Larry posted this on his site yesterday. Latest clarification to the 2 move concept.

How about this…

All land units (infantry, artillery, and tanks) can move up to two territories. They can move into friendly territories to reinforce them, contested territories to battle for them, or hostile or neutral territories to attack them.

Land units that begin their turn in friendly territories can move up to two territories, but they must end their movement if and when they enter a contested territory. However, they may not move into a hostile or neutral territory unless they began the turn already adjacent to such a territory. In other words, they may move only one space to enter hostile or neutral territories. Such land units can also be moved by transport, in which case they may either be transported to any territory within range or remain at sea.

Land units that are moved out of a contested territory can only be moved to an adjacent territory. The adjacent territory being moved into must have been controlled by the moving player at the beginning of his turn or contained units belonging to him. They can also be moved by transport, in which case they may either be transported to a territory within range that meets those same requirements or remain at sea.

(if you think this was well written you can thank Krieghund)

Kim

@Tavenier:

I see. I know transports can be handy for Germany. Forcing England to keep an eye on an invasion, invading Russia, invading Scandinavia and fast move your units. But still it seems like a too big of an investment that you just can’t spare.
I hope you can get the time to write about it!

Yeah, the cost is a big issue and taking the neutrals helps with that.

@Texas:

I believe the basic line of thought is, the sooner Russia loses units, the sooner they are eliminated from the game.  Making a stand in Poland causes Russia to begin losing units turn 1, not to mention Germany has a pretty short supply line there.  Russia will lose its units on the defensive anyway, but if you can delay it until turn 3, 4, 5… the longer they will be around.

Good post this is very true

AH stacks in Galatia AH1 and attacks Romania with whatever can get there but cannot get to Galatia. Also attack Serbia obviously and I think you have to hold off on Venice till AH2 or so
Russia is more important than Italy, especially early on

Hypothetical question: If the attack resolution rules for 1914 were the same as the other A&A games, which current first moves would you change and why…for example, I would change my opening moves by AH to build up forces to attack Italy first and just build up a force in Galicia rather than attack Venice and Poland…I would still have to attack Serbia, but I would hold off on Albania…

That’s the nicest thing anyone’s ever said about me.  :-D

@incitefool:

I want to sign up for Flash fan club.

I think that he is a political laxative.

@knp7765:

Strangely enough, it looks like the planes are closer in color than the ships are. Or maybe it’s just the lighting.

It’s probably the lighting.  I moved my table around in some of the shots to get direct sunlight on the sculpts, to see if this would affect how the colours looked relative to each other.

My point was that the review overall, based on the comments I have seen, would have been much lower had people actually been rating the actual game rather than the game as it does not exist except in their own minds with the changes each wants to personally see.

I found that moving all the German units into Belgian Congo is a very effective strategy. It forces the Allies to group up and attack you which either results in their complete annihilation or leaves them so weak that the Ottomans will just storm the whole continent with minimal effort

What do you think about possibly pulling the two German subs back to SZ 4?  First, they wouldn’t have to dodge 2 mine rolls (and Germany has enough to kill Britain’s home fleet anyway). Second, you’re set up to make a joint attack on SZ 8 turn two if Britain should try to drop a fleet. A G1 build of a BB in SZ would help (a battleship could likely survive 2a mine rolls on its way to SZ 8).

I haven’t tried this yet, but it might help a Paris or Bust strategy (preventing British reinforcements to France).

@Hitlers:

I’m also surprised that German East Africa only gets 1 infantry given that this incredible b��t��d was never defeated.

(link snip)

Amazing person and an amazing field commander. Truly the end of an era in military leadership.

I got mine from Meeplemart.  $78.95 plus $10 shipping and plus taxes.  they ship anywhere in Canada ranging from 10 to 25 dollars.  Hope this helps.

Loads on US Amazon, none over here.

http://www.amazon.com/50-Mini-Poker-Chips-White/dp/B001NH41VI

So one of the issues here is that a player can leave a single infantry in a contested territory as a rear guard, holding up the advance of, say, 20 infantry and 10 artillery for an entire turn.  Well, here’s a possibility:

If combat takes place in a contested territory, and the player whose turn it is scores enough hits to kill each defending unit at least 3 times, that player can advance any or all of his victorious units into a new enemy controlled territory, initiating a new combat.

It does make them neutral and off limits…
The original rule allowed for the allies to be in Russian territories, but the new rule is that russia gives up NON-ORIGINAL territories. Its ORIGINAL territories that are in Russian control become off limits to everyone except for the territories that are contested with the Central Powers.

I agree. Larry isn’t trying to send us a message, this just wasn’t playtested enough. No way was the outcome of WW1 inevitable. Either side could have won the whole time.

@Flashman:

As long as you have infantry to absorb hits on counter attacks, tanks will repay this by deflecting hits on your next turn.

One possible strategy is to build a stack of French tanks, attack with them, then reinforce the area next turn with British infantry.

But see tanks primarily as a means of breaking through a defender who cannot afford to hit back. They’re a war finishing weapon once you have the upper hand economically.

+1. Good post!!

@oztea:

Replace the French Atlantic battleship with a cruiser, take away one of their transports.
Give the Germans a transport so Russia can’t be as aggressive.

This is what I would do w/French BB anyway, from what I’ve recently read the focus of the French navy in 1914 was in the Med, because they feared an Austria/Italian alliance (yeah, I know the game starts w/Italy on the allies side, but the bulk of the French fleet was still in the Med). The French had several cruisers/destroyers off the Atlantic coast/English Channel supplementing the British navy, but the bulk of their fleet (including all their biggest guns) was in the Med. Plus they didn’t have more big ships then the Germans, so this is a good move IMO. I think the French Med BB will venture out to the Atlantic more times then not to bolster the UK fleet rebuild. The Med would still be really rough on the CP, but I think it is intended to be that way.

Link showing where the French fleet was, and its goals in 1914
http://www.naval-history.net/WW1NavyFrench.htm

If you make the French Atlantic BB a cruiser (this should happen), the Germans get a 3rd option/target and could attempt to sink the French Atlantic fleet instead of the Canadian fleet. I think you would probably remove the French Atlantic transport as well leaving the 2 French Med transports (the Med is where the French had the most transport ability, because the bulk of its fleet was there to escort). I don’t think you want the French to end up with just 1 transport (still need to pick up the Portuguese). So that leaves the French Atlantic fleet with just a cruiser, still making the Canadian fleet the Germans second target (after the UK home fleet), which is good for the game IMO.

As far as the German transport, I think that should wait for now. I’m not sure the Germans should have the option to make landings in northern Russia, or Scotland (on the first turn). There’s nothing to counter it w/only a single inf able to counter attack in those territories.

An earlier post suggested an Austrian sub be added to the set up (I too was leaning that way). I changed my mind based on what I read, the Austrians didn’t have many subs. In 1915 the Germans had subs delivered to the Adriatic and sailed under the Austrian flag, but had German commanders (Germany wasn’t yet at war w/Italy). Being this takes place after the game starts (and I know Italy starts the game already at war), I think the Austrians shouldn’t get a sub at set-up (if they want one, build one), because it would give them attack capabilities from the get go they didn’t have as far as game terms. The Austrian navy was a fleet in being, and their big ships didn’t leave port (was a defensive deterrent, as the game shows w/mines etc…). This plus an Austrian sub could sneak under the Italian fleet and hit the UK cruiser/transport in sz 19 so it would have to be moved, or boosted (and boosted wouldn’t be good for the CP).

Edit:
Maybe place a German sub with the Austrian navy, as this would only bolster their defense, but not attack capabilities. Being subs can move through enemy fleets w/o stopping, maybe this would be of some help down there (like slithering over to the Turk fleet)? You would still have the problem w/UK Egyptian fleet (as above)

So at this time I would be against an Austrian sub, and/or a German transport added at set-up, but would definitely be on board with reducing the French Atlantic BB to a cruiser, and removing the Atlantic transport as well (leaving just a French cruiser in sz15 at set-up). This would give the CP somewhat of a chance if they started building navy, or a better chance to control either the Atlantic, or possibly the Med for at least a short period of time (and would also be cool to test).

Edit: Maybe also look at a German sub placed w/Austrian fleet at set-up? But now you would have to chip subs at set-up LOL, unless you also removed one of the starting Germans Atlantic subs too, and then there’s the UK Egyptian fleet (German sub could take a shot at it) .

It slows down US shuck to Europe too much, but it does help get those Canadians across when the UK is shucking its transport fleet between Picardy-London-Karelia.

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.

@Koningstiger:

When exactly did the Americans enter WW 1? Wasn’t that 1917? In game terms they enter on round 4. War should be almost over by then following the same logic, haha…

Well, in the real war, the Germans looked at their watch, saw it was 4 o’clock in the morning, saw stacks of Brit, French, and US tanks in France, and did what half of the players I read about do….gave up  :-D

I’ve found if one side or another wants to put in the time, turn 4-5 is not late enough to determine the end result of the game, especially if one side (cough, CP, cough) is able to refocus to one front instead of two.