Was anything being planned for Axis and Allies before this? No. This isn’t taking the place of anything. It isn’t preventing something else from coming out. If anything, the failure of this game might be taken as a sign that the brand is dead more than anything else. I would much rather have preferred another historical game but I am going to withhold judgment until we hear more about it.

Thank you. And this is also the case when returning?

So we engaged in a rather spirited debate over what I assumed was a simple rule. Aircraft movement: Does it take one of it’s allotted moves to leave or land on a carrier or land, or does it and adjacent sea zone all count? Example: Fighter from Japan takes off. Does its first of four movement come in sea zone 6, or say sea zone 17?

Before we start, a word on the last game of 1914 as it relates to a previous house rule- we changed the Neutral Power House Rule to 1-3 join the invading alliance and 4-6 mobilize to resist, and from there used the house rule. It worked well. Also in this game- German player moved all of his forces into one giant murderball and attacked west, act shocked when it failed to produce results there and left his nation open and Russia alive. Only astute AHUN play and marvelous results from the Ottoman Empire stopped it from being a crushing Entente victory.

So after our last game, history has been changed wildly but not in the conventional manner. The Central Powers did not win- nor did the Entente. While the Entente was about to turn the tide for good, victory was less than assured and would come only after many years more of terrible bloodshed. Meanwhile, Central Power leadership realizes that victory is now unlikely- the Russians are still in this, Italy is still in this, and every possible Allied move is still in play. AH Empire and the Ottomans approach the Germans and tell them they are going to approach the Entente for peace terms. After all, despite heavy losses, both nations have more territory than before and are in a better position than they began, but they know defeat is only a matter of time. Germany is outraged, but accepts. The Entente powers accept because they don’t see victory as an assured thing and even if they do, it is now 1925 and victory can only come on the heels of Europe being utterly decimated.

Results? German colonial possessions taken by France, who also gained Alsace.
The Americans actually invaded Spain and took its possessions as well.
The United Kingdom is actually weakened by a resurgent Ottoman Empire and its promises of independence to most colonies and commonwealth members. It counts them amongst its allies, but it doesn’t have the same power anymore.
Italy was never on the offensive but as part of the peace treaty gained Albania and sees the war as a success, having repelled the AH Empire’s advances (due in no small part to France).
The Ottoman Empire is spreading across the Middle East and North Africa mostly unchecked.
Russia does not undergo a revolution until after the war is over, and when we hit 1940 it is still ongoing.
Germany has been forced to restructure and industrialize, but is smaller than it was before.
The Austrian-Hungarian Empire has grown and thanks to promises of independence and commonwealth with balkan states has been able to create an era of relative peace and unity in its borders, as well as the borders of its commonwealth.

A generation passes and war strikes again. It will be played on the 1914 map but with some territorial changes as well as expansion (using dry erase to carve up regions where needed, such as dividing several Russian territories into many more).

The questions are:
1- What are the alliances? We’ve kicked around more than a few ideas. With nine factions- White Russia vs Red Russia included- we’ve even explored 3v3v3.
2- What new territories should be created?
3- We will be using the units from the Global game, but for units present in both, what rules should be used? Contested with higher values(1914) or obliteration in combat with lower values(others)?

Who should play them? For 1914 my idea was that whoever takes control of that nation when they are being attacked would use them right after his main nation’s turn. IE; Persia is part of the CP. Ottoman player controlled it during the invasion. After the Ottoman turn, it is Persia’s turn.

In this set up, the Ottoman player would play Persia’s turn.

That was the general idea I was agreeing with. For more information, this happened because the French in 1914 attacked Spain and lost. Spain joined the Central Powers and after the French attack…there was nothing in any French territory that bordered Spain. We all looked at each other and went, “…why would Spain not at the very last gobble up Portugal and some of southern France as a response? Why would Germany and the other powers not promise Spain everything short of a lap dance by the Kaiser’s wife to jump in and absolutely ruin France’s strategy?”

Even the threat of a Spanish attack could be enough since France would end up sending forces down. With those undefended territories, even one turn of Spanish domination could be a major CP strategic coup. On the other hand, a nation like Greece might not have a great chance at surviving but if it behooved the Allies to send troops from Africa or even Italy to aid them when they are invaded, maybe that gives them a chance to open up a new front. It relieves a little pressure from the Ottomans and even the AHuns initially, with the Allied gambit either failing and weakening them in another front or working and causing chaos for the CP. The Nordic countries actually matter.

Persia becomes a more interesting gambit. In our game, the UK player just attacked into Persia. He barely won after the Ottomans intervened. If one die had gone differently, Persia would have survived as a CP power and had the ability to hammer India.

The system isn’t perfect, of course. Ethiopia shouldn’t become an African superpower because Italy fails to take it, but it should have something. So for 1914, maybe European neutrals and Persia get 8 IPC+territories, Ethiopia gets 5 IPC+territories, and Afghanistan gets 3 IPC+territories? A small sheet would be enough and it isn’t too much math hammer, methinks. And if that is too complex, a flat across the board IPC rate works.

Who should play them? For 1914 my idea was that whoever takes control of that nation when they are being attacked would use them right after his main nation’s turn. IE; Persia is part of the CP. Ottoman player controlled it during the invasion. After the Ottoman turn, it is Persia’s turn.

As for WWII Axis and Allies games, 6 and 3 IPC makes sense.

I just posted this in the 1914 forum, then I saw this. However I believe this is the forum suited for the idea. I would message the mods but their profiles indicate they’ve been gone for a while. I apologize for my faux paus.

Played our first game of 1914 tonight and had a blast. Afterwards, we brainstormed some additional house rules (because gamers, I suppose), and one stuck out. Before I say this, let me note this is a very casual crowd.

Rule: A neutral minor power when attacked by one faction or the other sides with the one that did not attack it. If it is able to repel the invasion, it becomes a fully functioning member of the alliance it joined. It has IPCs, builds units, deploys them, and attacks.

Cause: Almost no reason not to attack some of these nations. Defeat means nothing- the scale of units involved means a small handful of units lost is not a true blow. The potential IPC gain outweighs the risk in all but a few instances. By making neutral powers a bigger threat, hopefully players will only attack those they deem important to a war winning strategy and not just as random acts of violence for IPC gain. This can lead to silliness with Switzerland and the Nordic countries along with Spain among others.

Mechanics: New factions get 6/8 IPCs plus whatever IPC total is on their territories. From this point we had some disagreement:
1- They are a fully active faction with no restrictions.
2- They can only attack the faction that attacked them and their territories.
3- They can only counter attack into the territories that the attack against them was launched

Played our first game of 1914 tonight and had a blast. Afterwards, we brainstormed some additional house rules (because gamers, I suppose), and one stuck out. Before I say this, let me note this is a very casual crowd.

Rule: A neutral minor power when attacked by one faction or the other sides with the one that did not attack it. If it is able to repel the invasion, it becomes a fully functioning member of the alliance it joined. It has IPCs, builds units, deploys them, and attacks.

Cause: Almost no reason not to attack some of these nations. Defeat means nothing- the scale of units involved means a small handful of units lost is not a true blow. The potential IPC gain outweighs the risk in all but a few instances. By making neutral powers a bigger threat, hopefully players will only attack those they deem important to a war winning strategy and not just as random acts of violence for IPC gain. This can lead to silliness with Switzerland and the Nordic countries along with Spain among others.

Mechanics: New factions get 6/8 IPCs plus whatever IPC total is on their territories. From this point we had some disagreement:
1- They are a fully active faction with no restrictions.
2- They can only attack the faction that attacked them and their territories.
3- They can only counter attack into the territories that the attack against them was launched

––
I posted this in the 1914 forum, then I saw the House Rules forum.  I believe that is the forum suited for the idea. I would message the mods to move this thread but their profiles indicate they’ve been gone for a while. I apologize for my faux paus.