate game of the middle ages would be mainly about arranging marriages.
I have such a design, but strangely nobody seems interested in developing it.
Not to mention that, as most medieval strategy games seem to forget, THERE WERE NO STANDING ARMIES. Everyone just went home at the end of the campaign season, and harvested their crops. Get ready to remove all your units from the board at the end of each turn.
I actually have a game design for a medieval strategy game I made. It involves seasonal armies, noble lineages, supplies, and yes, arranged marriages. I’d like to compare notes Flashman. PM me if you’re interested.
-
You cannot hold a castle without first having legal title to it.
Uhmm…
I’m going to dispute this ludicrous claim.
Unless you agree, that ‘legal title’ is a synonym for ‘claimed by force’.
-
You cannot hold a castle without first having legal title to it.
Uhmm…
I’m going to dispute this ludicrous claim.
Unless you agree, that ‘legal title’ is a synonym for ‘claimed by force’.
Sure, to a certain extent. But it’s a lot easier to become the Queen of England by marrying the King of England than by invading it.
Suggested Topics
