It all depends on what UK does. If UK ignores them the ottomans can really grow quickly and threaten.
BJCard's first impressions
-
The map sure looks good, and the only problems are the far too small territories on the Western Front. Its bad enough when only France and Germany contest Belgium or Picardy, imagine when UK too start to reinforce that little territory, and from turn 4 even USA and tanks need space for their stacks, in this tiny territory. Luckily Russia have some huge territories to host its lone infantry, so he’ll never get this space issue.
The difference in territory size also makes for some funny stuff, man. Like an aircraft in Berlin cant reach France in one turn, but the Russian aircraft in Moscow can easily reach the Middle East in one move. I guess Russia had developed long range aircraft already then.
I love how the Rulebook use cartoons to explain the difference between Amphibious assaults and Amphibious reinforcements. Too bad they used dark colors, so its hard to see. Maybe in next editon.
The plastic pieces were beautiful, except for the artillery, wich looked like it was liftet from Risk.
-
Agreed on the small territories on the Western Front. I kept knocking over infantry when moving units in France.
-
Some more movements:
Canada to Marseilles - 1 turn by sea
London to Karelia - 1 turn by sea
Washington to Rome - 2 turns by sea
Vienna to Rome - 4 turns over land
Berlin to Lorraine - 4 turns over land
What did someone say about Germany being screwed?
Possible Solutions:
Give the CPs trains
Reduce all naval movement by 1
Make Munich a production centre
-
So why not buy new production centers/factories @ 10/12 IPC??
Buy rail lines to connect territories @ 5 IPC, then any units may advance along any contiguous territories linked by the rails?
-
I agree: I think Germany should have had a second (Western) mobilisation zone.
As Germany you need to build a Fighter a turn, but can only really hit Poland with one on T2, then probably will be building one(T3 on) simply to move it close to the Front.
-
Because all of these would have been in place in 1914 - you shouldn’t need to buy them.
Next game I will experiment with the Munich factory only. That might be all that is needed to balance.
So why not buy new production centers/factories @ 10/12 IPC??
Buy rail lines to connect territories @ 5 IPC, then any units may advance along any contiguous territories linked by the rails?
-
I think rails would benefit the CPs too much, but the Munich factory may be just enough to make it more balanced. Also perhaps Ottoman could be boosted a bit in the Mid East- as it is now it seems like all they can do is threaten Sevastopol and hold on to Istanbul and Smyrna.
-
Indian production might need to be limited to give Turkey a break; I’ve suggested max 6 IPC spend per turn in Bombay.
-
Think 6 IPC spend is too low, Flashman.
I expected it to be the IPC value: 4 units (maybe max 2 non Infantry).
That would have been sufficient. -
Indian production might need to be limited to give Turkey a break; I’ve suggested max 6 IPC spend per turn in Bombay.
Agreed, as it is Britain has 2 transports to move 4 units every turn to Ottoman territory - or can just take Persia too easily.
-
Indian production might need to be limited to give Turkey a break; I’ve suggested max 6 IPC spend per turn in Bombay.
In general, I don’t like the idea of limiting spending artificially like that. If Britain wants to sacrifice from their strength on the Western Front by overloading the Ottomans, they should be free to do that.
I could maybe get behind restricting the types of units they can place there to represent industrial limitations, etc.
-
The British don’t even need to put much in India- they start with significant forces in India and Egypt- not to mention they can activate Arabia.
Suggested Topics
