Opening the door for more World War One based games? Your opinion

@nishav

You def need to give the tournament rules a run. Play for 6 full rounds and then check it who the economic and winner is. If Entente still win, try the CP +12 and play some more.

@DoManMacgee and I can give u idea for bid placement depending on starting strat and where CP are failing you.

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?=)

I envisioned calvary working like this.

Attack at a 2
Move at a 2
Defend at a 3 (If on a territory containing defending infantry)
Defend at a 2 otherwise.

Cavalry played a minor role during the entire war. (Lawrence of Arabia for example)

Cavalry would have one other feature. They alone would be able to leave a contested zone and attack an empty adjacent enemy controlled territory.

By turn 4 they would no longer allowed to be built.

I do agree the game is great as is.

Summary of my proposals regarding aircraft:

There is only one round of air to air combat.

The side with the most surviving aircraft wins air superiority.

Every power gets a fighter in their capital to begin with; France gets a 2nd in Lorraine and Germany a 2nd in Munich (or a Zeppelin).

Fighters starting on the board are rated only 1* for combat. Thereafter newly purchased units go up to 2, 3 & 4 on each successive turn. Price is the same, old units remain at their original level.

Generally level equals combat rating and movement, though all planes can move 2 spaces minimum.

Since planes are likely to survive longer, consider increasing price to 8 IPC.

Planes can now conduct SBR against enemy production centres; i.e. the eight power capitals plus India & Munich.

To conduct SBR, a plane must take off from and land in the same tt. This can be contested.

My preference is for bombing to effect enemy morale, but it could be adapted to simply reduce enemy IPCs.

Enemy planes based in the target region can intercept and force air to air combat with the bomber(s) under the same rules as standard dogfights.

Thus, in the early war bombing is not feasible; but it comes into its own when  level 4 machines become available.

This also emphasizes the importance of certain intermediate tts; note the position of Alsace (between Paris and Munich), Venice (2 spaces from Rome, Vienna & Munich), Poland (Berlin-Vienna-Moscow), Romania (Vienna-Constantinople-Moscow) & Mesopotamia (Constantinople-Bombay). The importance of Belgium as a base for bombing London is obvious.

It could even be considered that starting units have a rating of 0, since these represent unarmed scouts. They would still count for air supremacy but without making a combat roll.

The tanks don’t really get rolling like you said until turns 7-9, but that is when you are going to need them. Our last game the CP won was around 16 turns, so got lots of use of the tanks.

Kim

OK after playing the game a few times I have to say this is my least favorite AA game to date.

I agree with many others it is near impossible for the Central Powers to win, the first game we played I won but we where still new to the game.

The Russian Revolution oob was just broken, now it has been fixed but I still hate the idea that if the Russian Revolution is triggered the CP lose one of the victories cities need to win the game.  As if it’s not hard enough for the Central Powers.

The debate over contested territories and moving out of, is just silly.  The first game we played this rule wrong, but the idea that you cannot leave a contested battle into a territory that you already have units in is beyond stupid.  The idea I couldn’t leave a contested zone into an allies is bad, but not being able to move into territory with my own army unless I own the territory.  Shows a easy way out when writing the rules in my opinion.

Cruisers are next to useless in this game.  The extra movement of 1 does not make it worth buying them, with battleships being so cheap.

Obviously many rules where overlooked when first released such as
US neutral rules and what they can or cannot do  (many of these things are not in the OOB rules as written)
US transports before they are at war.
I also notice when many of these things where questioned the official response came back with what seemed like a bit of attitude at people pointing out these errors and that truly turned me off.  It is not the players fault the rules are unclear or just out right do not say something cannot be done.  There is no reason to blame the players for pointing out these faults in the rules.

If I were Germany I’d feel completely cheated by the Revolution. UNLESS it created a new Bolshevik power friendly to the Central powers…

@ossel:

I find it interesting that none of the games posted on this forum have ended with the victory conditions that are stated in the rules…which doesn’t really surprise me due to the nature of the war, but I kind of wish there had been more of a design consideration for alternate game endings, besides ‘we don’t feel like playing anymore.’

Flashman, remember what Sun Tzu said:

Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.

I think the Allies are giving up too soon as well, but taking Moscow is a major morale victory for the CP’s, and it seems to be very effective.

[Edit]: I guess revolution was triggered in this game, but the effect is similar.