Balanced 1914 Setup?

@Arreghas I really love this idea!
One of the biggest problems I find in my games is stacking. Its not as fun when the game just comes down to two giant stacks on the western front, and the CPs can never win because they can never get enough guys there. However, I think this house rule combined with Economic and Political Collapse could fix that problem and give the game more of a trench warfare feel. Thank you for sharing and keep up the good work!

@barnee I agree but then whats stopping anzac and calcutta from just taking the money islands turn one then?

Germany is going to get 6 IPCs for it and 4 guys? Compared to Anzac and Calcutta pressuring Japan on another front? At that point it becomes to heavily leaning into the allies since Japan already does not have the best backing in this one with having to force its way through calcutta and china from so far back.

Am I wrong in my thinking on this one?

It sounds like you might enjoy Risk: Europe! It’s available for only about $30, and it features free-for-all battles across the old world of europe with a more complicated economy and army structure than classic Risk.

I don’t think the A&A 1914 board is well-suited to a random objective deck…you’d be investing a lot of time in fiddly setup, beancounting, etc. only to have someone win all of a sudden because they had an easier-than-expected objective card that they drew at random, or because you guessed wrong about what their objective card was and blocked them out of the wrong territory.

Example Prototypes

 Advanced Artillery

 Rockets

 Heavy Tanks

 Increased Factory Production
1 stack - Minor
2 stacks - Advanced Minor (Technology - Increased Factory Production)
3 stacks - Major
4 stacks - Adcanced Major (Technology - Increased Factory Production)

 War Bonds

 Improved Mechanized Infantry

 Super Submarines

 Jet Fighters

 Improved Shipyards

 Radar

 Long-Range Aircraft

 Heavy Bombers

I love the idea for a Europe 1939 game, 3 individual blocks with own specific victory conditions.

Player 1, the Axis with Germany and Italy, separate economies but move and attack together.

Player 2, the Commies, USSR aka Russia, joined with China in the global game.

Player 3, the democratic western allies USA, UK, France, separate economies but move and attack together.

@oztea

Hi! Sorry to disturb you, but just to clarify (sorry for the stupid question), Japan is supposed to be at war with the UK, ANZAC, and the Dutch in this setup, right? I’m asking because the TripleA map doesn’t have the UK and Japan at war and I’m not sure whether that’s an error or not. Thank you!

My alt. Chinese set up was
2inf in Siuyan
3inf in Hopei
2inf in Anhui
3inf in Hunan
1inf in Kewchiow
4inf and 1ftr in Szechwan
3inf in Yunan
3inf in Kwangsi

The only major major change comes in giving Chinese control of the originally Japanese controled Kwangsi tt. All Japanese units remain in play but get moved up by 1tt. So what was in Kwangsi moves to Kiangsi, what was in Kiangsi moves to Kiangsu, what was in Kiangsu moves to shangdong. This dosnt effect Japanese strenght and they can still use their overwhelming air power to advance, pretty much, at will in China. What it dose is give China one full turn to collect its NO and makes Japan a bit more wary about striking south on J1.

I’d like to know if anyone has developed an alternate setup for either AAR or AA50.  I am not looking for historical accuracy - I’m looking for a setup that produces the most exciting gameplay.
I know a lot of people would disagree with me, but I like A&A not because it’s based on WW2, but because of the gameplay and mechanics. 
So, I’m looking for a setup that would enhance gameplay.  I can’t help but think that some “exciting” setup options are sitting on the cutting-room floor simply because they are not historically accurate.
Can anyone help?
Thanks.