Finally bought this game!

@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 envisioned calvary working like this.

Attack at a 2
Move at a 2
Defend at a 3 (If on a territory containing defending infantry)
Defend at a 2 otherwise.

Cavalry played a minor role during the entire war. (Lawrence of Arabia for example)

Cavalry would have one other feature. They alone would be able to leave a contested zone and attack an empty adjacent enemy controlled territory.

By turn 4 they would no longer allowed to be built.

I do agree the game is great as is.

This sounds like a good idea. I play with a lot of new players, many of whom are confused by the “units can move 2 spaces, except when they can’t (except for fighters).”

They’ve always had an easier time with 42.2’s NCM.

@Auztria:

Yes. If they truly had a historically accurate setup, Russia would have almost as many troops at start as Germany and Austria-Hungary combined. The Ottoman Empire would have no fleet, Germany would have extra cruisers in the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean, Britain would have just 1 infantry, and Africa would be even more barren. Of course they can’t do that, simply for gameplay reasons. If Russia could conquer Galicia and East Prussia effortlessly every game, people would quickly grow bored.

But you see… I went to school to be a historian! I will have to do a little bit of experimenting with the Russian infantry bordering Galicia and East Prussia. Naturally, it raises my hackles that the Russians can’t do much more than poke the CPs on this front. The Russian TTs containing six infantry probably ought to have eight (on the western border). Any attack they make in Prussia or Galicia is going to be bulldozed by a massive A-H or German attack with at least 12 infantry in each case to throw at the hapless Russians.

I have a soft spot for those intrepid Bulgarians c. 1915. This has led to some experimenting on my end to make them a playable country in lieu of a country in the direct Ottoman pale. Instead of collecting income, they would do something like China does in A&A:Pacific 1.0–crank out people or arty (no planes, tanks or ships). I even thought about allowing the Germans to give them a subsidy (1 IPC or something along those lines). Australia is often talked about for its commitment to the war (and justly so), but I was blown away when I read the Bulgarian stats. 1,200,000 mobilized out of about 5 million people!!  If Italy is in this game, surely Bulgars can’t hurt…

Haven’t ordered mine yet. I would suggest the infantry size discrepancy is either an optical illusion or perhaps a subtle attempt by Avalon to aid player’s abiity to distinguish oposing forces on a crowded board.

@ossel:

@BJCard:

Viet nam war could be made into a fun game, with helicopter rules or something like that.� The US would have superior military, but fewer units- maybe some kind of home morale system affected by US troop losses?� Would the Vietnamese/Chinese have human wave tactics?� Perhaps you could change history and fight the war like it was a war and not a police action.�

It would be hard to model a war in which the US forces never lost a significant battle, but was still forced to stop fighting.

I have a scenario I’m working on for Vietnam. It involves helicopter landings, infiltrating Vietnamese troops, and terrain difficulties. I have the map and rules pretty well done, just need to playtest it and refine the rules a bit. Also need to figure out victory conditions (probably use a morale system like you mentioned). I’d be happy to post it on this board if anyone’s interested (would that go in “House Rules,” or “Modifications?”).

FYI Guys, I’ve just posted my Vietnam ruleset and map over in “Other Variants”: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30166.0

Those of you who are interested, let me know what you think.

@flashman

I am sure when the Second Edition comes out, many of these concerns will be dealt with, especially with a more streamlined and clearer rule book.

If not by Avalon Hill, then maybe Eagle Games. They did a good job, with Conquest of the Empire( I basically stuck with the old set of rules), and, Shogun(kept most of the old rules).

Along with any new minis/collectable minis.

As for a new follow up game, for example like Jutland, or, Lawerence’s adventures in the Mid-East , is pure speculation.

My best bet would be a tie in game like Axis & Allies 1915 and The War of the Worlds(H.G. Wells Novel could be given as a treat inside the game box).

Alas any reissued game would probably have those DAMX Zombie theme to it, thanks, Pellulo

PS I would never ever RoundRobin the latter.