Am I the only one seeing $100 MSRP as too much for this? In total this looks to be right about 1942 levels. 12 inf for each power?

When you consider this is pretty much a 100 year anniversary commemorative game of WWI you're paying a dollar per year (not so bad LOL).

If all purchased units are supposed to be placed in the capital where do nations like France and Austria-Hungary, who have inland capitals, place their naval units? Or do I have the wrong impression of unit placement in that land units have to be placed in the capital and naval units can be placed on originally owned territory that has a naval base?

I pulled this from the end of the Russian report from Larry.

New sea units can be placed in any sea zone that shares a naval base symbol with a territory that you originally controlled. New units can enter play even in a contested territory or hostile sea zone. No combat occurs because the Conduct Combat phase will be long past.

Land & air units will be mobilized at your capital (with the possible exception of the UK having some limited building in Bombay? We'll know soon, UKs report is due next). Ships will be mobilized from a naval base (no capital needed), and I don't believe a power will have more then 1-2 naval bases on the map (probably won't be able to build more either). The coastal capitals will have a naval base (guessing). Sounds like naval bases will be assigned to both a land territory, and a particular sz. A naval base also comes with mines that will roll at 1 vs enemy ships that move into, or through it.

Wow Flash, you never sees to amaze 

Now the turn order is F'd up

Could you put together a Letterman top 10 list of things wrong with A & A 1914 so we can keep it straight. Please please fill in the blanks, and we already know what the #1 is

#10
#9
#8
#7
#6
#5
#4
#3
#2
#1 No choo-choo's




Please take this for what it is    and a couple months after the game does come out I would like to get a glimpse of some of your house rules to change things up

You could also jump over to Larry's site. They are pretty easy to find there, and all authored by Larry in the A &A WWI 1914 board (see link below). It is a detailed report of what appears to be a game in progress, and a great read.

1) Report from the Front (Austria)
2) Imperial Russia
3) Imperial Germany
4) France 1914


http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=44

Is that a nipple ring on Brest, oh never mind it's an anchor for the port

wove100, nice pick up about Belgium being linked to the French, and the French would mobilize them (collecting the income & units). Holland would be different story (I think), because as a neutral its forces would mobilize against whomever entered it. If Germany forgoes attacking Holland, they wouldn't get the Dutch income, but wouldn't have to fight their 4 units either. If UK decides to come through Holland, the English would have to fight the 4 units there so it might be better to leave it then counter attack I guess. 

I think the strat attempted in most games will be Moscow first then Paris or London  depending on the sea's and who is weaker. I'm not saying it's going to be the best strat, but probably the most straight forward (and seems to be the way Larry is going). Germany will most likely attack east & west simultaneously in the beginning.

Most will be playing with the optional Russian Revolution Rule. If you force the Russians Revolution by attacking with all 3 CPs then you can use all your resources on the western front afterwords knowing the Russians can't slither back into the game. Keep in mind that you don't have to take Moscow in this game with all your units ending up there, just control 4 Russian territories (3 adjacent to the capital), and have Moscow be contested. All your German units won't end up in Moscow, so they could be one step closer to the sea, or the direction you want them to head. I wouldn't worry to much about stranding half the German army on Russian soil, because you can bring some back piece mail through the Baltic back to Kiel (or the western part of Germany) where the battle will be raging. Part of the eastern force (stationed maybe in Ukraine) can also head south once Russia is forced out, because the Ottomans or Austrians will most defiantly need some help putting pressure on the English or Italians through Turkey or Romania.

Paris won't fall easily in this game, but the Germans need to make some early progress then dig-in on the western front trying to keep the battles on French soil contesting French territories for as long as they can to keep French income down (fewer French units). Then roll back as they need to in a fighting (contesting) retreat back to the German border or into German territory until they can focus 100% of their resources on the western front. As the French get further from Paris they will have the logistics to deal with, and the UK will have logistics throughout coming across the Chanel, then marching to the front (so now trains don't look to good to the Germans do they).

Oh crap, just flipped back and saw Larry posted the French turn (see ya)

Not sure if the Ottomans will get much of a shot at North Africa, unless everyone else ignores it. They would have the best route of the CPs, but will be pretty poor (crumbling Empire). Egypt will probably be supported by India as the Admiral pointed out. Italy could have a say in that as well depending on where the Austrians are heading (could be an all in on Russia to force they're early retirement). I think France will have its hands full, but they would also have access to the Med, and the ships needed to to get there. The Ottomans will have many enemies in the Med and a lot of coast to defend if they manage to get to Egypt.

Nope, I'm sure he plays by his own set of rules (which would include rail), and probably on his own map too.

If you change the rules for movement you ruin the setup.

How bout just playing the game as is..... before trying to fix it?

The game has not been proven to be a good or poor design. Give it a chance right?

Hmm, same quote, different response LOL. Don't think you can judge a game in a bad light because all the things on your personal X-mas list didn't make it.

I agree 100% w/IL and most would see it that way (strange I know right). I generally play OOB until we notice a repeating problem, or it is proven that something is skewed and needs some work (like through the Alpha process). It isn't my intention to suggest radical changes or say something is broken 3 months before the game comes out LOL (3 months after would be more typical). I reserve any personal judgement, and I'm skeptical (as most are) even when others proclaim a problem, because sometimes such demands come from a certain play style, group setting, or in Flashes case just want more out of it. Fortunately the later can be dealt with through house rules, and maybe, just maybe after much testing and proven data at some point can find its way into the game as an optional rule (or in a reprint) ?

Austria Hungary, given how it has the same production as Russia, I figure I could play WW1 how it was ment to be played, with Austria covering Germany's behind until they smash France's teeth in.

The war will be done by Christmas that way

Spoken like a true Warmonger LOL

PS: So your planning on a long game then. If the game comes out in April, X-mas is a long way off (hehe)

BTW I think playing both the Ottomans and Austria would be cool

Flash, I don't disagree that rail could have been part of this game, and has been widely used since the 1800's in many wars. I think that rail could be part of AA, and I would love to see that mechanic in a future AA game for any era (hopefully it will happen). As a side note IL will probably take full credit for the idea though, leaving you hanging in the wind LOL.

To work as a game mechanic rail would probably need to be printed on the map for the regions that had a good network, be able to be SBRed, and not just a general rule for NCM. It would probably benefit the bad guys more, so there would most likely need to be something to off set it for the allies. Maybe in the form of UK getting the ability to mobilize a limited number of units (inf) from the Commonwealth w/o ICs (or something).

In this 1914 game there is going to be a delicate scale of balance (like all AA games), and Germany will be the axis of that scale IMO. Germany will need to be careful not to overload one front, and ignore the other for to long, and will most likely be working the French front w/o much help. The way the game is set-up moving units at a faster rate (rail) would throw that balance off IMO. It's about game mechanics and balancing it, and rail didn't make it in this edition (get over it).

Historically Germany was thinking that they could drop France quickly enough to switch gears to the Russian front before they fully mobilized. Kinda like what happened in WWII (yeah Italy screwed them in both wars LOL). Yes rail was part of that plan traveling from one front to the other with-in a relatively short span (I get that), but if allowed to, it would give the CP to much of an advantage in this game because the way that this game engine works IMO.

When the game starts, as the CP you know that the above isn't going to happen because of the game mechanics (one round of battle). The French front is going to get stuck in the mud, and be pretty stagnant. You will be required to keep a steady flow of units pouring into the trenches so that the French (with UK) don't gain ground and ratchet up their income for more units. French units come into the game (Paris) much closer to the front in the beginning then Germany (Berlin) because the front is on French soil (as Flash pointed out). As the Germans you need to keep that line though, because you can't afford for the French (w/help of UK) to gain ground and ratchet up their income (more units near the front).

You also know there is a Russian revolution rule (4th turn at the earliest) that is based on how hard you (Germany) and the rest of the CP push that front. The game mechanics force the Germans to have a good balance of units going in both directions (they won't be able to overload one side or the other IMO). You (flash) say that the CP need a rail system to jump from one side to the other in a couple turns, I think it's quite the opposite in this game (because of the other mechanics). You can't allow the Germans to go full throttle against the Russians the first 4 turns to force them out of the game because your left over units will return to save Berlin quickly. You can't allow the Germans to play mostly defense against the French/UK. Again as you have pointed out Berlin is a long way from the opening front, and it would take the French a while to get close to the German capital. In that case the Germans would be mobilizing near the front, and the French have the logistics problem (it is a double edge sword IMO).

I kinda like that this will be a slower paced game as far as movement. It gives a new depth that has been missing IMO, and I think you may share it. In most games you can buy slower units early, and mechanized units later and go all in w/o having a reserve force, or reinforcements coming up. This game doesn't allow that, as you will have a constant flow of reserves flowing in (I like that).


I know a couple of things have bugged you in past games Flash.

1) Tanks/mech moving twice as fast as inf knowing they would all be NCM at the same pace because of rail. Problem solved, because now there is no difference in movement (watch what you wish for LOL). It does provide for a constant flow of reserves though, which is a little more realistic isn't it?

2) Being able to take over enemy ICs and produce units in what would be perceived as using the enemies factories (factories that would have been burnt to the ground in most cases). This game doesn't allow for you to use your enemies production centers (that I'm aware of anyway), so we have made some progress haven't we?

As a side note Flash, you have been at the forefront of not having the ability to use enemy ICs, or build your own IC on enemy soil to mobilize your own units (I get that, it would be unlikely to happen because of scorched earth etc..)  You have also been trying to pioneer rail into the game for as long as I can remember. I know the thought process and theories behind both mechanics, but don't they both basically do similar things.

An IC built on, or captured on enemy soil would allow you to mobilize fresh units near that front, but there is a slight delay before you can use it (next turn for captured could be longer if it is traded, two turns if you build one). Rail would allow you to quickly move your units built back in your own production centers to, or near the front (somewhere between 3-5 spaces I'm guessing). Theoretically the IC on enemy soil could be a gathering point for your units that are railed or flown in from your production centers, rather then an actual factory building them. I'm not trying to be argumentative, just pointing out that theoretically they are similar as far as units getting to the action that's all. I understand the logic behind both are different, and w/rail you would probably be able to disrupt enemy movement etc....

Flash and Oz you're both pushing similar rules/idea's of units just miraculously showing up near the front or in remote areas that won't be in the game. It would be nearly impossible to balance it IMO.

Flash I like the idea of a rail rule (maybe even just as a house rule), but as I see it, if rail was involved at any capacity then we would have seen evidence of it in one of the 3 reports we got.

Oz, same thing, if there was a rule to allow a power to mobilize or recruit units other then in their capital in a territory based on IPC value we would have got a glimpse of that by now. Other then the possibility of Bombay being able to mobilize ground units at some level (we'll see when UKs turn rolls around if there is a special rule) I can't see either of these being in the game.

You're going to have to rely on transports, and/or a steady slow moving line of reinforcements constantly moving forward from your central industrial power plants (capitals).

Flash, you're right to a point that w/o rail, or the ability for extra moves when staying with-in your controlled territories the CP will be hard pressed keeping a steady flow of units moving to the trenches, but it could also be to much of a benefit to them if they could move even double time when not engaging the enemy. It will take looking a couple turns into the future to decide which direction for German units to head leaving Berlin.

Larry also said that the German starting force is large enough to move into any of the neighboring enemy territory and either take it, or not fear the counter attack. I know this can't last more then a couple turns because they will be facing multiple enemies in France (including Italy), so they are going to need that steady flow of units to recoup losses. The French will be losing ground or territories will become contested (income), and although they can build right at the front, they will be coming in lesser numbers. The UK will still need to transport units over to the French coast, then move them into position (will take 2-3 turns to get units over from London to the trenches), or try to establish a beach head in Belg or Hol which will be overwhelmed by German reinforcements moving up.

BTW I (as many) will be messing around with house rules for this game after playing it for a while OOB. Both these ideas are very interesting. Rail would most likely help the CP more, but the ability to mobilize units based on IPC value could help the allies more (depends on values of the territories). Together they might off set each other enough to work in tandem LOL.

I would suspect some kind of a Commonwealth rule for Canada and India (also representing Anzac). Maybe something tied to the IPC values or an inf or two each turn from Bombay or Canada. It would seem that India will need to mobilize units to keep the Ottomans honest, especially if Russia has a Revolution.

I haven't seen any mention of NOs in this game either. If there were some I think that it would have been noted by now having gone though the turns of 3 major powers.

You take more from Larry than you think...

bla bla bla

BTW If your "thing" is claiming you came up with an idea before Larry, then I really don't see why your "thing" should go unchallenged.

Wait just one damn minute here vonLettowVorbeck1914, IL has the copy right to "1914" so you are going to need to change your screen name. He thought about the year 1914 once in 1997 so it is his, give it up. Well at least it is hidden because your name is so long, maybe he wont notice