Alpha+ 1

@Imperious:

So what im saying is go ahead and build 12 units in India and watch how soon UK falls once France falls because they didn’t support her ally.

This. Many of these issues that are popping up are 9 times out of 10 not going to happen, and if they do, the player is an idiot. If Russia is cavorting around in Western Europe while three or more of their home tt’s are captured, then they deserve to be overthrown.

A 10 infantry build in India would be stupid and unrealistic.
Just because it’s stupid to do doesn’t mean the rules should allow such a gross historical inaccuracy.

Game balance trumps historical accuracy, especially in a game like this. Perhaps it can be assumed that UK can bring that many troops to India, rather than what your thinking which is building them…

Perhaps it can be a fact that UK could deploy that size of a force from UK in what is given as a turn.

If we go with what is historical, Ottomans cant build any planes or tanks, or even artillery and ships.

So what are we to do? screw up a game that has not been played or just make all these adjustments and ruin balance?

I do agree that the India thing might be a problem, but i trust the playtesting especially after the other games did playtesting at Chucky Cheese with plenty of beer…

They have to have got it right this time. Keep hope alive!

Something that’s been bothering me- tanks seem extremely underwhelming. Attack 2, defend 1 for 6 bucks? Absorb a hit only on attack? Should be a 3/2 for that price, or drop the cost to 5.

I understand it has to do with balance, buy AA42’s tanks are 3/3, move 2 for 610 IPCs, and even THAT seems barely worth it.

India is probably considered a safety valve for a UK that has lost its home navy.  It can stay active rather than just build up home defences.

I’d prefer to have a limit, and allow some Africa build AKA Askaris.

See the thread below about tanks.

In WWI they were a breakthrough weapon, practically useless in defence. Its generous giving them a defensive roll at all.

As I’ve suggested, an adjustment giving artillery the ability to support an infantry AND a tank would solve the tank weakness and encourage combined arms building.

@MistuhJay:

Something that’s been bothering me- tanks seem extremely underwhelming. Attack 2, defend 1 for 6 bucks? Absorb a hit only on attack? Should be a 3/2 for that price, or drop the cost to 5.

I understand it has to do with balance, buy AA42’s tanks are 3/3, move 2 for 610 IPCs, and even THAT seems barely worth it.

@Flashman:

See the thread below about tanks.

In WWI they were a breakthrough weapon, practically useless in defence.

An effective breakthrough weapon-deserving of more than a 2 for attack. An attack of 3, boosted to 4 with art, would be ideal.

But that would mean changing the battleboard.

My proposal only means changing the rule.

Proposed fix for Russian Revolution Rules:

Change:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories or Russian-controlled territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

To:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

@wove100:

Proposed fix for Russian Revolution Rules:

Change:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories or Russian-controlled territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

To:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

So, what to do with a hypothetical big Russian stack in Istanbul?  remove the units and then who controls Istanbul?

@BJCard:

@wove100:

Proposed fix for Russian Revolution Rules:

Change:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories or Russian-controlled territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

To:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

So, what to do with a hypothetical big Russian stack in Istanbul?  remove the units and then who controls Istanbul?

No one. It would be left open for any power to claim back.

@TheVenocWarlord:

@BJCard:

@wove100:

Proposed fix for Russian Revolution Rules:

Change:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories or Russian-controlled territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

To:

All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.

So, what to do with a hypothetical big Russian stack in Istanbul?  remove the units and then who controls Istanbul?

No one. It would be left open for any power to claim back.

I agree. Though not perfect, I think this solution is better than the one the rules are pointing at in which Russia would retain control of Constantinople but the Central Powers would not be allowed to even attempt to regain it.

Don’t see the difference; Russia still controls Istanbul regardless of the units being removed. Having units in a tt does not = control.

You need to specifically state that revolutionary Russia relinquishes control of all tts outside Russia.

The CPs should be able to attack russian territories outside of original ones.

The Bolsheviks (at least Lenin) were sent into Russia by Germany to work in German interests.

If we assume that the RR is the Communist takeover, rather than that of the Provisional government (the rules imply that this is the case), then the whole point is that Revolutionary Russia does not act in the Allied interest; the pro-Allied regime has been overthrown.

This is why the Revolution should occur at the end of a CP player’s turn, otherwise the Allies will manipulate it in their own interest by, for example, withdrawing units from specific tts with post-revolutionary aims in mind.

In my version I go way beyond this, with the German-controlled Bolsheviks fighting  Allied-controlled Whites for control of Russia, the various warring powers intervening to back their own clients.

@oztea:

We still have to address what happens to allied units in Russia after a revolution.
And if the CP MUST accept the revolution.
If they are at the gates of moscow and need it to win, and Russia wants peace, why should the CP accept?

The CP should be allowed to refuse the armistice to prevent allied players from willingly playing Russia into a situation where it will surrender.

Or you could just not shoot for fulfilling all the requirements for to occur if you think that situation will happen. ;)

For those who have played the game, with having switzerland attackable, will this help the allies or the central powers?

Yes germany has another front to attack france from but this also allows italy to mobilize and attack germany faster and supporting france at the same time.

Im starting think making switzerland unpassable may tip better chances for germany to win. Anyone care to enlighten me on the situation on that front?

I fully intend to use Switzerland as a hub for Austria and Germany in a Paris-Rome strategy.

This was even before I discovered it was so thinly defended. But with both A & G able to pile units in there before France or Italy move it would be criminal not to take it.

I also infer from the low IPC value that the designers fully intend that the CPs should do this, otherwise it would surely be at least 3 IPCs.