@imperious-leader said in 1914 Gen Con Rules:
@slip-capone Then this is to be in the smorey swamp section, they are his rules alone
They were used at both Gen Con and Origins.
I am just happy they are on the boards to share.
Minor Powers in A&A 1914
-
Looking at the map it seems that:
Serbia and Romania are same colour as Russia;
Bulgaria is same colour as Turkey;
Portugal and (colonies) is same colour as France;
Arabia is UK colour.
Can’t make out the rest, presumably Belgium starts UK or French.
There are neutrals such as Spain, Sweden and Persia which never joined the war.
It remains to be seen if the same colour means they start in effect at war, or it just indicates who controls them when they do join.
Also, UK units are a closer colour to neutral countries than as their own tts…
Best Guess, then:
Start as Allied: Belgium (France), Serbia & Montenegro (Russia)
Join Allies after turn 2(1915): Italy
Join Allies after turn 3(1916): Portugal (France), Arabia (UK) & Romania (Russia)
Join Allies after turn 4(1917): USA, Greece?Neutral: Spain, Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Abyssinia, Persia, Albania, Afghanistan, Greece?
Join CP after turn 1(1914): Turkey
Join CP after turn 2(1915): BulgariaGreece is a difficult one; they supposedly had an alliance with Serbia, but had a pro-German king who refused to join the Allies. Otherwise its difficult to assign “pro” status to any of the other neutrals who didn’t actually take part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Modern_Greece#World_War_I
I’m assuming Switzerland is neutral and impassable - cannot be invaded, but this may not be so.
-
A longer chronology (1 turn = 3 months) gives us the following historical timetable:
start of turn:
2 - Turkey joins CP
4 - Italy joins Allies
5 - Bulgaria joins CP (possibly Allies now allowed into Greece - ref Salonika)
6 - Senussi Revolt (anti-Allied)
7 - Portugal joins Allies
8 - Arab Revolt (anti-CP)
9 - Romania joins Allies
10 - US Election (Republican win - USA joins Allies)
11 - USA joins Allies
12 - Greece joins Allies
13 - Liberia joins Allies (doesn’t seem to be on the map)
14 - Bolshevik Revolution - Russia collapses into civil warInterested to see if the game has a set limit on turns, i.e. after turn 20? you count up income or VCs to determine a winner.
Different system:
-
A longer chronology (1 turn = 3 months) gives us the following historical timetable:
start of turn:
2 - Turkey joins CP
4 - Italy joins Allies
5 - Bulgaria joins CP (possibly Allies now allowed into Greece - ref Salonika)
6 - Senussi Revolt (anti-Allied)
7 - Portugal joins Allies
8 - Arab Revolt (anti-CP)
9 - Romania joins Allies11 - USA joins Allies
12 - Greece joins Allies
13 - Liberia joins Allies (doesn’t seem to be on the map)
14 - Bolshevik Revolution - Russia collapses into civil warInterested to see if the game has a set limit on turns, i.e. after turn 20? you count up income or VCs to determine a winner.
Different system:
well that tells us one thing for sure. 1 turn does NOT equal 3 months because USA enters the war on turn 4
-
Still don’t see how US can enter that early.
If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.
This would mean:
All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)
Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)
Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.
-
No it’s because the turns are not based on rigid turns of ‘time’, rather it is based on what makes sense for the game from a balancing standpoint.
I guarantee you no other scenario will be included, thank god.
-
But if the USA can come in when Russia is still strong, what chance can the CP possibly stand?
Unless it starts with stacks, and stacks, and stacks, and stacks of infantry…
-
Because Russia falls into revolution without another set of “red pieces” that adds nothing to anything. They just retire from the game like they did in History.
-
Even if they’re at the very gates of Berlin?
Sorry, Ivan, but the game balance requires that your entire army collapses at this point, so you all you Russkis have to disappear into thin air.
Politics, politics.
-
If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.
-
Still don’t see how US can enter that early.
If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.
This would mean:
All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)
Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)
Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.
Q. And since this starts in 1914, I wonder how the nations that opted to stay neutral in the beginning will be played.
A. Many minor powers are neutral initially, including the US, which if not attacked by the Central Powers will enter the war on turn 4.
It’s right there in the accouncement
-
@Imperious:
If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.
The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.
Really, you seem to fall into the trap of seeing “World War I” and “World War II” as single self-contained events.
WWII was in fact a collision of around 5 or 6 regional wars that happened to overlap. The “Allies” eventually co-operated, but didn’t even have the same enemies all the time. Only the Finnish-Soviet peace treaty stopped the UK and USSR being at war with each other.
So in WWI the Eastern and Western fronts were fought with little reference to each other; the armistice of December 1917 didn’t stop the war; that of November 1918 didn’t stop the fighting. The war in the east didn’t end in 1918; it collapsed into a series of regional conflicts going on well into the 1920s.
If the game is to have any resemblance to reality, it is this collapse of Great Powers, rather than military occupation, that brings victory or defeat.Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ratio, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.
I’m wondering if, since there are no fighters on the map shot, Larry agrees with me that there were in effect no fighters in 1914. Since reconnaissance is unlikely to be a factor, early war machines are irrelevant.
-
Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ration, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.
Sounds like how the Russian Generals lead there men into war.
-
Still don’t see how US can enter that early.
If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.
This would mean:
All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)
Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)
Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.
Q. And since this starts in 1914, I wonder how the nations that opted to stay neutral in the beginning will be played.
A. Many minor powers are neutral initially, including the US, which if not attacked by the Central Powers will enter the war on turn 4.
It’s right there in the accouncement
“And thus”, quoth the great prophet Yavid, “spaketh the Lord Larry”. “For his word is the law, and shall be neither questioned nor anticipated. For he who questioneth the Lord Larry shall be cast into the pit of Houserules, where he shall perish, for without official rules, houserules cannot be”.
“Except Imperious Leader, who shall be forgiven all, for he hath his own game to plug.”
-
The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.
The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.
World War 1 was also the continuing the Franco-Prussian war, but we don’t need to fight that twice either.
Larry agrees with me that there were in effect no fighters in 1914.
No rather Hasbro didn’t get those sculpts in the money shot for the box in time, due to China being China.
-
“Except Imperious Leader, who shall be forgiven all, for he hath his own game to plug.”
Yes sir, you got that right.
-
Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ration, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.
Sounds like how the Russian Generals lead there men into war.
Perhaps more realistically Russia cannot attack after turn 4, or build new units, but they do defend… Germany should at least have to clear them out by force to take over Eastern Europe. AND Germany should have to maintain some kind of garrison to hold down the tt.
-
@Imperious:
The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.
The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.
You say that like it cannot belong in a World War I game, and that is somehow some indisputable fact. Come off of it. He has shown that it was going on during the war. It’s plausible. I don’t like the idea myself, but to declare despotically that it can’t be in a WWI game is too much.
-
Here you go again with the value added words… Didn’t say it “cannot” belong, rather should not like having the battle of Haiti and her dreaded Dreadnoughts destroying the worlds navy’s. A game with Rio De Oro and Haiti on the same side would prove unstoppable as they proved in History.
http://warshipsresearch.blogspot.com/2011/09/dreadnought-of-haiti-according-to-dutch.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/España_class_battleship -
@Imperious:
The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.
The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.
You say that like it cannot belong in a World War I game, and that is somehow some indisputable fact. Come off of it. He has shown that it was going on during the war. It’s plausible. I don’t like the idea myself, but to declare despotically that it can’t be in a WWI game is too much.
“You say that like…”
as in
“you say that as though…”
or
“your saying that in such a manner gives the appearance that you believe it to be fact that…”
I really can’t be bothered by your inability to actually read what is written. Stop reading what you want to see and read what is clearly there by standards of written English. I realize you have your own dictionary but don’t expect the rest of us to follow it.
I personally don’t like his idea, but to act as though it is crazy or whatever to have it in a WWI game is out of line, even for what I have seen out of you.
-
This:
Stop reading what you want to see
Take your own advice just for once. And stop hijacking the thread …again
Suggested Topics
