Topics created by Flashman

Wove’s rules above are pretty much exactly as I’ve always though rail movement should be.

I might be a little more generous to Turkey and allow it to rail anywhere within its original tt; they did have a railway all the way to Medina, and were building one to Baghdad.

Preventing the CPS moving units from Berlin to Baghdad would be a vital strategic goal for the Allies, definitely spicing up the battles in the Balkans.

Also consider how big some of the SZs are on this map: you can ship from Canada to Marseille in one turn. This is how the Allies can move units, the CPs have to march overland one space at a time, when in reality the trains would get them to just behind any front line in no more than a week or so.

Seeing as how the Kaiser has admitted defeat I doubt ever

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.

No retreating with air units seems sort of silly.

Well, supply over sea zones would solve the lost capital issue for the French and maybe Italians.  I suppose if Istanbul is taken, the ottomans would have crumbled anyway, so not worried there.  If Berlin or Vienna go, then thats probably game.

I personally bought 2 copies of Spring 1942 to get extra pieces, because they were cheap, and then bought 1 copy of 1942 2nd Edition for all the nice upgrades. I am very happy with '42 2nd Ed.

I skipped the original Eur & Pac 1940 games but later bought 1 copy of each of the 2nd Editions, so no major financial cost to me there. I’m very glad I did that, and I’m very happy with the 2d Editions (and Global) now.

As for 1914, I would prefer to get a 2nd Edition instead of the 1st (if a 2nd is ever released). I don’t mind paying for the whole game as long as I hadn’t already bought the 1st Ed. I am disappointed by the lack of individual unit sculpts for the rest of the units, although the Infantry look nice. I’m in no hurry to purchase 1914; I will wait and see what people think of the game once they’ve got it in their hands and played a few times first.

Naval mines can hit transports. You call out mines on ships one by one. (to distinguish transport w/2 INF vs transport with INF+Tank)

So yea, amphibious invasions are risky, but if you have naval superiority why march through France as the US when you can land and Greece and be super annoying.

@Flashman:

Russia is still in the war in Summer 1917; like I say the scenario could start with tehr big Russian summer offensive on July 1st.

Spring 1918 would be after the Bolsheviks have pulled Russia out of the war.

Fair enough, don’t know WWI history that well yet.  I think it could be good though if you do a late war scenario with countries having access to better weapons.

Britain can funnel the India troops there in two turns, after the considerable middle eastern army is used.

Perhaps it would be better to have the B & F fleets sack themselves destroying the Austrian navy.

The point is, the initiative of movement is very much with the Allies via sea power. Since overland movement is slower, the Allies should be able to use this to their advantage in a way that they could not in the real war due to the internal (rail) lines of the Central Powers.

If the Allies work together they could have Austria begging for German help to defend Vienna before the Germans get close to taking Paris.

In 1915 French and British troops marched into Greece for preparing the landing at Gallipoli, specifically on the island of Tenedos and in Salonika.

This happened in blatant violation of Greek neutrality. (maybe because it was just a scrap of paper)

Yeah ask Germans that “ideally” Belgium must have been parted in regions that were needed to get into france and those that werent…  :roll:

In fact the head of state King Konstantin didn´t want the entente to operate in his country (doesn´t matter if they were “invitated” by good payed venizelos)
He was actually forced by an french ultimatum to abdicate in 1916.
For that goal the good allies made an exerted pressure on Greece (British and French ships blockaded the Greek to starve people)

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erster_Weltkrieg

yes its german wiki but the sources are international and reliable… (don´t know if english wiki says something about that)

Or one infantry for each non infantry unit.

So you can build 2 inf and 2 arty, if you wanted.

Treating USW as a strategic bombing attack? Simply rolling 1d6 per sub? That’s a pretty good idea, actually. I’d allow it over much of the north atlantic. The only limit to damage is that British always gets the IPC’s from the british isles, and the US always gets at least 10? IPC’s. And you couldn’t do it in a sea zone with hostile surface warships. It probably should be that way in Europe 1940 as well.

Also, perhaps the US enters the war after losing 15 IPC’s? And only cruisers can attack subs.

And yah, the ‘old’ Europe had the best treatment of convoys.

@Flashman:

So no contested SZs, then.

Does that meant that, when a player with ships in a SZ that an enemy has just built a new ship into takes his turn, he must either fight the new units to the death or withdraw?

If I remember correctly, ships can avoid battle in previous A&A versions, but perhaps he’s changed it to simulate the necessity of breaking through the blockade?

Someone mentioned that the new ANZAC infantry from Pacific 1940 2nd edition would make good Askaris.

Nice list, Flashman. Some good points there.

I wanted to give the poor Yanks something to do…

Actually I don’t suppose the U.S. and Italy are allowed to control non-aligned neutrals until they are at war.

Question: if Austria attacks Albania R1 (but doesn’t attack Venice) does this automatically mean a state of war between Austria and Italy, or just that Italian units are used to defend Albania?

If the latter, Austria could use this loophole to annihilate Albanian units before they have any chance to be supported from Italy. Not that Albania is likely to be worth much - 1 IPC if that.

It seems strange that Italy cannot transport units to Albania without engaging the Austrian navy; in reality Italy blockaded the Adriatic across the narrows between Apulia and Albania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otranto_barrage

I think “stay in port” from Larry means remain within the protection of your “home” SZ. Effectively, the Adriatic is the home port for the Austrian fleet.

But can you make out the SZ borders?

Have a tech chart, with the roundel of the player on the tech(s) they’ve obtained.
Not so complicated.

Out of Supply

I’m not going to suggest complicated supply rules, just a thought about armies that become isolated from friendly capitals.

To use an obvious example of Serbia. Suppose the opening Austrian moves involve a successful invasion of Romania, but the attack on Serbia is resisted.

This leaves Serbia as politically part of Russia, but isolated from it by neutral and enemy held tt.

Should the Serbian army suffer a penalty from this lack of supply? I would suggest that OOS armies would be most authentically represented by a shortage in artillery shells. So:

Units in OOS armies may not be “promoted”.

This more severely effects attacking moves, but OOS armies defending can dig in and defend well enough.

Give them an entire game round to re-establish supply, otherwise such armies must surrender.

I’m assuming here that a contested Romania does not make Srerbia OOS, supplies will still find a way through.