Posts made by Muscleape

We just finished our first game of WWI. Although I am sure we botched up some minor rules, I enjoyed it. I felt it was a nice change of pace to A and A WW2.

The Central Powers rolled over Russia. We were playing with the Revolution Rule. ALthough the German and AH player could have triggered it, they purposely did not. INstead they opted to conquer Moscow and carve up the Russian territories. This boosted their IPCs so that both were quite powerful. At this point, it was a slow and steady grind of attrition on the Eastern Front. It was clear by turn 9 that the CP was eventually going to win, so we stopped playing.

I do like the map, but the western front territories are just too small to hold all the troops contesting them. It would have been nice if W Europe was a bit bigger. Or perhaps he could have boxes on the boarder of the map that can hold extra troops so the space on the board does not get too crowded.

I do hope that Zeppelins are introduced if they make a second edition of this game.

I think Cavalry should be included as well. Granted on the Western Front, cavalry were extinct after the first 6 months. The Eastern Front was not quite as dug in. Cavalry were used by both sides longer on the Eastern Front.

I haven’t touched the original game in over 20 years. I went out and bought the second edition. It truly is an amazing game. the second edition has added depth that does not take away from the sheer fun. Currently, we have played 10 games. In every game, the Axis wins. I know the game must be balanced. After all, it is play tested. However, as I look at the math involved with the game, it seems a good Axis player will win almost every time using the current official rules.

On the Germans turn, the Germans move out 4 subs and 4 fighters and a bomber into the English Channel to wipe out the UK/USA flotilla.

The UK/USA have 1 carrier, 2 fighters, 1 destroyer, 2 subs, and 2 cruisers.

IN the opening round the attacking Germans all miss. The UK/USA flotilla score a hit with one of the fighters.

The German player wants to take a sub as a causality. He argues that since there was a USA destroyer on the space it would be possible for the defending UK plane to hit a German sub.

Is this correct?

I was writing to get a clarification on a scenario. During a naval battle, can a defender choose to take an air craft carrier as a casualty and leave the fighters in the battle?

For example I am defending with an A/C with two fighters. I am attacked and the attacker scores a hit. Can I choose to sacrifice the carrier in order to keep the planes in the fight?

SS,

You are right it might take a while for a GG to emerge. Personally, I think waiting for a GG to emerge after an epic battle adds some realism to the game. I also think it adds excitement because one never knows for sure when a GG will emerge.

I also think a GG should be a limited to leading a certain type of unit. I think the player should choose. He could only choose based on the units that he used and survived in the battle. For example, Crazy Ivan attacked with 3 Inf and a bomber. He wins the battle but lost all three infantry. He rolls and gets a GG. The GG he gets would be attached to his bomber from now on and only providing a bonus to bombers on the same territory as the GG. Had an infantry survived with the bomber then he would have a choice of attaching the GG to the infantry or the bomber.

Honestly, I have no clue what the die rolls should be.

This thread is very interesting. I think a great General would add a great token to the game. A great General would function like a queen on a chessboard. One of the most important pieces. I think this should be echoed in AA. The real question is how would they be generated? I think an IPC purchase is too easy. IN real life, Great Generals cannot be bought. Great Generals rise up by proving themselves in battle. I think this should be reflected in AA.

If it were me, I would have the possibility of a Great General emerging after an epic battle. I would define an epic battle as involving many units. The attacker might receive a great general if he wins a battle beating a certain number of defenders. On the flip side, I would allow a defending player a great general roll if he beat back a certain number of attackers in a battle.

After the battle, the player would roll a die to see if he earned a GG.

Again, thank you for clarifying that. I used to play the original axis and allies when I was in the Navy. A bunch of us would gather and play it in our down time. This was the 1986 version and that was 20 years ago. After I got out, I put the game away and never touched it again. 20 years later, I am a teacher. A student of mine was talking about it. I asked him if he played it, and he replied yes. He rekindled my interest in the game. So of course, we decided to get a game going after school. Before we could play, I just wanted to clarify those old questions, as it really impacts on the strategy.

Now, England can use its navy to clear out the German Navy and launch an amphibious assault on Germany even if Germany still controls Denmark/W Europe.

Thank you for clarifying that. I have one related question. Do I need to control Denmark/ NW Europe in the 2012 second edition to sail into Germany?

In 2004 Revised, the Med Sea was always open. But on this 2012 Second edition the line seperating the sea zones is very narrow. Does this mean I have to control Gibraltar to enter the Med Sea?