I have been playing around with different configurations for a custom table and wanted to note some things I’ve landed on that I really like. A main one thing is having the map mounted so that it can slide around as needed on top of a bigger playing area. My table is 65” x 95” in total with a 5.5” arm rest around the outside and the middle is a recessed neoprene surface. I have the OOB Global map mounted on 1/2” rigid foam with a 1/2” aluminum frame around it. This allows the map to slide up close to whoever’s turn it is, but then be in the middle so both players can roll dice In front of them without disturbing the map and in easy view of the other player. (Plus we like lots of room to roll the bones). This ability to adjust the surface along with a standing height, makes it comfortable for long uses because you can move around more and don’t feel as tied down.
Things I’ve learned and changed from original design - I originally used too big of a frame for the map and mounted it on too high of a foam block (you can see these pictures at the bottom) - it made it hard to see the other player’s dice and the big frame took up too much real estate. My global map is mounted on much thinner foam (the framing is bad, you can see if you look closely) but I also used much thinner aluminum angle for the frame. This gives just enough grip when needing to move the map around (I use furniture slides on the bottom, which glide very nicely on the neoprene) but doesn’t make the whole thing too bulky. Having it an inch or so off the surface keeps the dice off, but isn’t so heigh that you can’t see the other player’s dice rolls. When playing other versions (such as Zombies) the board is much smaller, but it can easily swap in and out on the same table since it can move around where ever it is needed or be pushed aside.
I originally made it normal table height, but found long reaches while sitting were harder and it just felt cramped. Standing height with a bar stool is a great way to have the best of both worlds.
The 5.5” rim around the table itself gives you a nice arm rest that doesn’t interfere with the gaming surface. I’m playing with how to best add some cushion to this part - open to suggestions. Sometimes I just lay a piece of leftover neoprene on it.
Dice bounce nice on the neoprene and stay off the floor. It also feels nice and has enough give to allow things to slide but be picked up easily. Wouldn’t definitely go with neoprene again as a surface covering.
I made the drawers open to the inside of the table so you can stay hunched over the action while accessing and stowing stuff away. 50/50 on whether I would keep this if I were to do it again. If I were doing it again, I might try to build customer drawers form scratch using actual drawer glides, but that was beyond my ability when I first did this, so I just used clear plexiglass boxes with aluminum pulls mounted on them. It’s nice having them clear, and I was happy with how the pulls came out, but without glides they can be a little fussy sliding in and out of their slots.
I originally designed the table so that I could put a cover surface back on top when not in use, but find I don’t really ever do that, so if I were to do it again, I might not mess with that part (I never even finished staining those as you can see in the pictures).
CF362D52-269F-4480-8CBB-08139099138F.jpeg A9E12EA1-66EB-4671-86AC-68C62FD30AD5.jpeg 858DE1F2-030A-4D5A-93E4-70A7D1180ADB.jpeg 8F513EE0-DA37-4BA9-880E-4D5EF7BF431F.jpeg F0188165-757B-4CC1-BF67-5045832283C9.jpeg 2E3CD627-0D31-4121-ACF8-682F9F58A40B.jpeg
Modified 1914 Map file
-
Same map illustrating rail nextwork.
Resisted temptation to add Mexico, Baghdad & Athens as VCs.
Nice if rail could link Cape Town with Petrograd; remember these are potential rail links when they are between enemy vcs.
Any effect of the UK enclosed within 2 SZs?
-
I don’t like spider webs on the map, poor aesthetic.
Move 2 spaces on land fixes the movement issue.
-
@Imperious:
The OOB setup/IPCs greatly favors the Allies!
So why not give the CPs some meat (like Poland with 4 or 5 IPCs) if it correspondends with history?
(needs some playtesting, sure)The tournament RULES address that issue.
The map file addresses obvious Historical points raised by others and makes corrections.
The space between Russian capital and Berlin do allow Germany to grab less IPC than before due to the new distribution, but also makes it harder to reinforce them due to the capital’s location. That means a tradeoff.
I don’t make a map to address balance, rules are used to correct that.
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough! -
@Imperious:
I don’t like spider webs on the map, poor aesthetic.
Move 2 spaces on land fixes the movement issue.
They’re to illustrate potential moves, I’m not suggesting they’re drawn on the map.
Though I like 2 space moves (it was I that first suggested it) there’s something appealing to me in limiting it to VC to VC moves. It simulates the feeling of having set strategic objectives, and after attaining one you have to take time bringing up reserves to reinforce before targeting the next, as well as repairing and laying down the transport network.
For example Germany cannot just dash stright into the heart of Russia; consider the importance of Warsaw - control it and you can send new units stright there from Berlin. Serbia/Belgrade suddenly become worth attacking on A1!.
Faster transport within industrial areas you control and then slower progress into contested and enemy tt seems more authentic to me.
-
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough!Because that is less important than making a more balanced game.
-
@Imperious:
Why make a new map neglecting the historical economic strength of the regions (again)?
OOB is wrong enough!Because that is less important than making a more balanced game.
Correct, but in my opinion it is possible to deliver to both camps!
Example: If Poland gets more IPCs it:
1. helps CP balancewise
2. correctly refelcts Poland as the No1 industrial region of Imperial Russia.So, where is the problem?
-
Correct, but in my opinion it is possible to deliver to both camps!
Example: If Poland gets more IPCs it:
1. helps CP balancewise
2. correctly refelcts Poland as the No1 industrial region of Imperial Russia.It has not been proven and I can’t make Poland worth more because you are Polish. It doesn’t work that way. I don’t even think it was worth the most. What is Polands GDP in 1914?
-
Sorry guys I was very busy with other stuff in the last days and couldnt spend much time on the great new map.
Changes in the Set Up for Russia, Germany, Austria, Italy, Ottoman Empire, BE, France:
Russia:
Lithuania: 6 Inf 2 Art
Tallinn: 3 Inf 1 Art
St. Petersburg 6 Inf 2 Art
Sevastopol 6 Inf 2 ArtAustria-Hungary:
Trieste 3 Inf 1 Art
Tyrol 3 Inf 1 ArtItaly:
Venice 11 Inf 3 Art
Piedmont 1 Inf 1 ArtGermany:
Ruhr 12 Inf 4 Art
Alsace 7 Inf 4 Art
Hannover 6 Inf 3 Art
Pommerania 6 Inf 2 Art
Prussia 2 Inf 2 ArtOttoman Empire:
Meopotamia 2 Inf 1 Art
Armenia 1 InfNaval Set Up:
BE
Sea Zone 4: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 9: 3 Battleship, 3 Cruisers, 2 Transport
Sea Zone 14: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 19: 1 Cruiser
Sea Zone 29: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 2 TransportGE
Sea Zone 10: 2 Battleship, 2 Cruisers, 1 Submarine
Sea Zone 11: 1 Cruiser 1 Transport
Sea Zone 24: 1 CruiserFrance
Sea Zone 15: 1 Cruiser, 1 Transport
Sea Zone 16: 1 Battleship, 1 Cruiser, 1 TransportI will post reports and pictures in the next days!
-
Check out the new map file. I understand that you made that setup for the Phase 2 map. Can you have a look at phase 3 map and see if you like it?
Also, what do you think of making Poland worth 3? Which other place will be reduced -1
-
Poland should not have more IPCs than Ukraine which was (because of cereals) more important for the CPs.
(search for the “peace for bread”)Don´t like neutral Albania because it includes also Montenegro which was at war with the CPs and was a tough enemy for AH… (maybe you could give Serbia a coastline and name it Serbia/Montenegro with 4 IPcs while Albania has 1 IPC left)
I understand the correct historical alignement of Bulgaria to Germany, but I dont like to see this Balkanarmy represented by German units… It would still be better to see them represented by AH or OE…
Angola should be changed from frenchblue to the colours of the BE.
What about Flashmans suggestions ?
(Dividing Seazone 17 - Mark could be the bottom of the printed Fighter,
Finlands unhistorical coastline and the dividing of Trans Jordan)Why did you change US IPCs back to 20 when they enter war in R6?
I was thinking about maybe splitting up Budapest into Transylvania and Budapest…
All I can say is that I like Phase 2 map very much and enjoyed playing with it last weekend.
-
Why did you change US IPCs back to 20 when they enter war in R6?
Because they build while neutral and having 40 IPC for 6 turns becomes a ridiculous horde of pieces. All this balancing is lost if you trade two turns for a cash cow of double income.
The other things i will look into.
-
40 IPCs was because they DONT build until entering the war which would be more historical and would also represent the strongest economy in the world at that time. With OOB the United States were even weaker than Russia or France…
Compare the 2 scenarios, after R10 US would be more powerful than OOB so it gives the CPs a little more time but crushes them at the end of the game even harder and could finally tip the scales (also more historical):R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 R12
40 80 120 160 200 240 280Italy should also not collect income during R1.
-
40 IPCs was because they DONT build until entering the war which would be more historical and would also represent the strongest economy in the world at that time. With OOB the United States were even weaker than Russia or France…
Oh this was never explained. I think all the ideas need to be written out so the module can gain favor. You already got the setup, but that USA rule is a huge difference. So if Germany goes USW, the US also goes to 40 ipc ( at war status) correct?
Why shouldn’t Italy collect income?
Also, Ottomans should be neutral on O1
-
You´re right I didn´t explained that very well (though I did mention it in a comment at boardgamegeek I think)
At the beginning of the game everyone (including USA and Italy) gets his starting income.
With USW (My Rule: GE sub attacking one of the USW zones with a 12-sided dice; result will be split up between BE and USA, if its odd BE will suffer more) Germany can at least hit the 40 US- IPCs twice before Wilson will enter the war earlier than R6… (historicaly Germany did USW in 1915 but ended it after american protests and then again declared it in 1917) Yes after declaring war USA will collect 40 IPCs every Round !Italy was during 1914 neutral and was not in the mood to fight with/against anybody.
That did not change until 1915 (R2) (IT not collecting income during R 1, along with my Setup changes for Venice,Tyrol and Triest also prevents the unhistorical first strike of AH against Italy in R1)Ottoman Empire entered the war on October 29 1914. That means Round 1 (Aug14-Dec14).
-
Bump to revive topic.
Is this project still in the works? What you guy’s have done with the map (saw parts on Game Geek) looked pretty cool (great work IL). Do you have the new set-up and any rule changes at this time. Did you break-up that huge sz 17 (was in discretion), and/or have straight rules in place for Denmark, Gib and Constantinople?
-
I made no changes and Kept OOB.
1914 isn’t too interesting for me once i got the product. Most of the sculpts are crap, especially Dreadnoughts and ocean liners.
People with no Head, hands or feet could sculpt a better piece.
-
Hey flash, someone should make a tripleA map of your version of 1914.
-
From now on can we split Spain in half.
Even though its hardly relevant, its weird seeing a territory touch FIVE sea zones.
Suggested Topics
