Why is 1914 the most expensive version of A&A

Since WW1 with standard rules is considered a positional slog, I don’t think that adding zombies to the mix is going to make the game more dynamic. Its going to create an even more stagnated wall of positional battle. Also, territory control is quite different than the other editions so zombies would have to be added into that mix and perhaps you could do whoever has the most units controls?

The unit pallette is also smaller, which means the tech and interaction between the units and zombies would have to be fixed on a unit by unit basis (planes dont attack zombies, for example, because they dont attack anything).

On a side note: the 2 movement rule seems to better the central powers on the Eastern front but might allow the allies to put pressure on the Germans right away

It’s actually the other way around. Once you have played a few games you’ll see.

Kim

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.

@AlphaKappa:

Does 1914 Italy orange = A&A 1940 Japan orange?
What about USA, USSR? Are those the same? (because it looks to me like they’re different shades, but it’s a bit difficult to tell)
Does anybody know yet?  I just can’t wait until release! I’ve gotta knowÂ

I’ve posted some comparative pictures here:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30440.0

@Shakespeare:

Exactly how did the convoy rules work in Axis Allies Europe?

Weren’t there convoy boxes all over the North Atlantic?

Couldn’t we apply them here?

There were “Convoy territories” for lack of a better term that could be denied by German Subs that went through them.

@The-Janus said in Playable Nations in 1914:

defensive

Actually The King of Greece was married to the Kaiser’s sister and was more inclined to support the central powers. It was only due to a allied supported civil war that pushed Greece over to the Allies.