Posts made by xxstefanx

I just wanted to point out the idea how research ought to be handled derived from real research!

I still haven’t got my copy so I cannot judge from playing experience.

But: Germany might have 35 to 40 at its disposal at the start of R2. So why should 5 IPCs - or 3 if you lower the original A&A cost - be “unaffordable” if - and only if:

1. The techs are actually useful/powerful
2. The risk of lossing all money is significantly reduced (4,5,6 with some kind of success instead of only 6)

Regarding 1.:
Forgot to mention that in my opinion a power should be able to directly assign a certain tech to be researched!
Not: In A&A, I research on a strange “column 2” as USA hoping for some ship improvement and accidently get radar!
OR let me say: If you try to improve submarines, you don’t end up with longer-ranged aircraft! :wink:

Of course it also depends on the usefulness of the research areas!

Basically in a WWI game only Germany and UK are supposed to research anyway. Maybe France.

The Ottomans for instance simply do not have enough money and this is fine, as well.

If a power does not invest in research, why give it anything for free?
Everything costs money: Facilities, Laboratories, Researchers, materials, etc….

No: 5 IPCs PER ROLL is perfectly fine!

Question is: How does progress in research happen? Yes, in reality!

There are 2 possibilities:
1. Slow Progress: You manage to proceed in a step-by-step-way until finally reaching your goal!
2. Breakthrough: a “flash of genius” delivers the decisive idea for the (almost) immediate breakthrough.

SO:

• Research is a 3-step-process.
• a roll of 1,2,3 means research failed
• a roll of 4,5 proceed one step on the research chart
• a roll of 6 means immediate breakthrough

In WWI both forms took place on a regular basis!

… and the mountains are too high! :-D

We play our WWI game which is simply called Central Powers & Entente (in reference to Axis % Allies) for about 6 years now.

In the middle 2000s our gaming group which is some A&A veterans for almost 30 years felt like having played every strategy and every move so we thought:
What about creating a really fresh scenario ourself and in the process improve various aspects of A&A not well captured/simulated?
So we came up with WWI because the conflict is far more balanced from the outset and “diplomacy” comes to the table as an important additional strategic factor.

In the end the game features the following elemental changes/improvements:
1. Historical Accuracy (as close as possible)
2. Diplomacy as a new step in the turn order
3. Historical Events (Russian Revolution, US War Entry, Hindu-German Conspiracy)  
4. A&A Rule Improvements

Just some remarks:
-> 1.
We wanted to really feel like the military leader of the power facing the real questions of the war. Therefore Germany’s First Army exactly is placed where it historically stood when the game begins (October 1914) and not anywhere else. And in the correct strength as well. We did not want the situation of A%A Anniversary for instance in which Japan has 9 fighters (for about 2800 aircraft) and Germany 4 fighters (for about 3000 aircraft) Same with infantry: Japan mobilized 1.4 million men but in the game it gets 18 infantry initial setup whereas Germany attacked Russia with 3.5 million men alone but gets 18 infantry as well. Were the units are placed as even another story. We simple wanted the game to feel authentic!

-> 4.
One Example: We always disliked that casualties can be chosen! General: “How did our offensive go today?” Major:“Well, we lost too many tanks but we sacrificed some infantry instead!” If you think about it, this is simply ridiculous so unit types of casualties are rolled out in a second step after rolling out the number of hits.

In short, it’s a fully fledged out WWI game with extremely high historical accuracy, balanced gameplay and various rule additions and improvements!

The only purpose was to generate challenge and fun for our gaming group (and some “guests” to drop by). Just did not feel the urge to publish it officially like stated above. But WWI is immensely interesting therefore I posted the original WWI thread on MR Larry Harris website to push him a bit to create his own version! ;)

No power would have seriously considered attacking neutral Switzerland and/or using it as a passage for attacking Italy. For those who doubt that simply read about the 12 Isonzo battles on the A-H/Italian Alp front.

Switzerland must be impassable in this (or any) WWI game.

This has nothing to do with balance. And if, the game is poorly designed.

@BJCard:

Man three WW1 games?  Well, ‘The Conflict’ website says ‘coming in 2012’, so who knows.  Your game (IL) looks better anyway.

Actually it’s 4…
but I don’t think I will find the nerve to put myself into “publishing hell” :evil:
:wink:

Besides I think IL’s game will be awesome!

But maybe I should consider putting the rules and board up here for some WWI geeks!? 8-)

Tech should capture the most prominent ones:

1. Superstructure
2. Tanks
3. ASW (Anti-Submarine-Warfare) (which is Hydrophones and Depth Charges)
4. Chemical Weapons and Countermeasures (Chloric Gas, Mustard Gas, Gas Masks)
5. Fighters, Bombers
6. Heavy Artillery, Railway (or Longrange) Artillery

1: Later in the war even more extensive defense systems were build. Massive concrete structures significantly improved defense because infantry and light artillery were significantly reduced in their offensive power.
Effect: Attacking Infantry/Artillery -1

2. Tanks were not introduced before 1917. At first they were extremely unreliable getting improved during the war.
Introduce some kind of “reliability” roll to determine which is inactive during a combat. Reliability gets improved with rounds.
Make them cost 4 therefore and to my opinion a tank should negate the “trench” effect for one infantry.

3. ASW was introduced not before 1916 and even then UK had not the proper ship types to to use the technilogy in an effective way.
Submarines should not be able to be detected before ASW is researched. Submarine ruled the seas 1914/1915 almost uncontested.
If researched destroyers get a detection roll and a depth charge roll on 1.

4. Chloric gas was the first gas attack to be used in WWI. It was blown towards the enemy trenches. Mustard gas was used later fired from artillery to eliminate the unpredictability of wind.
Both should be preemptive strikes before combat.

5. All aircraft were reconnaissance planes 1914 with A0/D0 at the outbreak of war just improving artillery accuracy.
3 different steps of fighter research could get the combat values up. Bomber can be researched after you reched step3 of fighter development.

6. Almost all artillery 1914 was light field artillery (except G and A-H)
Heavy Artillery rolls with 2 dice,
Railway Artillery rolls on 3, can shoot from one tt afar and is not affected by superstructure. Cannot support infantry though.

Any reason for using olive green for US? It’s WW2

Here are the US doughboys:
http://historymartinez.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/wwi-us-doughboy-uniform.jpg

Please rethink, IL!

No problem with 119$ (if everything is perfect!  :wink: ).

Could you specify the models for the sculpts?

For instance, tanks should be clear:
A7V, Mark IV male/female(?), Renault FT17
(coorect?)

What about the others?

Dreadnought?
Kaiser or Tegethoff class for the CPs?

What happens in the Bolshevik Revolution then.

Do the Russian territories just get eliminated from the game?

I am relieved!
Russia is spot on! +++

Btw any red-brown Bolsheviks appearing in your game from 1917 on?

Just discovered the picture of the box srt!

And it is pure AWESOMENESS!!!

Game could be bought for the box alone!  :wink:

@Imperious:

I assume, Russia will be beige, similar to UK AAP/AAE, correct?

Russia will be OOB Milton Bradley

Sorry to say, but this is a poor choice!
“Red” was the Revolution. The “Red Army” was formed 1918 to fight the Tsarist loyal troops and had (almost) nothing to do with WWI.
Russia ought to be WHITE (if you follow political reasoning) or beige (if you consider the Tsarist army uniform).
RED-BROWN belongs to WW 2!!!

P.S.: If you play the Russian Revolution out in your game, you can even let red-brown Russians represent the Bolsheviks and white or beige ones the Tsarist troops!

Very good, khaki UK pieces!  :-)
The grey of OOB MB German pieces is good, too. Not perfect as the field grey is slightly brighter but ok.
I assume, Russia will be beige, similar to UK AAP/AAE, correct?

How about the other nations?

• Will France come in 1914 Royal blue or 1915-1918 Heaven-Blue (light blue)?
• USA? Can you still get rid of green and make them brown at this point of production?
• Turks will be red like the flag, right?
• Which Green will Italy be? Flag or Arditi green?

Last question: Any chance at this point to make the Germans Light Gray and the Austrians Dark Gray?
Come on Imperious, do me this favour, as I am German and want to put my Pickelhaube on! :-D
Germany and Austria have to be “right”!

Awesome Map!

Colours:
Russia - perfect!
Germany, A-H: Perfect! BUT colours should be switched! PLEASE! Germany ought to be field grey (light), A-H is supposed to be the darker grey.
Italy: Green! No question!
UK, OT: Fine! (I would have given them Khaki and Sand (yellow) based on WWI era uniforms though! And of course all the sand in the Middle-East battlegrounds :-D)

USA: Why do all people think green is logical! Basically USA introduced the green-based fighting uniforms in interwar period! WWI was brown! So…

Very nice work with the sculpts! 8-)
Count me in for a buy!

Indeed in terms of tech WWI was far more innovative than WWII.
In WWI many technologies were INVENTED and in ADDITION as everything was so new there was much continous advance/progress as well (like in WWII).
Fighters, tanks, ASW (anti submarine warfare with hydrophones and depth charges), even the submarine was new (though already available 1914 but hardly known what to do with it!). In addition there were all the improvements e.g. the fighter race causing alternating air superiority!

So Flashman, you are not alone!

At least in a BIG/limited/collector’s edition tech is supposed to be there as a prominent factor (as well as (real) diplomacy!)

And - even if simulated historically correct - it would hardly be “decisive” per se.

Hey Flashman, you are well informed and have good ideas BUT I can assure you that these thoughts will lead to complex rules which Larry would like to prevent especially for this initial release which is supposed to bring some numbers in!

I am curious how he avoids some of your described problems but we will see.

In an advanced game/collector’s editon whatsoever things might be different!

Flashman is absolutely right stating that:
1. Russian Revolution took place clearly before the end of the war!
2. The combatants were White Russians and Bolsheviks (both former russian troops! The Allied sendings are neglectable!!!)
3. In an advanced game there ought to be a “Russian Civil War” (mini) game in the WWI game to reflect the situation correctly!

Regarding Italy I would say oztea hits the spot with his dynamic view:
Dice rolling depending on events with overall greater probability for Italy to join the Entente, then Neutrality throughout, then to join CPs.
(In our game you can buy a diplomatic die for 5 IPCs. You positively influence on 4+. You need 3 steps to either side of a war entry scale and there are various modifiers along the way. In the end you need some kind of probability matrix and weigh it with the investment nations are willing to spend to favor major or minor powers. (Italy major power; Bulgaria, Romania, Portugal, etc. minors. USA cannot be influenced directly but solely on 2 specific event scales named “public opinion” and “political decision”.

Great Words, Larry! :-)
Verry much appreciated!

Let’s see what the results will be: for this game, AAE40 and future games.

Tbh I really hate it that I cannot split Japanese forces right from the start due to lack of additional TAC bombers - that is a total NO GO! :evil: