The Great War 1914-1918: Clash of Empires

@General-Day Apologies for the delay (we’ve been busy with holiday activities). We are fine sending you the map and rules for the game, with the obvious proviso that we retain all copyrights to them. Please email us at pmfproductionscontact@gmail.com and we can send you the map and rules. We hope you and your friend will find them helpful and we’ll be interested in any feedback you have!

@ossel:

@1Bean432:

Are we talking full-fledged rule changes or are we just changing the map around?

This particular thread is devoted to SIMPLE map changes (moving a border here or there) in order to make the OOB map more accurate to the actual borders at the time. No rules changes.

Alrighty.

The size of Tunsia, Morroco, Gold coast, and Togoland should be increased.

Angola should connect to Kamerun. I know its historically accurate the way it is now, but it just feels so strange to have two territorys so close to each other, but have to spend an entire turn in Belgian Congo.

Munich border with Switzerland should be a bit more obvious.

Another SZ that splits up SZ 17. This new SZ is connected to Sicily, Naples, Rome, Tuscany, Piedmont, Sardinia, SZ 16, and the other SZ 17. This new SZ houses all of the Italian navy.

Here’s a little “mini-game” I developed years ago, so I figured I would post it here. It plays pretty well in my experience. Let me know your results if you decide to play it. Also, feel free to ask me about anything you need clarification on.

It is based off of E&W, but as the title suggests, you can use Imp Games’ East & West map or Xeno Games’ World at War; the territories, IPC values, and SZs used in the game are identical on both maps, you just need to swap ownership.

Enjoy!
Jihad.JPG
Jihad.doc

WW2 in Europe/ Europe at war Questions and suggestions

So after having read the rule book and getting a feel for the game and its mechanics, I’m now ready to play a more serious (solo) game. However, I do still have a fairly large number of questions:

1.) Does attacking artillery also fire in the shore bombardment step? The rules suggest that it does as it states: “artillery that fired in step 2 cannot fire now” or something along those lines (land combat sequence).

Mt 2cts: I suggest renaming “shore bombardment” into “opening fire” when it comes to land combat. I’d also go for giving both sides a choice: Either fire your artillery in the opening fire step and any casualties caused are removed immediately (firing side’s choice on a roll of “1”) or attack/ defend during each round of normal combat along with other units. In this case any casualties caused are always the owning player’s choice.

2.) I still don’t really get that under some units it is stated that on die rolls of “2” they can choose which unit is hit, but then strangely enough it goes on to say that this is always the owning player’s choice. What exactly does the  firing player get to choose then?!

My 2 cts: allow the firing player to choose the target rather than the owning player (and on a 3 or 4 in case of a tactical bomber, for instance, the owning player decides.

3.) Can the Russians attack the lone Polish infantry on their side of the demarcation line in Fall ‘39? The rules say they may move into the areas designated to them, but it doesn’t say anything about attacking.

My 2 cts: Allow it! This is also what happened historically!

4.) Illustration Page 9 advanced rules: Assuming Belgium is being attacked here for the first time and is therefore suffering from the penalties related to “surprise attack”, how can they possibly reinforce Liege from Brussels as the rules state that units suffering from surprise attack may not move, neither in the movement phase nor in the blitzkrieg phase. Or is this done by “British” units (as the Belgians are now represented by British units after having been attacked) using British redeployment points? From the example I certainly don’t get that impression…I assume this is a faulty illustration??

5.) Does the UK collect money from the neutral territories whose forces it represents? I guess not, but just wanted to make sure…

6.) Do neutrals get to build any forces if they are not defeated at the end of a turn?

My 2 cts: I’d allow them to build units up to the value of the territories they still control, as long as they are still in possession of their capital (to be placed in box 1)
7.) Can ships belonging to belligerent nations pass through ports [with ships in them] belonging to neutral powers? (I.e. French and British ships, for example, while not yet at war with Italy could pass through the sea zone containing the port of Tripoli or French ships could trace a convoy through the sea zone containing the port of Barcelona).

My 2 cts: I’d leave it to the nations controlling the port; they can either allow it or deny it. A denial would not be a declaration of war!

8.) Please emphasize in the rules that if the Axis attacks either the USA or the USSR prior to Spring 1942 both can only receive up to 25% of their income. This is a bit vague.

9.) Why do fighters have such a low combat value when it comes to attacking ground units? (and why such a high one while attacking other air units)?

10.) If I understand it correctly the “4” combat value of fighters is only used in air to air combat? (I.e. escorts vs interceptors and when air units ONLY meet in a certain territory? (for instance in order to pin enemy air units there?)

11.) Was an air-to-air combat phase deliberately left out of the land combat sequence? It would make sense to me if attacking and defending aircraft would first engage one another and that any surviving fighters and tactical bombers (from both sides) would then  get to make a(n) (pre-emptive) attack against an enemy ground unit of their choice.

12.) Do naval units exercise sea control while still neutral? (i.e. would Italian naval units and tac bombers  -that are still neutral in 1939- inflict movement penalties on e.g. a British convoy?

My 2 cts: No. Not until they are at war with one another do such penalties apply

13.) While a (major) nation  is neutral, does it receive supply automatically or does a convoy still need to be established to receive supplies from overseas?

14.) Is it possible for naval units of befriended nations to ever share a port together at the end of a turn? (E.g. British ships in a French port; when dropping off transported units the rules state a transport must return to its port of origin, so e.g. a British transport transporting a unit to Brest would have to return to Bristol rather than remaining in Brest, right?)

15.) The text underneath “Minor flag space” differs significantly between the basic and advanced rules. Is this intentional? For example, in the basic rules it says that units located in a minor flag space only suffer the movement penalty in case of a surprise attack, but this is not listed in the advanced rules.

16.) Why does Italy receive money from the start for Tripoli while the UK doesn’t for its African territories? Because the UK is at war and Italy is still neutral?

17.) Are British and French naval units also bound by the rules governing surprise attack in Fall ’39? If so, this seems like the time for the Germans to attack e.g. Scapa flow!! If so, would the port bonus apply regardless?

18.) It took me a long time before I got the air redeployment example. Air units can only land/refuel/rebase on “factory spaces”, right? And not on NRZ’s? I take it they can also refuel on carriers?

19.) Can air units with a movement value ever fly from the US to Britain or is the only way to do this by means of transporting them by ship? (refueling on Iceland still doesn’t give them enough movement points).

20.) The US starts with $20, however its income is $50 (1/4 of 200). Is this correct? Or do they get to spend $20 on their first turn and afterwards $50? If I’m not mistaken neutral countries do not get to actually buy and place units until activated?(But they do get them to advance up the build boxes?)

21.) How is a convoy set up to the Pacific holding box? (simply to the “picture”?)

22.) What happens when a convoy needs to spend more than 10 mp’s? Does this then count against [naval] rp’s? Do rp’s then need to be saved from the redeployment phase?

Table Tactics used to have available the Central Powers units, which if you combined them with say the infantry figures and artillery from Attack, you could pretty much have what you needed for a WW1 land game, and the naval units, less carriers, would cover the naval aspect.  You could pretty much eliminate the Asian aspect as that lasted a very short time.  You did have the Emden raiding in the Indian Ocean and Von Spee’s squadron sailing across the Pacific, sinking Cradock’s two cruisers, Good Hope and Monmouth, and then attacking the Falklands, where 4 our of 5 of his cruisers were sunk in December of 1914.  Aside from those naval actions, you do not have much at all.

You would need the Mid East and Africa for those campaigns, and Lettow-Vorbeck was still fighting in November of 1918, and you cannot pass up the Arab Revolt and Allenby’s campaigns in the Mid East, nor Gallipoli.  The current Europe 1940 board would be about right, reset to 1914. Another option for a start would be the basic Attack Game board covering Europe and the Americas, and then redraw the boundaries.

I am talking to Table Tactics about doing some more WW1 tanks besides the Mark II that they have: the French Renault, maybe a British Whippet as a later war tank, the German A7V, and a Rolls-Royce armoured car for the Mid East.  Given the small size of most of your WW1 fighters, you probably would want to use 1/300 scale for the fighters, rather than 1/600.  I am checking with another company on Zeppelins, and they already do a nice blimp.  Get a mix of 1/2400 scale and 1/4800 scale WW1 ships, and you have the basis for a prototype.

For Countries in the Game, you have the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Ottoman Empire on one side, and the British Empire, France, Italy, and a Russian/US player.  The US comes in with either the Russian Revolution or the use by Germany of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare.  I have thought of a couple of ways to trigger the Russian Revolution, with the option of preventing it if the Ottomans are knocked out soon enough.  Hard to say how to handle the Balkans, as Serbia has a claim to be in the game somehow, unless they are controlled by the Russian player until knocked out of the war.

There should be some nice naval actions between the German and UK, and the Italians, the Austrians, the French and the UK in the Med, with some chance for action in the Baltic and the Black Sea.  Not sure how to handle the stalemate on the Western Front as yet.  However, it is only 2011, so there is time yet.

yah, with three diffrent idealogies competing for contol, that would be cool, but i was going for a game that was a little less black and white

leaders of arab countires are more often allied with western powers than with Islam, Russia and China are not on the best terms either, and in this game i am going to make it possible for Russia and China to have full scale war with each other. Also its not like the US, UK, and France are able to agree on eyerthing either. I think it is best if they are seperate powers.

sure their will still be too sides, NATO, headed by the US, and the Warsaw Pact, headed by the Soveits. but the alliances are not set.
In fact at the start of the game all countries should still be at peace. each power can either buy NATO or WARSAW Pact vicotry points with 10 IPCs, of course doing that lowers the effectiveness of their armies the next turn, and so should only do this when they are not expecting attack

THe US and USSR are the only countries that start out active, If  US/UK/France are attack all of those countries can become active, of course I am going to have diplomacy rolling that can weaken or change the NATO alliance

China, and India are different. You can gain control of them diplomaticly or you can attack them to makes them active. if you attack one, the other becomes contoled by your alliance

The diplomacy thing will be clearer later, I also might make diffrent national objectives for each contry so that when you have more than two players, diplomacy can be represented by people instead of dice rolls.

catpoop? interesting name….

I had IB before it was officialy released in stores. I don’t want to upset you anyway, but it is a load of bugs, and virtualy un-playable online.
This was one of the typical scams by hasbro before they went belly-up.