@imperious-leader said in 1914 Gen Con Rules:
@slip-capone Then this is to be in the smorey swamp section, they are his rules alone
They were used at both Gen Con and Origins.
I am just happy they are on the boards to share.
Already Looking Forward to 1914 2nd Edition
-
Well, Hitler thought so, but like most people he grossly underestimated Soviet industry.
I’m not against certain “balancing” techniques to produce a more uncertain outcome. Generally this does mean exaggerating the starting units & industrial capacity of the Axis, but this is rather different from allowing nations to build types of units they were just not able to produce.
One method I’ve recommended for WWI is that only the CPs can exploit (collect income from) occupied tt, and only they are permitted to invade neutrals. Or at the very least invading a neutral influences the USA against the invader.
I also want to see:
Strategic rail movement
No new factories
No use of occupied factories
Ships able to remain in port
Separate infantry recruitment rules
Terrain typesI.L. at least has listened to my arguments over the years, and it seems most of these will be implemented in his game; I’m not optimistic for the official version.
-
I.L. at least has listened to my arguments over the years, and it seems most of these will be implemented in his game; I’m not optimistic for the official version.
That is 100%, though i do like to make sarcastic comments on your ideas if extrapolated to conclusion. Our game does not end based on when Germany Historically falls. We apply a fixed limit that makes the game finished in a more or less fixed time.
The representation of units for some nations and not others is due to making the basic fact pattern of what Historically did occur in the scale and gimping Turkey makes the CP too weak. The other problem is these “Nation fans” who whine about not getting this or that. We understand people will make house rules, so for the most part that’s why they got tanks and armored cars, etc.
-
I do think when Larry in revised had the optional rules that were generated on a per country basis was totally awesome. Unfortunately I don’t think we will get those in any of these games any time soon. I think this WW1 game would be better had he included some of these do be used by who wants to use them. It wouldn’t ruin the game and it would give players a more realistic feal on a per country basis. I kind of think Flash that would even satisfy you. I think, maybe not.
-
Remind me of what they were and I’ll tell you if I’d be satisfied. Like you say, probably not.
I do think when Larry in revised had the optional rules that were generated on a per country basis was totally awesome. Unfortunately I don’t think we will get those in any of these games any time soon. I think this WW1 game would be better had he included some of these do be used by who wants to use them. It wouldn’t ruin the game and it would give players a more realistic feal on a per country basis. I kind of think Flash that would even satisfy you. I think, maybe not.
-
Remind me of what they were and I’ll tell you if I’d be satisfied. Like you say, probably not.
I think these were they:
-
Ahh, you mean National Advantages!
Trans-Siberian Railway: Your infantry , AA guns, artillery may move 1 space among Russia, Novosibirsk, Yakut & Buryatia.
Don’t quite see the point of that one.
No, don’t like these. Rather abstract, and more stuff to remember that isn’t on the board.
Since My chronology is based on a 4 turn year, I have some winter effects, but they’re mainly to do with certain SZs becoming frozen over and impassable (ships have to spend the winter in port).
Maybe all units attack at -1 in Winter. In Arabia/North Africa it might be -1 to attackers in Summer.
But since Larry’s chronology is nuts (America enters on turn 4!) it’ll probably be impossible to implement these.Tank salvage is something that could be imported to 1914, but for every power. If we do get different sculpts for tanks we can repaint a few in enemy colours for salvage units. Fight at -1 (untrained crews?)
With so few unit types its difficult to suggest anything more; if there were a bomber tech then Italy and Russia would start with it.
Maybe Q Ships (UK) - transports that can fire in defence. But I prefer this sort of thing to be handled with event cards for an element of surprise.
-
Pretty sure the 1 space thing was a typo. I don’t have the physical rulebook readily available, but I am 99% it was two spaces.
If you don’t like those, then you probably won’t like these :-D:
-
Meh, the night bombers one is quite neat.
-
Flash I am not sure the way the whole Axis and Allies concept is enough for you. I don’t believe Larry is ever going to build a game with the amount of detail and ruleset you are looking for. He has to keep it to a broad audience for it to sell. The game probably needs to be played in a 3 to 5 hour window. It seems to me you are looking for something on a different level than what you will ever get out of any of these games. Good luck on finding a game to your liking I don’t think one of these is going to be it.
-
Don’t quite know where you’re coming from - I’ve just rejected the idea of adding NAs.
My reasoning may be complicated, but in essence I want the game to be simple, but realistic. I have no interest in moving into “hex and counter” war games.
If I reject “Capture the Capitals” as victory conditions it is because it is unhistorical, and has often resulted in games which are too predictable - everything revolving around Moscow. The search for an alternative may go around the houses, but is intended to reach a solution that is simple to implement.
Just because I suggest “we could do this”, and “what if we did that” doesn’t mean I want everything crammed into the game; essentially I’m throwing ideas around that may make the game better. For example, for years I’ve argued for there to be only one movement phase, partly to simplify and speed things up. The argument for it may be long and complex, but it seems that this has born fruit and the new game will be speedier and better for it.
-
I just read your posts and you seem to always be complaining or lamenting that there is not enough historical detail or you don’t like the rules for some reason. That is why I am making the assumption you are not happy with these games. I guess I stand corrected.
-
I suppose there are two opposite approaches. Some are only concerned with playability and balance, others (with an background in history) are more interested in the game reflecting reality, and consider it a challenge to match the two things together. I belong in the latter camp.
-
I do think Flash that this game could be done more to your theory as I believe this was a 50/50 struggle until the USA got in. It actually may have been more of 60/40 in the centrals favour. They were the ones gaining ground and over time probably would have won.
-
I suppose there are two opposite approaches. Some are only concerned with playability and balance, others (with an background in history) are more interested in the game reflecting reality, and consider it a challenge to match the two things together. I belong in the latter camp.
…and then we have the plastic piece junkies 8-)
-
…and then we have the plastic piece junkiesÂ
Ah yes. Just last weekend, I bought nine new plastic storage trays in anticipation of the new game.
-
What’s the ninth one for?
-
Spring 1942 and Pacific 40 came out in 2009, the second editions of both were released in 2012.
There will be a second Edition of AA1914 maybe in 2016… - seems to be enough time to create a perfect game!Some thoughts about A&A14:
It came to me that we did not bought the lovely pieces and the funny map to play a balanced or finished game. Its more like paying 80 EUR/$ to become a member of a playtesting/developing team for the “real” A&A1914 (second edition). We have spent our money to develop a cool WW1 game together with the designer himself by giving feedback on HGD(feedback LH is willing to hear actually). It will be very exciting to follow the progress, though I can understand the complaining about the broken “first edition”. -
I’m starting to get the impression most of this forum is just one long discussion between Imperious Leader and Flashman.
-
I am sorry if I give you the impression of being bossy or dogmatic Harry…
-
I’m starting to get the impression most of this forum is just one long discussion between Imperious Leader and Flashman.
Well, they do seem among the most prolific and willing to “mix it up,” that’s for sure, but hopefully without any serious rancor involved. Since the game is inherently trying to straddle the fence between balance and historicity without becoming TOO too complicated, the debates here are nearly inevitable. My teaching schedule doesn’t allow me to be able to keep up as regularly as I’d like with these threads, but I do enjoy going back and following them when I can. I personally tend to side with Flash but I realize that this is only a personal preference, mostly, and also a result of how I typically use these games: as a tool to teach kids history tempered with a little logic/ strategy. I’m thus much less concerned with such things as game balance, because I don’t really care who wins, but what everyone learns. I also like them to think about “what-ifs” though, which is why I do like Flash’s basic rule that those who realistically COULD have produced something can in the game. The rest of the argument strikes me as mostly a debate between those who love the game primarily as an HISTORICAL wargame and those who love it as a historical WARGAME. Since we all love the game for our own reasons, the answer is to make the game flexible enough to be “all things to all people” without it becoming too expensive for anybody… admittedly another difficult balance.
The passion in the arguments is really a reflection of how much we all love the game and want it to be EVEN better. With that in mind, I really hope the second edition fixes some of those bone-headed color choices: IL’s upcoming game looks like a big improvement to me in this respect as in many others. Piece-wise, it looks like it might be fairly close to ideal for me! Here’s hoping that IL’s game sells out in no time and that the HasBorg apparatus takes note of its success and uses some of its better ideas in their 2nd ed.!
Suggested Topics
