Speaking of WWI Miniatures Games…

@theveteran

Indeed. The Central Powers and winning in the game, Russia already capitulated (revolution).

@DessertFox599 said in 1914 Tournament Rules Game Play:

i only play with those rules. They are great.

Nice mate.

What are you finding the CP need for a bid?

Are you playing with the time limit?

From a simple math min/max perspective which some are intersested in, a naval strat is extremly unwise. Simple plus/minus math will tell you you need to add appr. 81 IPC worth of naval as CP in total accross the board (using the starting naval as ref) to even break even which means if you wanna “controll” something you will need to add more than the competition.
As CP you cant ever get into a building race with the allies as your starting income is so much less, but rather you need to as fast as possible close the incomecap.

Consider sz17. (I will assume the ottoman and russian navy cancel each out). Allies can after turn1 have 2 BS (France+Italy)+3Cruisers(UK+Italy+France which means AH wont be able to break even, even if the go all out navy. After turn2 the allies will have additional 1BS+Crusie (UK) in the zone and again AH wont be able to break even, even if they spent all during 2 turns. After this france plus Italy can with great ease together spend equal to AH for each turn.
So I have to ask how in hell are AH suppose to get controll over sz17?=)

I suppose you can counter and say “the allies dont counter my moves in my games” but then what is the point of argue the value of strats. I can  ask what do you think about my “attack-AH-first-as-Italy strat”, assuming AH dont defend their borders?=)

it was very impressive that you were able to take Moscow indeed. Not pressuring OE from India was a large mistake, drawing OE away from russia. Also, Italy not pressing AH and therefore drawing units away from Russia was also poor on their part. Britain was worthless, and italy was not used in an intelligent way. Nice win

The website itself was taken down. You can look on the Internet Wayback Machine, but there’s no guarantee that his thread will have been picked up.

-M_R

Kreighund never explained why this was introduced, when it appears to benefit the CPs only in limited movement through such tts. They would surely be better off being able to withdraw from them.

Haven’t ordered mine yet. I would suggest the infantry size discrepancy is either an optical illusion or perhaps a subtle attempt by Avalon to aid player’s abiity to distinguish oposing forces on a crowded board.

@ossel:

@BJCard:

Viet nam war could be made into a fun game, with helicopter rules or something like that.� The US would have superior military, but fewer units- maybe some kind of home morale system affected by US troop losses?� Would the Vietnamese/Chinese have human wave tactics?� Perhaps you could change history and fight the war like it was a war and not a police action.�

It would be hard to model a war in which the US forces never lost a significant battle, but was still forced to stop fighting.

I have a scenario I’m working on for Vietnam. It involves helicopter landings, infiltrating Vietnamese troops, and terrain difficulties. I have the map and rules pretty well done, just need to playtest it and refine the rules a bit. Also need to figure out victory conditions (probably use a morale system like you mentioned). I’d be happy to post it on this board if anyone’s interested (would that go in “House Rules,” or “Modifications?”).

FYI Guys, I’ve just posted my Vietnam ruleset and map over in “Other Variants”: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30166.0

Those of you who are interested, let me know what you think.