@Flashman:

How do you know Lucifer isn’t the real Good guy?

Look at the state of the world under the other dude.

I’m sure both think they are.

@MistuhJay:

I believe it is assumed the Zimmerman note is what is triggering American entry; under your rules, the US could plausibly be kept out of the war indefinitely. This would cause some serious balance issues…

@Grognard:

@Chacmool:

Declaring USW should be something that you as Germany really have to consider,
and has to be worth bringing the mighty US earlier than R4 into war.

I’ll go a step more realistic, the US shouldn’t be allowed to declare war until it has been hit by unrestricted sub warfare at least once, if not twice.

The Zimmermann Telegram was sent in anticipation that the resumption of unrestricted warfare would bring the US into the war anyway. The interception by the British might have brought the US in a few months earler than they would have come in with out it.

But the important thing to remember is that the note never would have been sent if the Germans were not looking to start up the unrestricted uboat campain for a second time.

@Flashman:

I solved two of the problems listed above in one swoop by using a completely different chip system:

Each power has just one stack of units in a tt:

white - 10 infantry

grey - infantry

red - artillery

dark blue - fighter

brown - tank

By mixing in all the chips from all my A&A games I just have enough. Some of the stacks are rather tall, but overall there’s much less messing about swopping chips and shifting stacks, and there’s no overcrowding on the western front; hence, less chance of knocking over stacks.

The artillery, tank and fighter sculpts are now redundant, but the game is a lot more manageable without them.

note: Harry Larris is the chap I interviewed about the game, he is not me.

Have you considered just painting some stripes down the side of the chips?  Black for armor, red for artillery ect….  Red on red would be 5 art, black on white would be 1 tank.

@Harry:

@Flashman:

This man is not me. The mighty Flash has no need for a sock puppet!

He is, quite obviously, the evil alter-ego of Axis and Allies creator and all-round hard man Larry Harris. His mission in life is to make the real Larry look intelligent and knowledgeable.

Correct. The laws of physics tell us there is matter and antimatter, protons and antiprotons, and positive charges and negative charges. This tells us that if a Larry Harris exists, then there must be a Harry Larris.

You’re just wrong about one thing. I am the good alter-ego. I design Christian themed board games that promote the ideals of charity and good works.

All villans think they are the good guys.

@Chacmool:

Declaring USW should be something that you as Germany really have to consider,
and has to be worth bringing the mighty US earlier than R4 into war.

I’ll go a step more realistic, the US shouldn’t be allowed to declare war until it has been hit by unrestricted sub warfare at least once, if not twice.

The sub rules would be better if the die roll was 1-4 in a sea territory with an Allie  port, 1-2 in an sea zone with no port and no roll if they are in a sea zone with a CP controlled port.

Also,for historical accuracy, Germany needs to be able to build about 9 sub a turn to match the number of subs they produced during the war.

SM is its own phase, so both.

Von, I agree that A&A time is abstract at best, that’s why I qualified my “about 8” months by adding “ish” onto the end of the 8. Double the fudge factor to cover my bases  :wink:

As for you Crusty, why wouldn’t you want to play a game with a turn scale of about 8ish months? It doesn’t mean you have to take that long in real time to play each turn.

And rules don’t have to reflect real world travel times for the units depicted. In fact, my post was an argument against such a thing. I started off by … lets see

@Grognard:

First off, I think Kims idea sounds like the right one.

That’s right, I started off by saying I liked Kims idea best. If you haven’t read Kims post yet, please do so at your earliest convenience.

Then I continued to my modest proposal with the express purpose of quieting thous who were giving Larry a hard time.
I know, I know
@Grognard:

As for you that are ragging on the MOD Larry put forward….

I think a sense of scale might dispel some of the misconceptions that are running rampant.

and concluding with

@Grognard:

So, 20 sea zones a turn combat movement for ships anyone?
Or all ground units being able to march 10 territories before engaging in combat?

No, I didn’t think anyone would.

Might have given you the idea I was advocating increasing movement rates by an order of magnitude, but I was subtly advocating against it.

Bwaaa Haaa Haaa Haaa, a lurker no more! :evil:

I’ve been looking at the boards and finally decided to comment on some of the topics.

First off, I think Kims idea sounds like the right one.

As for you that are ragging on the MOD Larry put forward….

I think a sense of scale might dispel some of the misconceptions that are running rampant.

First the duration of one turn is about 8ish months. I base this on the rules concerning the introduction of tanks, the soonest the Russian revolution can start and the turn the US gets activated.

So, what can you do in 8 months? In 1812 Napoleon and his army marched from what was then the Duchy of Warsaw to Moscow, fought some battles along the way, took Moscow, were told to shove off in the following peace talks, started the march back home with starving troops, bad weather and the Russians being generally poor hosts. The last French troops left Russian soil less than 5 months after the main body of the Army entered Russian soil back in the summer. Lets see,  over 3 months left in the turn… How about the army march back to Paris. The French could march 500 miles in forty days, so if they had been in good shape, this would have been plausible. This would bring the total territories covered by the army in one turn to 10. All this done with marching songs and shoe leather. No site to site beaming, no bikes on steroids, no warp drive, no SRM.
Think this was a one-off? In 1813 the 104th Regiment left Fredericton and arrived in Kingston about 2 months later. Well over 600 miles in a Canadian winter, with a 2 week stop in Quebec city.

As for a move of 5 for all sea units… The submarine Deutschland made the trip from Bremerhaven to Baltimore in 2 weeks. That’s 6 sea zones. If you extend that out to 8 months you get 96 sea zones per turn. Yikes! But this wasn’t a combat mission and you would have to add in time for fuelling and stuff.

So, how about s surface ship instead? The SMS Wolf left Kiel on 30 November 1916 and returned home on 24 February 1918. this was a touch under 15 months, so call it about two turns. Total sea zones travelled? Well, lets see, she departed Kiel and headed north of Scotland and then took a left. She then took another left at the Cape of Good Hope and headed up to India to lay mines outside of two ports. Then headed through the waters of South Asia to the waters of Australia and New Zealand. She sunk 37 vessels(two of which were warships) for a total of 110,000 tons. And, for good measure,  she returned home with 467 POWs and many tons of valuable loot. But, just how many sea zones did she travel in two game turns, all the while fighting battle after battle? Lets see, 13 gets her to India, at which point they are off the map, lets say another 7 for off map movement for a total of 20 sea zones there and assume another 20 for the return trip.

So, 20 sea zones a turn combat movement for ships anyone?
Or all ground units being able to march 10 territories before engaging in combat?

No, I didn’t think anyone would.

The rule Larry suggested is unrealistic, but not in the way you think. And it isn’t SRM.