The Great War 1914-1918: Clash of Empires

@HHFrenchRepublic12
The conceit in “East & West” is that minor powers just bond to a major power, once they become active in the war. So, what I had suggested was that France would become part of Western Europe, and the Arab League would become part of the UK, if/when they’re at war with the USSR.
It just keeps things a lot cleaner, in terms of not having to reinvent the turn order, and other stuff which might add overhead.

That is what it’s looking to be like, I’ve been hunting around to get inspiration and it looks as though, as you stated, what i want doesn’t exist. So now comes the hard work and thinking of how to design such a game. Perhaps a basic, unrefined skeleton is where I start and from there I can see if it is possible.

@phd_angel This is not the expansion set for Global War, but a stand alone game. You get the rules and setup charts when you purchase the map.

This is an update on a project I began some time ago, Axis & Allies: World at War.

The goal is to create a single, custom game map, ruleset, and playset for use in private games. In short, creating an Axis & Allies variant similar to Global War, but without the intent to mass produce or sell the product commercially. This means that I will engage a professional mapmaker to create a high-quality play mat and play aids (e.g., charts, roundels, cards, etc.).

In terms of mechanics, this will be a card-driven game like Amateurs to Arms and Mr. Madison’s War bolted onto the Axis & Allies core rules. Basically, players will draw from decks of cards that set global conditions, activate neutral nations, and let them activate units in given territories. Rather than being able to move all units every turn, players will spend Operations Points to move specific armies. Additional Operations Points can be obtained through card play, from possession of strategic resources, and by building and placing supply columns. The latter are units that move along with armies, allowing the player to activate that stack every turn for free. They may, however, be captured by the enemy.

The game will feature both territories and point-to-point movement. Possession of a given number of points within a given territory translates to ownership, which yields a production value in IPCs. The game pieces will be a mixture of plastic pieces and traditional counters.

We will use an alternate history to bring all corners of the map into play. The map is inspired by both Harry Turtledove’s Great War series and an alternate history saga known as The Feast of Eagles, which imagined a world in which Europe remained largely divided after the Wars of Religion. The major conflict in North America is between the United States and the Confederate States. In South America, Argentina squares off in a naval race with Portugal, which retains its Brazilian colony. In Europe, a Franco-Russian alliance is opposed by the British and the Austrians. Minor powers include Castille (British-allied), the Two Sicilies (French-allied), Poland (allied with Sweden), and a restored Byzantine Empire. At the onset of the twentieth century, the French also dammed the Mediterranean, flooding the Lake Chad Basin. A similar project was undertaken in the Congo. Along with the Great Lakes, both African “world lakes” are accessible by a new canal infrastructure that admits oceangoing vessels. Japan squares off in the Far East against an ascendant Russia, a China of dubious strength, and the United Netherlands, not to mention the British.

At this point, I have a notional set of units. Again, feedback would be excellent, especially by folks that are good at optimizing builds. Which proposed units are unlikely every to be built?
Axis and Allies Units.pdf

Hello.

It’s been almost a year since any information on this has been posted. I can’t find the existence of a Legion Gaming publisher. I just read all pages in this thread and am still a little confused. Forgive me if I’m asking questions already answered elsewhere.
Is this game canceled, or just on hold?
Has it been assimilated by IL’s Clash of Empires?
Should this thread still be stickied?

Thank you.

I have it, but am holding onto it for further playtesting on the set-ups.

Europe is being slightly changed in terms of the map, and there will be some minor additions to the rules.  These changes will probably be part of the map/rule package I am looking into producing.  Pacific would be released this way as well if all falls together.

Cheers

I recently got a copy of Conquest Gaming’s “A House Divided The Brothers War”.  It is an area movement game that uses miniatures and, because of the railroad movement in addition to regular movement, 6 distinct theaters (3 per side),general and event cards that modify the fighting troops abilities, is a very interesting game to play.  It is tough for the North to survive the opening rounds because of their relatively weak starting generals and troop levels, but because of the reinforcement advantage, if it can hang on the game becomes winable for it.  Another interesting and historical feature is that many of the South’s generals have good infantry, cavalry and artillery modifiers while many of the North’s generals are lesser, but all the main generals are represented so eventually the North draws Sherman, Sheridan, Thomas, Grant, etc. But, of course, the South continues to draw generals each turn so Longstreet, Stuart, Pemberton and Lee appear (Beauregard and Jackson start the game in play).  You have to provide your own pieces, the pieces from the Napoleon Risk will work, but I had enough pieces from Battle Cry to play the game.  The game is only $13 and with about $10 shipping is still are good buy for such an interesting game.

Honestly, if you play the board game for the map and pieces, then you should avoid most of the board games out there.

As far as 4 revisions in 10 years, maybe that’s a bit high, granted, but….  I can tell you a fact that in 10 years, Dell has gone through more server revisions in those same 10 years.  Does that make their products (or substitute Apple, IBM, HP, etc) any worse?  That’s the worst comment I’ve ever heard.  Not only that, but revisions are there to help make the game better.

Ok, rant off.  Talking about World at War 2005 now.  The game is ok, but unfortunately when combining the latest rules from Axis & Allies (which this is based off of), the Allies has too much of an advantage.  Especially when comparing this version with the 3rd version.  There are now factories in India and Australia for Britain to use, you can still purchase infantry off of factory sites, but at a max of 1 per land and they cost 1 IPC more, which hurts Germany a ton since they can’t keep Africa.  Then again, Britain got a bump in Africa as well with the tank defending on a 3 now and they get an extra artillery piece, so you really have to commit in Africa to take it and hold it.

The technology rolls are interesting, but kind of confusing to understand at first.

I’m actually on this forum to see if anyone has brought up house rules or variants to make the game a little bit more balanced.  I believe the Allies should win about 60-65% to keep in line with history, but this version (and the previous ones as well) gives the allies about 80% chance to win.  This is assuming average dice rolls.  We’ve played around with giving Germany super subs and Japan get fighters to start, but it didn’t help all that much.  Japan usually never has a problem and the jet fighters were just the icing on the cake.  Super subs really didn’t help Germany as much as we had thought it would.

Anyone else try to do something different with this game?