Do we need a Western Front blow-up board?

[Razor]

If your western front are crowded then you play it wrong. Solutions may be:

• Stick to pure infantry buys.
• Let UK and US take responsibility for Belgium and Picardy, and France for the rest of the front. Dont cross fit.
• Buy more navy

[BJCard]

Um, aren’t you supposed to use multi-national forces to defend with?  And Artillery with air support are better in defense than plain infantry.  Are you joking Razor?

[Razor]

Yes, you can use multi national forces for defence, and you can buy artillery, tanks and aircrafts too, but then the territories got crowded for sure

[Flashman]

Nobody is going to leave areas weak because there’s no physical room for the pieces!

We need another solution.

Another I’ve been thinking about is to simply use chips to represent all units of a power so, depending on how many chips you can hold of, you’d have something like:

light blue/grey - infantry
red - artillery
dark blue - fighters
brown - tanks

All stacked together with the obligatory infantry unit to top it off.

So 3 or 4 tall stacks rather than 10 or 12 medium ones. Fit better, but easier to knock over…

Anyway next game I’ve decided to use old style chips as:

grey - infantry

red - artillery

green - tanks

white - fighters

I have more, and they’re more distinct than the new chip colours.

[Derek]

Marshaling cards

I use odd numbered ones for the CP
and even numbered for the Allies

So if a tt has only one marshaling card number in it; it is not contested (odd = CP, even = Allies)
If a tt has 2 card numbers on it; it is contested

Pretty simple solution

[Flashman]

I think I prefer a box for each tt with all units lined up opposing each other.

[Danger Mouse]

Country specfic chips so you could stack multiple nations units under one nations piece? So, I may have a French infantry on top but below him is a stack of Light green(british)dark green(American) and blue(French) chips that represent a multinational infantry force. Then repeat for all your armies and bamn you only ever have one stack of every unit type for your side in a territory. I agree that as the game goes on the Western front becomes an almost impossible pile of every western nation packed into three or four territories.

Sadly with eight nations it would be expensive for all of these chips and you would have to find spray paint that somewhat matches the nations in order to make these nation specific chips, but who cares if you really want to solve the problem on a game you have already paid a hundred bucks for.

[Old Dwarf]

I use Counters from Paths of Glory & Fatal Alliances for the Board & only set up
the figs on the Battle Board.Of course our pimped out version we play is rather
far from the base game but it solves the over packed TT problem.

[Derek]

@Old:

I use Counters from Paths of Glory & Fatal Alliances for the Board & only set up
the figs on the Battle Board.Of course our pimped out version we play is rather
far from the base game but it solves the over packed TT problem.

Do you have any pics?

[italiansarecoming]

Just invade Switzerland then the front will be more spread out ;)

[Flashman]

Been there. Done that. Same problem.

I’m focusing on the idea of using marshaling cards, but each card represents a region and has trenches on either side and no-man’s land in the middle.

Don’t need chips for each nation, just a colour for each piece type topped off with an infantry.

@italiansarecoming:

Just invade Switzerland then the front will be more spread out ;)

[Derek]

Flashman you should really try this, it works great, doesnt clutter and doesnt require tons of new chips/colors or other peices.
All you need is a set of Marshaling cards (10 is more than enough for me-i dont think ive used more than 6 yet in 4 games)

@Uncrustable:

Marshaling cards

I use odd numbered ones for the CP
and even numbered for the Allies

So if a tt has only one marshaling card number in it; it is not contested (odd = CP, even = Allies)
If a tt has 2 card numbers on it; it is contested

Pretty simple solution

[Flashman]

Again, I prefer a card = a contested tt, so I can immediately see the balance of forces in any given region.

[Derek]

@Flashman:

Again, I prefer a card = a contested tt, so I can immediately see the balance of forces in any given region.

2 cards = contested
1 card = not contested

odd = CP
even = Allies

You will rarely use more than 5 or so cards, so you can ‘immediately see the balance’

Keep the cards that are in contested tts next to each, other off the board, so you can see the ‘balance of forces’
Put cards near where they are on the map, off the board

[Koningstiger]

I wonder how they handled this during “playtesting”.

I also wonder what the general consensus was on the unrestricted submarine warfare rule as written. Did they really not notice during playtesting that this rule was entirely uselless in this form?

[Derek]

@Koningstiger:

I wonder how they handled this during “playtesting”.

I also wonder what the general consensus was on the unrestricted submarine warfare rule as written. Did they really not notice during playtesting that this rule was entirely uselless in this form?

Well i can imagine the playtesters saying “tts in europe too small we need marshaling cards”
And WOC saying “ok…wait that cost more money, F*** that”
WOC also says “Play testing over, we will fix any problems in the 2nd editions while taking every ones money again”