Agreed.
Is Switzerland the stepping stone to victory?
-
If Norway is worth 4 (economically it should be worth no more than 2) to deter attacks, why not the same for Switzerland?
-
Again, I think the game is almost completely correct as is. If the Central Powers try to invade Switzerland, the French counterattack on Turn 1 would have air supremacy and wipe out the Germans, who would have no reinforcements in Munich at that time. If the Austrians devote troops there they lose any hope of momentum against Italy, and the road to Vienna is wide open. It diverts troops from Russia, and it makes the West Front longer, which is a BAD thing for the CPs if they want to knock out Russia first. If they push hard to the West, the Russians mass in Ukraine and march straight on Vienna. Result: CPs don’t want to attack Switzerland if they’re smart.
For the Allies, attacking Switzerland has all of the same disadvantages. The French need the troops elsewhere to try to take pressure off the Russians and the Italians REALLY don’t need to have a second territory threatened. Before going through all the crazy permutations suggested here, let me ask: how many people have played games where Switzerland held the key to victory? If so, go back and play it again now that the other side realizes that Switzerland is an “easy” target, and see if it works again. If it consistently works, then change the game. If not, DON’T. Hell, if you’re going to make defense better due to terrain, do the same thing for Tyrolia, and Bulgaria, and Persia, and Afghanistan…this sort of attempt at being hyper-historically correct reminds me of the agony that was old AH games: “Rule 1.2.1.1 - The rule that mechanized infantry and armor cannot cross straits without receiving the -2 penalty to dice rolls is negated in the case of the British Fifth Pony Company if the straits are from Hex XX25 to XY26”.
-
If Norway is worth 4 (economically it should be worth no more than 2) to deter attacks, why not the same for Switzerland?
Germany would still attack it to get 4 IPC a turn. If it stays at one , but with an army based on 4 nobody attacks it.
-
Do your moves of at most six units per turn into Switzerland. Then throw a die and that many units actually get to move into Switzerland. The rest stays where it wanted to move out of, like Munich. Makes it highly undesirable to move into, because you could potentially lose move,ent of five nits. If you move with only three units, then chances are smaller to lose movement, and s on.
-
If Norway is worth 4 (economically it should be worth no more than 2)
You got a problem with that ? Hey, remember that controll of Norway also represent the iron ore trade from Sweden, and the fact that Norway had the nr 3 largest merchant fleet of the world. Switzerland had like zip.
-
I can’t see how Norway or Sweden are worth twice as much as the Netherlands or Belgium. Its pretty clear that these values partly represent the designers not wanting you to invade there, while they clearly do want you to fight over Switzerland because otherwise the western front gets too crowded or, as I guess, they want Austria to get in there and help the Germans on that front.
-
Some Neutrals stats supplied by Ryan Hanson on BGG:
Central Powers Aligned
Bulgaria
Aligned to: Ottoman Empire
IPC Value: 3
Historical Population: 4,800,000
Historical GDP: 7.4
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: 280,000
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: 1,200,000Allied Powers Aligned
Serbia/Montenegro
Aligned to: Russia
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 7,000,000
Historical GDP: 7.2
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: 250,000
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: 757,000Romania
Aligned to: Russia
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 7,700,000
Historical GDP: 11.7
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: 290,000
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: 750,000Belgium
Aligned to: France
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 7,600,000
Historical GDP: 32.4
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: 117,000
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: 267,000 (seems too low?)Portugal
Aligned to: France
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 6,000,000
Historical GDP: 7.4
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: 40,000
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: 100,000Albania
Aligned to: Italy
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: (?)
Historical GDP: (?)
Historical 1914 Standing Army/Reserves: (?)
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: (?)Note: Larry has reported that Albania also includes Montenegro and is really more of an amalgamation of that region than a specific nation state. It exists primarily for game purposes.
Arabia
Aligned to: British Empire
IPC Value: 1
Historical Total Troops Mobilized: (?)True Neutrals
Netherlands
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 6,210,000
Historical GDP: 22.0Norway
IPC Value: 4
Historical Population: 2,450,000
Historical GDP: 6.0Sweden
IPC Value: 4
Historical Population: 5,620,000
Historical GDP: 15.8Denmark
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 2,830,000
Historical GDP: 10.6Spain
IPC Value: 4
Historical Population: 20,200,000
Historical GDP: 41.6Switzerland
IPC Value: 1
Historical Population: 3,860,000
Historical GDP: 16.5Greece
IPC Value: 2
Historical Population: 2,730,000
Historical GDP: 4.0Persia?
Afghanistan?
Ethiopia?If anyone has any of the missing numbers I would appreciate it.
-
If anyone has any of the missing numbers I would appreciate it.
The Swiss had an army of around 250,000 men just prior to the start of the war, and had an additional 200,000 men in support. Both France and Germany considered the Swiss to have a good professional army.
So getting back to the origianl post, at only 1 IPC, raising 2 units to defend Switzerland (considering the quality of the Swiss troops as well as the terrain), it may not be a fair representation, and sure is no deterent.
Also, if we consider the German planned invasion of WWII (Operation Tannebaum) that originaly called for 21 divisions to invade, but was reduced to 11 divisions due to the fact there were insufficent routes of invasion, the idea for limiting the number of troops that could be sent into Switzerland also makes sense.
Even in World War One, the Swiss initally prepared for an invasion (mobilizing 220,000 men to the border), so it seems making the area impassable would not be correct. The question is, should the Swiss defence be stronger then 2 units and/or have some move restrictions, or just leave it as it is OOB and if one side or the other gains an advantage so be it?
Kim
-
It profoundly changes the nature of the war. The western front owed its distinct nature to the short distance 'twixt Switzerland and the sea. One does not simply walk into Switzerland, so one has to go through the small front line which is already heavily guarded by the enemy.
I would make it worth 4 mustering 8 units. This should be enough deterrent in the early rounds, but somebody may chance it to try breaking the deadlock and outflank.
-
This is one of the first things I noticed when I set up the board to play my first game. My initial response was to make Switzerland an impassable zone but that would not be historically accurate. Hannibal made it through the alps to attack the Roman Empire on it’s home ground in ancient times so why wouldn’t a nation be able to make it through there in the 20th century. He DID lose half his elephants and many of his troops along the way and it took him months to do it BUT he did make it.
There were a few good ideas posted in this thread to make it more difficult to use the Swiss corridor but it seemed to me that they weren’t very accurate at simulating the nature of the problem. Adding a few more infantry to the Swiss army would only prevent movement through the corridor until they were defeated. I’m not sure how that makes it easier to traverse the alps in subsequent turns. Making them a strict neutral would be borrowing a rule from the G40 game and not necessarily appropriate for this game and the nature of the relationship to the rest of the neutral territories in 1914. Allowing only one unit to move through Switzerland per turn seems unrealistic, even Hitler on his worst day wouldn’t give that kind of order to his troops.
My proposed rule change is simply this;
It takes 2 turns to travel through Switzerland.This would allow a country to attack with whatever number of units it deems necessary for it’s strategy while respecting the true nature of the difficulty in passing through the Swiss corridor. The problem is not troop strength, it’s lack of of a super highway complete with turning lanes. In short, it takes longer to get through the mountains.
Example;
Germany takes Switzerland on turn 2 with 2 infantry and 2 artillery to spare. On turn 3 those units would not be able to move at all. The only thing they can do on turn 3 is defend themselves against an attack from an allied force. On turn 4 those 4 German units can move out of Switzerland one space in any direction with respect to other rules regarding movement. This rule would apply to any force moving into Switzerland for the duration of the game.The effect of the rule would make Switzerland the major speed bump that it deserves to be without making it an impassible territory which would provide historical accuracy. It would give the opposition time to move their troops into a defensive position which would’ve been the case in 1914 if an army was moving through the Swiss Alps in their direction.
-
We play with Switzerland, but make some allowance for terrain in 3 ways; by excluding tanks and planes, 1 defending inf gets hits on 1-4, and attacking inf do not get artillery bonus. Also, we include Afghanistan, Kamerun, Nigeria, and Belgian Congo in the same rule (the former rough terrain, the latter jungle terrain).
Suggested Topics
