Battle Board for Axis & Allies 1914, Combat rounds,IPC chart, Task Force Cards

Regular game but with Ge. only defending St. Lo& Cherbou and abandoning Caen (only after losing the beaches in front of it).

The Brits. took the beaches by turn 3 and rolled also into undenfended Caen ( Allis tried to keep a pretense there, in case of a counterattack), but, by turn 5, could no longer contain the westward rush of Axis reinforcements to St. Lo.

Here the US forces were thrown back to the beaches, and, even thought taking Cherborgh. The surving forces are making a last stand at Utah beach (the US has 14 reinforcements left, everybody else is out).

Air will have to used more to surround US forces to take out Axis units as they roll to Utah beach. Earlier Brit. armor was used up to slow Axis armor, and, for turn 6, in a rare space, there is a major Axis force of five tanks (1/3 their armor) and three infantry, no AA guns! Here Imperial Air Power will make it painful to move those units!

Also a do or die attack & defense by the Brits. (with a US armor thrown in), finally take the steam out of the Axis “St.LO Express” of armor reinforcements (with so few Axis forces left, &, they boxed in by allied airpower).

With just regular cards, it would have been better for Axis forces to hunker down in Cherbough, and, go mostly onto a defensive mode.

By turn seven Allied forces finally have a point value higher than the Axis, but, need USA reinforcements to mop up oppositon to St.Lo. The dice read 12, all final US forces are released , into battle, unfortunitly this happens in turn seven (turn 6 only 2 US units are called up).

Finally by turn 10 US forces are all outside St. Lo (just sending three tanks by themselves would not take the city).

The game ends with the Ge. losing both of their defended cites (having abandon Caen), but, the Allies failing to hold St. lo more than one turn.

We’ll see how this how this upcoming game turns out! Thanks, Pellulo

@Arne said in 1914 Introduce Tanks Earlier in Game:

Hi, are there any objections (except for the historical ones) to introduce tanks earlier in the game than round 4?

Other than historical reasons, I don’t know why you couldn’t start buying tanks as early as you please. It would shake up some of the established strategies. Whether that’s good or bad would be up to you.

-Midnight_Reaper

I’m late to the game on this post, but since I have played many many games of AA1914 over the last couple years (and it’s my favorite AA game), I’d like to share on how my group’s thoughts have evolved about tanks.

The first few games, we barely made any, thinking they were not worth sacrificing 2 infantry units for the same cost. We lowered the IPC cost to 5, and within 2 games, tanks were on every battlefield. We figured we probably underestimated them, so we returned to the original cost.

Now, they are always on the game board for some powers, namely Germany, France and the UK. Other countries may field them based on whether or not they are clearly in the attack mode. Our games will never last less than 10 turns, usually more like 14 or 15 before we call a winner.

It’s important to remember that AA1914 is about weapons having synergies with each other, which means you need to figure out their niche for each and everyone of them, and they DO exist.

What we found out about tanks is that, once they start protecting a high percentage of your per-turn production (say 25% or higher), they give you tremendous staying power on the offensive. For the main powers, this means that 3 tanks or more will have an impact. For small powers like Italy, a single tank may make a difference if they are on the offensive.

When you play the usual rules, it takes time to bring reinforcements to the front (we use trucks as land transport equivalents so it is a bit faster) and therefore you want your offensive power to not erode as quickly, especially since the defender will have faster reinforcements. Many AA games were lost because the attacker made it to the enemy capital only to completely run out of steam, which meant a large scale retreat was needed.

While it’s true that tanks alone will lose a fight, their role is to skew the results of a offensive battle in your favor. Since their effect is guaranteed compared to rolling dice, you know you will cut your losses. This turns a relatively equal fight into an advantage, or an unlucky roll into a salvageable situation. Their effect will show over 2 or 3 turns, eating into your enemy’s kills and allowing your units to actually be there to defend when he would choose to counterattack.

Tanks alone are not worth it. But a few of them on a battlefield progressively eat away at your enemy’s army by forcing him to accept subpar kill ratios. Yes, more infantry MIGHT be good… if they were alive to defend for the counterattack. Tanks insure you will have a better attrition rate than your enemy, but the trick is you have to have a meaningful number of them compared to your IPC rate for them to make a difference. So, you either build enough of them to be worth it, or none at all.

The one caveat I would have is if you and your enemies have a tendency to stack ungodly large armies on a single region and wait for that epic clash of arms. In my experience, you should avoid this situation at all costs and force engagements when armies have more than 25 infantry divisions, otherwise it becomes a stacking game, and those are typically slow with a predictable outcome (the losing side just hopes something will happen to turn the tides, while the winning side simply keeps increasing its leverage while waiting for the inevitable). Go on the offensive, move that front, make it as fluid as you can !

All in all, if you feel you are going to be on the attack for a while, build tanks and watch your enemy lose more and more units for less and less of yours. Your staying power will be greatly enhanced and they will turn the tide of war in your favor.

Hiya Forum,

Here is a video I have created on youtube of the set up of AnA WW1 1914. I hope it come to some help for you to enjoy the game!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlBTCl9AMgg

BH

On a side note: the 2 movement rule seems to better the central powers on the Eastern front but might allow the allies to put pressure on the Germans right away

It’s actually the other way around. Once you have played a few games you’ll see.

Kim

Kreighund never explained why this was introduced, when it appears to benefit the CPs only in limited movement through such tts. They would surely be better off being able to withdraw from them.

@The-Janus said in Playable Nations in 1914:

defensive

Actually The King of Greece was married to the Kaiser’s sister and was more inclined to support the central powers. It was only due to a allied supported civil war that pushed Greece over to the Allies.