The Great War 1914-1918: Clash of Empires

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v01w1d1z3hsi07d/Print version Great War Afrika final.pdf?dl=0

this is a dropbox link, apparently some people don’t like mediafire. no problem

In the 90’, I played a couple of Xeno game and with and without gamerparadise rules.
It was well balanced but not enough for me.
The rules are not bad but the gameboard is ugly.
Over the year me and my friend changes the rules and created our own map.

WW2 in Europe/ Europe at war Questions and suggestions

So after having read the rule book and getting a feel for the game and its mechanics, I’m now ready to play a more serious (solo) game. However, I do still have a fairly large number of questions:

1.) Does attacking artillery also fire in the shore bombardment step? The rules suggest that it does as it states: “artillery that fired in step 2 cannot fire now” or something along those lines (land combat sequence).

Mt 2cts: I suggest renaming “shore bombardment” into “opening fire” when it comes to land combat. I’d also go for giving both sides a choice: Either fire your artillery in the opening fire step and any casualties caused are removed immediately (firing side’s choice on a roll of “1”) or attack/ defend during each round of normal combat along with other units. In this case any casualties caused are always the owning player’s choice.

2.) I still don’t really get that under some units it is stated that on die rolls of “2” they can choose which unit is hit, but then strangely enough it goes on to say that this is always the owning player’s choice. What exactly does the  firing player get to choose then?!

My 2 cts: allow the firing player to choose the target rather than the owning player (and on a 3 or 4 in case of a tactical bomber, for instance, the owning player decides.

3.) Can the Russians attack the lone Polish infantry on their side of the demarcation line in Fall ‘39? The rules say they may move into the areas designated to them, but it doesn’t say anything about attacking.

My 2 cts: Allow it! This is also what happened historically!

4.) Illustration Page 9 advanced rules: Assuming Belgium is being attacked here for the first time and is therefore suffering from the penalties related to “surprise attack”, how can they possibly reinforce Liege from Brussels as the rules state that units suffering from surprise attack may not move, neither in the movement phase nor in the blitzkrieg phase. Or is this done by “British” units (as the Belgians are now represented by British units after having been attacked) using British redeployment points? From the example I certainly don’t get that impression…I assume this is a faulty illustration??

5.) Does the UK collect money from the neutral territories whose forces it represents? I guess not, but just wanted to make sure…

6.) Do neutrals get to build any forces if they are not defeated at the end of a turn?

My 2 cts: I’d allow them to build units up to the value of the territories they still control, as long as they are still in possession of their capital (to be placed in box 1)
7.) Can ships belonging to belligerent nations pass through ports [with ships in them] belonging to neutral powers? (I.e. French and British ships, for example, while not yet at war with Italy could pass through the sea zone containing the port of Tripoli or French ships could trace a convoy through the sea zone containing the port of Barcelona).

My 2 cts: I’d leave it to the nations controlling the port; they can either allow it or deny it. A denial would not be a declaration of war!

8.) Please emphasize in the rules that if the Axis attacks either the USA or the USSR prior to Spring 1942 both can only receive up to 25% of their income. This is a bit vague.

9.) Why do fighters have such a low combat value when it comes to attacking ground units? (and why such a high one while attacking other air units)?

10.) If I understand it correctly the “4” combat value of fighters is only used in air to air combat? (I.e. escorts vs interceptors and when air units ONLY meet in a certain territory? (for instance in order to pin enemy air units there?)

11.) Was an air-to-air combat phase deliberately left out of the land combat sequence? It would make sense to me if attacking and defending aircraft would first engage one another and that any surviving fighters and tactical bombers (from both sides) would then  get to make a(n) (pre-emptive) attack against an enemy ground unit of their choice.

12.) Do naval units exercise sea control while still neutral? (i.e. would Italian naval units and tac bombers  -that are still neutral in 1939- inflict movement penalties on e.g. a British convoy?

My 2 cts: No. Not until they are at war with one another do such penalties apply

13.) While a (major) nation  is neutral, does it receive supply automatically or does a convoy still need to be established to receive supplies from overseas?

14.) Is it possible for naval units of befriended nations to ever share a port together at the end of a turn? (E.g. British ships in a French port; when dropping off transported units the rules state a transport must return to its port of origin, so e.g. a British transport transporting a unit to Brest would have to return to Bristol rather than remaining in Brest, right?)

15.) The text underneath “Minor flag space” differs significantly between the basic and advanced rules. Is this intentional? For example, in the basic rules it says that units located in a minor flag space only suffer the movement penalty in case of a surprise attack, but this is not listed in the advanced rules.

16.) Why does Italy receive money from the start for Tripoli while the UK doesn’t for its African territories? Because the UK is at war and Italy is still neutral?

17.) Are British and French naval units also bound by the rules governing surprise attack in Fall ’39? If so, this seems like the time for the Germans to attack e.g. Scapa flow!! If so, would the port bonus apply regardless?

18.) It took me a long time before I got the air redeployment example. Air units can only land/refuel/rebase on “factory spaces”, right? And not on NRZ’s? I take it they can also refuel on carriers?

19.) Can air units with a movement value ever fly from the US to Britain or is the only way to do this by means of transporting them by ship? (refueling on Iceland still doesn’t give them enough movement points).

20.) The US starts with $20, however its income is $50 (1/4 of 200). Is this correct? Or do they get to spend $20 on their first turn and afterwards $50? If I’m not mistaken neutral countries do not get to actually buy and place units until activated?(But they do get them to advance up the build boxes?)

21.) How is a convoy set up to the Pacific holding box? (simply to the “picture”?)

22.) What happens when a convoy needs to spend more than 10 mp’s? Does this then count against [naval] rp’s? Do rp’s then need to be saved from the redeployment phase?

The Great War (1914)

_It is the summer of 1914. The Archduke Franz Ferdinand (heir to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire) and his wife have just been assassinated in Sarajevo. In retaliation for this offense, Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria-Hungary has declared war on Serbia, an ally of Russia. This sparks a world of controversy and very quickly large military powers such as Germany, The Ottoman Empire, France, and Great Britain join in the fray. Two allegiances emerge, The Central Powers & The Allied Powers, with one goal in mind: WAR!

Do you have the economic aptitude and tactical know how to help your nation survive The Conflict and rescue a world in peril. Are you brave enough to face tanks, planes and other modern warfare in order to lead your alliance to victory? “The Great War” has begun, and ready or not, you better lace up your boots and prepare for battle._

The Game:
_The Conflict is a global-strategy based game designed around the economic and military conditions of Europe in 1914. Players play in one of two alliances, The Central Powers or The Allied Powers, to defeat their opponents. Players choose among seven nations (Austria-Hungary, Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy, Ottoman Empire, and Russia). After selecting a nation, players take turns completing their objectives during each round.

Note: The Conflict requires players to strategize both economically and militaristically in order to win the game._

Combat System:
The Conflict has been extensively tested and designed by gamers for gamers. Players will take their turn each round to strengthen their tactical advantages and defend the borders of their nation. Each turn is broken down into Phases. Players must complete each previous phase in order to proceed onward with the rest of their turn. If a player decides to enter into combat with another player, they must, along with their opponent, roll a set number of D12 dice to determine the outcome of each individual battle. The Conflict uniquely deducts a combat penalty from the player with the weakest military strength in a territory. This combat penalty is taken off all of their dice rolls during the individual combat. The combat penalty allows for the strongest opponent to have a real-world advantage over their enemy, if they have a larger military presence in the area. Players can develop multiple (land, naval, and air) strategies to succeed. They can utilize 11 military units with unique capabilities to complete specific goals, upgrade technology, play one of three victory scenarios, as well as try a variety of player preferences.

Game Pieces

Expected Release Christmas 2011
PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY TODAY!
http://www.legiongaming.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=1&products_id=2

yah, with three diffrent idealogies competing for contol, that would be cool, but i was going for a game that was a little less black and white

leaders of arab countires are more often allied with western powers than with Islam, Russia and China are not on the best terms either, and in this game i am going to make it possible for Russia and China to have full scale war with each other. Also its not like the US, UK, and France are able to agree on eyerthing either. I think it is best if they are seperate powers.

sure their will still be too sides, NATO, headed by the US, and the Warsaw Pact, headed by the Soveits. but the alliances are not set.
In fact at the start of the game all countries should still be at peace. each power can either buy NATO or WARSAW Pact vicotry points with 10 IPCs, of course doing that lowers the effectiveness of their armies the next turn, and so should only do this when they are not expecting attack

THe US and USSR are the only countries that start out active, If  US/UK/France are attack all of those countries can become active, of course I am going to have diplomacy rolling that can weaken or change the NATO alliance

China, and India are different. You can gain control of them diplomaticly or you can attack them to makes them active. if you attack one, the other becomes contoled by your alliance

The diplomacy thing will be clearer later, I also might make diffrent national objectives for each contry so that when you have more than two players, diplomacy can be represented by people instead of dice rolls.

no way. That map is bigger than huge.

Honestly, if you play the board game for the map and pieces, then you should avoid most of the board games out there.

As far as 4 revisions in 10 years, maybe that’s a bit high, granted, but….  I can tell you a fact that in 10 years, Dell has gone through more server revisions in those same 10 years.  Does that make their products (or substitute Apple, IBM, HP, etc) any worse?  That’s the worst comment I’ve ever heard.  Not only that, but revisions are there to help make the game better.

Ok, rant off.  Talking about World at War 2005 now.  The game is ok, but unfortunately when combining the latest rules from Axis & Allies (which this is based off of), the Allies has too much of an advantage.  Especially when comparing this version with the 3rd version.  There are now factories in India and Australia for Britain to use, you can still purchase infantry off of factory sites, but at a max of 1 per land and they cost 1 IPC more, which hurts Germany a ton since they can’t keep Africa.  Then again, Britain got a bump in Africa as well with the tank defending on a 3 now and they get an extra artillery piece, so you really have to commit in Africa to take it and hold it.

The technology rolls are interesting, but kind of confusing to understand at first.

I’m actually on this forum to see if anyone has brought up house rules or variants to make the game a little bit more balanced.  I believe the Allies should win about 60-65% to keep in line with history, but this version (and the previous ones as well) gives the allies about 80% chance to win.  This is assuming average dice rolls.  We’ve played around with giving Germany super subs and Japan get fighters to start, but it didn’t help all that much.  Japan usually never has a problem and the jet fighters were just the icing on the cake.  Super subs really didn’t help Germany as much as we had thought it would.

Anyone else try to do something different with this game?

Please do!