Nice job. I wish my wife would let me buy it, haha. I think the beer is necessary for playing AnA!
Playable Nations in 1914
-
This goes back in the trash can…
uote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pmIt is FIXED UNLESS THE AXIS start it early. Those allies don’t have the opportunity to start early. One side determines their fate, not both. It is not complicated.
Do you realize you used the world “unless?” If something is X unless Y, and Y happens (which it does almost every game), then it is not X!
LOL. The Russians and Americans cannot get into the war against the Euro-Axis UNLESS the Euro- Axis CHOOSE TO ATTACK EARLY. When will you admit that point?
Sure, I will I admit that point. But � that is neither here or there because:
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
An open system would allow both sides to enter at ANY TIME, without restrictions.I have never said anything about it being a open system. It has some restrictions, and has some variability. POWERS DO NOT START WAR AGAINST OTHER POWERS THE EXACT SAME TURNS EVERY SINGLE GAME. IT VARIES. THAT IS VARIABLE ENTRY. You ignored my clear questions getting to that point. What turn do Germany and USSR go to war in Global 1940? It depends. Therefore it is not fixed. It is variable.
Since you don’t know how to use a dictionary here you go:
A few definitions (definitions are statements describing the meaning of a word) of “fixed” from dictionary.com
definitely and permanently placed
not fluctuating or varying; definitesynonyms: constant, steady, unvarying, unwavering, firm.
Now for variable:
apt or liable to vary or change; changeable
capable of being varied or changedHmm, when does Japan go to war against the USA? When do Germany and Russia go to war? It is capable of being varied or changed. It is not definitely and permanently placed. It is VARIABLE, not fixed.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Because the game Im talking about is another game with a 5 x 4 map and 32 different sculpts. If you actually participated in these threads earlier you might have figured that out ( or not). I am telling you what our experiences were after playing with this game since 2005. We tried different entry systems, everything. It could not balance.Ah there it is. The fact that you have been around longer=you know more. Logical fallacy to the max. You must have heard what they say about those who talk the most… Are you saying that you and this group tried every possible scenario with a variable entry syste that was very similar to mine (or identical) and it was definititively proven to be hopeless to balance. I look forward to seeing these detailed findings. Please point me to them.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
IN the Great War example, we set the fixed date where you can start rolling for collapse. If the game didn’t have that, it also would be busted.Prove it. Seriously, you say that, but where is any evidence? Why is a system that requires multiple turns of cumulative events automatically “busted”?
Get time machine go back to about 2007, fly to Malibu, and record what happened. You will have your answer. The only thing that worked was having a fixed start date where you start rolling for collapse. If it was early, it shifted the game too much to the other side.
And you tried everyhting else? That’s how you know that’s the only thing that will ever work? Very scientific. � rolleyes You are being dogmatic. How do you know what “early” for THIS COMING GAME will be? Do you know everything about it already? You can’t base everything you think about all WWI games based one your experience with one in 2007. Well, you could, but that would be irrational.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
You would need to be at the table during playtesting and that has already occurred. When you buy the game you can do whatever you want.Thanks for not answering the question at all rolleyes. You claim that the system would need to have a fixed date and it would be busted otherwise, but supply no proof. � rolleyes
Supply proof that it works if the Russians can possibly collapse in 1916, see how that works for allied victory.
Well since we are speculating about the game, the French and British strength could be at a level where if the CP goes all out on Russia, they risk losing on the Western front. It’s quite simple really. Actually finding the optimal setup like that is not easy, but it never is. The point is that it’s very easy to see that the best way to solve an all out blitz into Russia is to make it difficult to do that on the other front. It’s pretty clear you’re stuck on having much of the game happen exactly as it did in the war (not a surprise, it’s pretty clear you can’t handle the possibility of ideas other than your own. That kind of change (oh no, the revolution didn’t happen exactly on my schedule, the game is ruined!) must drive you crazy!)
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
So? What if the war in the game is going differently that it did in the actual past. Or are you asserting it would have happened when it did no matter what?Yes i believe in eternal recurrence. It repeats the same thing.
There we go. I can’t argue against a core belief like that if it goes into the supernatural. But even if you believe that, you still ignore that in the game, the situation can be drastically different than in the war, which would lead to a different situation in russia as well. When you change causes, effects change.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Which game? I make no claims about the Axis and Allies 1914, Im talking about another game soon to be released. If you didn’t bloom late, you would have figured that out.Read the first post of this thread. Then read my posts. Actually read them. I was talking about the possibility of a system like mine in a WWI game. It’s hilarious that you admit knowing nothing about the new game but you know enough to say definitively what could not work.
Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
This game system favors simple elegant solutions, not bogged down piece counts and accounting of unimaginable scope.rolleyes Hyperbole much? I wrote it down in 5 lines. I realize for you, that might be imaginably difficult to understand, but give the average intellect a little more credit. Don’t drag us down with you.
-
@Imperious:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?57uatsdxv9lntc6
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?cnmx2gtrz784q4aHere. This might give you an idea of what is going on. These are prototype sculpts. Notice the Railgun. AA14 does not have Railgun, this game does.
Nice rail piece. Just needs rails printed on the map, or the effect is spoiled.
Is that the Emden with the dummy funnel? Great detail, there!
Are the red pieces Mexican, then? Or just Mexican Commies?
Are you planning 4 types of plane, or just tech upgrades for fighters?
Two types of infantry for each power?
You could get away with 3 sculpts for the upgrades (all basics in cloth caps):
Brodie hat: USA & UK
Adrian helmet: F, I & R
Stahlhelm: CPsWhat’s your pitch for Italy colour; or do you go with Avalon Hill and have 8 different shades of brown…
And shouldn’t it be feldgrau (field grey) for Germany, freeing up light grey for Russia/Italy/Austria/whoever?
I’m thinking of dying all my A&A units for both wars, with each nation using the same colour in each. Germany isn’t going to be light grey.
-
Are the red pieces Mexican, then? Or just Mexican Commies?
They are AA pieces to show scale comparison.
Are you planning 4 types of plane, or just tech upgrades for fighters?
All planes are upgraded for each nation on specific turns. No need to make different planes with or without interruptor gear, or metal aircraft
Two types of infantry for each power?
two- one is entrenched ( machine gun), Germany and Austro get Stosstrupen ( third infantry unit)
What’s your pitch for Italy colour; or do you go with Avalon Hill and have 8 different shades of brown…
not determined yet.
-
Shame, I prefer the method of only allowing newly built units to have the tech. Auto upgrade seems like cheating. If you want 3-3 fighters you should have to build them.
DFW BI (2 seater reconnaissance) (1-1-4)
Fokker Eindekker (2-2-2)
Albatross (3-3-2)
Gotha (Bomber) (4-1- 6)
Mind you I don’t consider the starting plane to be a fighter as such. Furthermore, players may choose to keep some of them for the longer range.
Since no other units (except possibly infantry as I’ve suggested elsewhere) are upgraded, I’d really like to see you push the boat out and make 4 types of plane.
-
Shame, I prefer the method of only allowing newly built units to have the tech. Auto upgrade seems like cheating. If you want 3-3 fighters you should have to build them.
When a nation develops something like Interrupter gear they outfit all their existing planes. They don’t just throw the air force in the dumpster when they can easily retrofit whatever development.
All metal aircraft frames might involve new planes, but game cant sustain dozens of plane types. It is a strategic wargame, not a game about airpower.
Bombers are a separate unit.
The 4 types of planes will be ready when i get the Indian pieces as well as the Cartwrights, and the salsa colored Mexican army
-
Mmmm, I’ll just have to buy my Albatrosses from someone else.
And the Fokkers. Even if you give us one type of Fokker, I’ll definitely want another. One kind with interrupter gear; and the other Fokker without.
By the way, will this game be going on general sale, or are you planning to buy every copy yourself?
-
@Imperious:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?57uatsdxv9lntc6
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?cnmx2gtrz784q4athose rock!
, how many types of naval units are in your game? -
All types including destroyers, 3 sculpts of each type German for CP and two for Entente, just to have some differences.
Zeppelins and Airships included.
If you like pieces, mine is the one to get. WE spare no expense for the 5 x 4 hardbound map
-
-
@Imperious:
If you like pieces, mine is the one to get. WE spare no expense for the 5 x 4 hardbound map
all types, so that includes battlecruisers?
when is the release date? if its not too soon to say
-
Shouldn’t the German tank be bigger than the armoured car? Those things had a crew of 18.
What scale infantry are you using: some very nice 1/72s in production from HaT:
http://www.hat.com/currentW.html
Is that 3 types of artillery; I was expecting only 2.
-
all types, so that includes battlecruisers?
Dreadnoughts
Battlecruisers/ Armored Cruisers
Destroyers
Transports
Subs
Sea mines
counter for seaplane tender ( ONLY FOR UK)when is the release date? if its not too soon to say
Cant say right now, definitely next year
Is that 3 types of artillery; I was expecting only 2.
yes
-
@Imperious:
Hmm, when does USSR go to war against the Germany? When does Russia go to war? It is a fixed time-frame, which is to say if the Axis don’t do something early, they cant get into the game. It is definitely and permanently placed. It is FIXED, not variable. If USA and RUSSIA could attack Germany on turn one without Germany doing anything to provoke them, you might have a variable system because BOTH SIDES HAVE FULL LEVERAGE TO DO ANYTHING THEY WANT AT ANYTIME WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. So stop babbling about gibberish.
It’s people like you who are more worried about looking correct than moving a discussion forward that cause most of the problems in any sort of discourse, and this quoted section above confirms that to be true. But hey, refusing to concede points like a reasonable being gets your post count up, and we all know that the more posts one has, the more correct they are. :roll:
We have a great example of a game with multiple possible war entries for multiple nations that does a pretty good job of being balanced in spite of that variability (in Global 1940). It shows that a game where major events happen at variable times is possible to balance, even if not astoundingly easy.
With a provocation point system similar to mine (well, the group with whom I played it, but the one I posted), The more success the CP had, the sooner the Americans joined. A balancing factor, and fits historical flavor well. Likewise, the more the central powers committed to Russia, the better chance they had of getting a revolution earlier, but this came at the cost of a difficult and potentially impossible (if too aggressive in the east) situation in the West. A balancing factor, and has a lot of historical flavor as well. (note when I say “historical” I mean that it take historical patterns and ideas into account, not re-enactment of events that ignore the preceding events.)
In the end this coming game will likely look little like either of ours, but as long as you continue to assert that a provocation system CANNOT work in a WWI game I will argue against that point.
-
Motor Torpedo Boats:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAS_(ship)
Observation Balloons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balloon_(aircraft)#After_the_American_Civil_War
Recon plane (2 seater) longer range than fighters
French Taxis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAFbdLdmYLk
By the way, don’t you mean PLYWOOD frames; i.e. the Albatross & Camel?
Which metal frame planes are you referring to?
-
Well I am sure it will be a cool game, but I was thinking instead of just one cruiser type piece you would have battlecruisers and light cruisers. Especially if your gonna have multiple types of infantry, artillery and aircraft.
-
The game has 3 fighter sculpts ( two allied)
I remember 1 french 1 UK and 1 German design ( all biplanes, not the 3 wing job).
Don’t want to give away too many pics too soon, but will periodically post a few at a time.
@vonLettowVorbeck1914; You really need to drop the vitriol act once you figured out how wrong you were. I will never concede anything unless i were wrong and i wasn’t. We simply could not balance the game if it allows anybody to enter any earlier that the fixed entry date. Balance is all important and delicate, you can’t just allow it to get messed up with chrome rules. MY game has both standard and advanced rule sections and many optional rules.
As if when you started the posts, it was against my experience that you began to whine. I didn’t reply based on your idea, you responded to my idea. You quoted me and i defended my experience. The discussion was about my ideas, not your point system. Then you realized i was talking about ANOTHER GAME, not Larry’s. Twilight Zone realization kicks in and now you understand whats going on.
Try playing Global with everybody at war at start. See how that fairs for the Axis or Allies. You need some restrictions or you would not have a historical game or the setup would have to dramatically change to compensate whom was effected by early entry. Either way the game would not look like WW2 in the slightest. At a minimum, the setup would need to change again and it would be Historical. ( it wasn’t too much anyway, but the new one would look crazy).
-
@Imperious:
@vonLettowVorbeck1914; You really need to drop the vitriol act once you figured out how wrong you were. I will never concede anything unless i were wrong and i wasn’t. We simply could not balance the game if it allows anybody to enter any earlier that the fixed entry date.
Yet Germany and Russia go to war in Global before turn 4 quite often, Japan and USA are at war before turn 3 quite often. That all happens BEFORE your precious “fixed” date.
But you still say that the Russian revolution, American entry, etc. CAN’T happen before your golden date in any World War I game? Don’t try to backtrack and say that every post you made in this thread about the impending Axis and Allies game (that the whole thread is about) only dealt with some game you made up in 2007 and not the game the thread was made for discussing.
You truly must be a politician, dodging actual answers constantly.
You keep making broad statements about what can and cannot happen in a World War I game, and as soon as I show conclusively that a lot of these allegedly “DOOM FOR BALANCE” factors are already present in one form or another in Global, you say that you were talking about some house-rule game that was made in 2007 that you don’t say you were talking about till several pages into the thread.
I’m going to try to ignore the backtracking and double talk on your part and get to the bare bones of it.
Do you still assert that a WWI game will be automatically busted if events like the Russian Revolution and US entry are possible before a specific turn in the game?
-
Yet Germany and Russia go to war in Global before turn 4 quite often, Japan and USA are at war before turn 3 quite often. That all happens BEFORE your precious “fixed” date.
Silly, they cant do it on their own accord. It depends entirely on whether the Euro-Axis are having a good game. It is their decision alone. Check how many times Germany declares war on USA and or invades Russia.They don’t and you know it, stop your gibberish son.
But you still say that the Russian revolution, American entry, etc. CAN’T happen before your golden date in any World War I game? Don’t try to backtrack and say that every post you made in this thread about the impending Axis and Allies game (that the whole thread is about) only dealt with some game you made up in 2007 and not the game the thread was made for discussing.
You truly must be a politician, dodging actual answers constantly.
You got it wrong again… This thread allows what people would like to see in a game. I on the other hand have a complete game of which to draw my input. Stop arguing with people and just contribute. If you don’t like my ideas, refrain from commenting. You alone hijacked it with garbage.
You keep making broad statements about what can and cannot happen in a World War I game, and as soon as I show conclusively that a lot of these allegedly “DOOM FOR BALANCE” factors are already present in one form or another in Global, you say that you were talking about some house-rule game that was made in 2007 that you don’t say you were talking about till several pages into the thread.
oh boy their you go again. That’s all your own view. Why worry so much about mine? I threaten your way of life or what? Can you be an adult?
I’m going to try to ignore the backtracking and double talk on your part and get to the bare bones of it.
Do you still assert that a WWI game will be automatically busted if events like the Russian Revolution and US entry are possible before a specific turn in the game?
Nice “try”, and yes if the event came early the CP don’t have enough time to have a realistic chance. You cannot have a a setup for whether US player starts in France early or if Russia never falls, or falls early. It upsets the balance. The CP have a limited number of “hits” against the Entente and the burden of facing full allied opposition proved with playtest proved it. Stop arguing with me, i really don’t care.
-
Another evasive answer. Of course if the Revolution happens too early to be balanced then it happened to early to be balanced, but that is NOT the same as saying that if the Revolution happens before turn X (IN A GAME YOU HAVEN’T EVEN SEEN) then it cannot be balanced.
I will reprhase the question.
Is EVERY potential World War I game (not talking about the one you already made, talking about all possible games) automatically balance-doomed if the Russian Revolution and the US entry are allowed to happen before the turns that represent the start of those events in reality (whichever turns correspond to early-mid 1917)?
Stop trying to force your game’s rules on everyone else by declaring anyone else idea’s impossible. It’s one thing to say yours are better (opinion), it quite another to do what you are doing by saying that everything that other people put out is impossible and could never work in a game for which we have hardly any specific detail (ignorant fallacy). The inability to consider ideas other than your own as even POSSIBLY viable is what is really childish.
What does the board look like for this game coming out? How many territories? What exactly are the victory conditions? What are the unit statistics? What is the income of each country? How are units produced? Are there convoy rules? If so, how do they work? What does each unit cost? How many territories are on the Western Front? Are there any special rules for Italy/Ottomans? How important is Serbia?
How can you say what can POSSIBLY work and not work if you don’t know all of these answers? I shudder to assess the quality of your “experience” with the other game where, if you acted during that one as you do now, you probably were trying to boss the other players into doing what you wanted during testing so your ideas of “balance” would be “proven.” In fact, the way you are acting now, I wouldn’t be surprised if this testing group was just you playing with yourself.
You say that the revolution must not happen before turn 10. Prove how this game that is coming out will be busted if it is allowed to happen in turn 9. Or 8. Or 6. Otherwise, you have no ground to stand on in saying that only your dogmatic assertion will work.
Different powers enter the war at different times from game to game of Global. The reason that that is not imbalanced is because the balancing took into account these variable entries. Yet somehow it is impossible for a WWI game to take into account variable entries, especially when we know that this game will be much smaller and therefore easier to comprehend what changes do to balance? Asinine.
-
PS It’s hilariously ironic and hypocritical of you to tell me to “stop arguing and just contribute”:
@Imperious:
Japan, China and these “Bolsheviks” should not be any part of this game. Germany had just a few ships and very meager forces in China and some island groups. It is so marginal to combat on a strategic scale that it does not warrant any consideration. The Great War was mostly a European affair with some action in the middle east. To try to represent and model all these trifle little and meaningless struggles would be to the detriment of any decent Axis and Allies system. Honestly, if two guys fought with knifes in Brazil, somebody would want yet another set of freaking pieces to represent some game changing warfare…all they need is that Wikipedia entry to prove it.
So someone wants to contribute their idea of having Japan, China, and the Bolsheviks, but you say that that should not be in the game. Somehow you will come up with some lame excuse about how you saying that people’s ideas should not be in the game in NOT arrgumentative, but that my saying that ideas like the variable entry idea are possible and can be good for the game is argumentative.
@Imperious:
Would Britain have gone to war if Germany had avoided Belgium? Not certain.
What if Germany had not even attacked France?
At the very least, offer a number of scenarios leaving the possibility of unhistorical results.
American entry was based on so many factors that it is ridiculous to make it mandatory on turn X. Instead, each side should be able to influence it in various ways. It will always be likely, but if you make it and its date certain where’s the game?
The only way to make a balanced game is to allow Historical developments at specific times, not variable. American entry was assured after the Zimmerman note no need to figit with what happened. If it does not add to the game it does not need a place in the game. Axis and Allies is a broadstroke of History put in a game. It’s not supposed to account for every single incidental because these types of rules bog down an otherwise good game.
Before I even enter the thread, you are arguing with people that are trying to contribute their ideas. You attack me for “coming after you” when I have merely been providing rebuttals to posts you have made criticizing and declaring “bad for the game” others’ ideas (ideas which I happen to think can take the franchise to a new level of creativity). I like the idea of triggered entry, and I was supporting those who proposed some version of it. I will continue to do so as long as you say that is automatically bad for any WWI game and saying that your idea is the only good one. You should probably start your own axis and allies website where you can delete the ideas of anyone who doesn’t like your ideas better than their own. Then all the posts would be your ideas or people saying that they like them. You would be so happy, I’d imagine.
I am contributing by saying that your ideas are not the only possible ones, and that it’s unreasonable that you dismiss people’s ideas from a game that we know little about as imposssible. You don’t know everything about Axis and Allies. No one does. Get over it and realize that other people can have good ideas too.
How do you know that they don’t already have a system that allows variable entry and works?
Regardless of whether the actual Revolution system in the game that comes out looks like yours, mine, anyone else’s or no one else’s, the fact that you continue to say that a variable entry system is impossible will continue to be absurd.
Suggested Topics
