It’s not hostility and my commentary is not directed to anybody. Just commentary of the incredible amount of house rules to fix a game that nobody has played. I don’t think it falls under excitement but rather nitpicking a game that never claimed it was the absolute truth of WW1, but really as Larry put it a “broad stroke of Historical accuracy”.
None of the rules i have seen have any KISS about them or in keeping with the complexity of the game as we know it.
They are all way out of the ballpark.
I encourage rules that “look like” something that would already be in the game…something Larry would come up with. If USA enters on turn 4, that’s just fine. The playtestors have played this out to create the best balance possible so nothing should change that by way of altering the US entry.
But a rule like “if you fight in an area perhaps the economic value is reduced by 1 to reflect the quagmire of the Great War” is a good one because it equally effects both sides and is realistic.
A rule like “US player enters on turn 1” would just destroy the game and make it unbalanced.