How long has this defective game been out & still no definitive Rules changes?

Krieghung, thanks for the quick response.  That poor Russian battleship in SZ12 has to thread the needle through SZ11 and SZ10 even if there are no ships there and I guess once the UK Navy is gone in SZ29, you just need to start ground pounding your way through Ottoman to get into the fight.

I really enjoyed 1914…I really wish I had more time to play it.  To be fair…I wish I had more time for a lot of things :|

Yellow reserved for cavalry

That might make sense.  Either that, or have contesting the capital as a precondition to checking for them.  However, in all three cases, the situation was caused by sneaky moves of troops to places just big enough to cause them to be contested, which is why I suggested giving the country the entirety of its turn to try to correct the situation (like in WWII games of A&A when a capital is captured).  As it was, we sent armies on suicide missions right before the turn of the country in question just to trigger the collapse, even though the moves would otherwise NEVER have been made (like sacrificing a considerable army just to have 1-2 units survive, thereby contesting a territory).

@Flashman:

The other main objective is that the SZs bordering Africa have no mines, which should make naval combat more lively; the CP fleets can link up, or invade north Africa.

That definitely think that could change things up a lot.  Those mines in SZ17 and the large allied fleets make any early AH naval plans difficult.

@KimRYoung:

@rjpeters70:

Dude, no offense was meant whatsoever.�  I was not knocking you or Koreans at all (I’ve even been to the ROK, and loved it).�  It’s just the first thing that jumps in my head these days, given that we have a crazy dictator actively threatening nuclear war named Kim.

I’m not offended at all RJ, just letting everyone know who I am. It was also bad in the late 60’s when the name Kim became a common girls name (short for Kimberly), then if they didn’t know, they thought I was a girl. In H.S. I got put in an all girls health education class, which I thought was great! I still get mail to Ms. Kim Young  :lol:

Kim (white, non-Korean male  8-)

For what it’s worth, I know a Korean named Robert E. Lee.

OK after playing the game a few times I have to say this is my least favorite AA game to date.

I agree with many others it is near impossible for the Central Powers to win, the first game we played I won but we where still new to the game.

The Russian Revolution oob was just broken, now it has been fixed but I still hate the idea that if the Russian Revolution is triggered the CP lose one of the victories cities need to win the game.  As if it’s not hard enough for the Central Powers.

The debate over contested territories and moving out of, is just silly.  The first game we played this rule wrong, but the idea that you cannot leave a contested battle into a territory that you already have units in is beyond stupid.  The idea I couldn’t leave a contested zone into an allies is bad, but not being able to move into territory with my own army unless I own the territory.  Shows a easy way out when writing the rules in my opinion.

Cruisers are next to useless in this game.  The extra movement of 1 does not make it worth buying them, with battleships being so cheap.

Obviously many rules where overlooked when first released such as
US neutral rules and what they can or cannot do  (many of these things are not in the OOB rules as written)
US transports before they are at war.
I also notice when many of these things where questioned the official response came back with what seemed like a bit of attitude at people pointing out these errors and that truly turned me off.  It is not the players fault the rules are unclear or just out right do not say something cannot be done.  There is no reason to blame the players for pointing out these faults in the rules.