My aa50 board is beat up and that is the way I like it.
Already Looking Forward to 1914 2nd Edition
-
They were not upgraded, they were withdrawn from combat service and REPLACED WITH NEWER BETTER AIRCRAFT, which had to be designed and built from scratch.
I’m beginning to think that there will be 6 versions of the game:
A&A 1914: With automatic turn 4 US entry (triggered by the note).
A&A 1915: Commemorating the US victory over Haiti.
A&A 1916: Commemorating the Woodrow “he kept out out of the war” Wilson re-election triumph, thus postponing US entry for another 4 months.
A&A 1917: Commemorating the sending of the note that triggered the war.
A&A 1918: Commemorating Uncle Sam finally going on the attack on the western front.
A&A 1914 Deluxe Edition: The game A&A 1914 should have been, with bombers and railways and morale levels and a US entry tracker and infantry training and EVERYTHING.
-
When I thought there would be second edition I didn’t think they would be adding a whole lot to it. Updated map and maybe a few new unit types. They will throw in a few new sculpts for the piece junkies so they will bite. This game should have been made on a map the size of global 40 or a little smaller with many victory cities or certain objective points to be taken. Granted I am thrilled that this is coming out but I do believe that in a few years we will be looking at 2 or 3 expansions that are way better than this one.
-
Yea they need a 2nd edition of this game. I wonder what it will have that is new.
-
This game is and should be but so complated. and 3 different types of fighters is far and away more complainted than it needs to be. The game and the war should be won and lost on the game board. By the men fighting it. Not on the tech chart. I would be horrified to find out that it was possible to put a country on such a high tech level that it’s extremely hard if not impossible to be defeated. Last thing I want to see is someone gets lucky to get heavy tanks and roll over his enemies because they can’t get a lucky roll and get heavy tanks for themselves.
The war should and should always be won and lost on the battle board not the tech chart
-
Larry says everyone gets to build tanks on turn 4. That looks like it.
For my money, techs are more appropriate for this game than in WWII. However, my implementation would be rather different, that is that the enemy would be able to copy a tech a couple of turns after it is introduced. Techs in this war were innovative, rather than particularly advanced, hence easier to copy than WWII techs such as jet fighters. The copier would still have to pay to develop the tech, but with a guaranteed result, so the advantage would not be so great.
Still, having tanks for just a couple of turns before the enemy produces their own version could lead to an important breakthrough.
Looks like I’m alone in wanting the fighter plane arms race represented. But I do believe the fighters of 1918 were a heck of a lot better than the string bags of 1914. I’d only want this if there are separate sculpts to represent the new fighters, however.
I do agree that techs should not be the decisive factor in the game; this war should still be about attritional infantry and artillery battles above all. But tanks and aircraft did give the edge to attacks in the later years of the war, albeit they still needed artillery and infantry support. Tanks without inf & art were as useless in attack as they were in defence.
-
The obvious unit types to introduce in a prospective 2nd edition:
Cavalry
Bombers
Destroyers
Anti-Aircraft units
Armoured trains (my personal favourite, but only applicable if rail movement is included)
as well as a distinction made between reconnaissance aircraft and fighters, with appropriate sculpts each
-
Armoured trains (my personal favourite, but only applicable if rail movement is included)
Right. No zeppelins or railway artillery…just skip to 4 types of armored trains. good.
I wanted a canteen unit for parched throats in 4 different configurations of refreshment, due to technological advancement during the war. I hope it is in the 2nd edition.
All units required ‘liquid courage’ to fight and i hope they make this an integral part of the game.
So Beer, Wine, Gin, and Whiskey in that order as the war drags on. We need these refreshment units!
-
How many units are in your game, again?
Wasn’t it 17 different types of artillery?
Oh, and a German tank weighing 33 tonnes which is half the size of an armoured car weighing 4.7 tonnes.
A single armoured train type would be sufficient. We must do justice to the Czech legion.
And you need storm troopers and equivalents for each nation, too.
-
Our game has about 40 sculpts.
Only need two types of artillery: rail and non rail
the tanks are not half the size of armored car, they are larger
no train would be sufficient, and then that’s overdoing it
Only Austro and Germans had proper shock troopers deployed into units. If Sgt. York is to be represented, then add 8 new sculpts to represent “frivolous units that were never deployed category”
-
So what are the 3 artillery units you posted?
I’d assumed they were Field Artillery, Heavy Artillery & Howitzers.
Italy had shock troops before Germany; all nations developed their own equivalents.
It was a mixed blessing: Germany burned up all its best men in the Spring Offensive of 1918 by detaching them into Storm units; when the Allies counter-attacked they found the quality and morale of remaining German infantry was consequently poor.
-
Two types: normal and rail. Thats it. It’s all you need.
Funny thing is no other wargame has counters for allied shock troops, Axis and Allies is a light wargame, so they are not needed. Even having none is too much.
Only Germany developed them to the extent where a sizable portion were used in combat. Hungary to a smaller extent. After that the bar drops way down.
-
I’d say that the Anzac and Canadian contribution in the Hundred Days Battles in the role of storm troops was pretty important.
But again, in 1914 any power MIGHT have developed the idea; you can’t say that only Germany can have them because only Germany DID have them in great numbers.
You might just as well say that Germany is not allowed to produce tanks, because the 20 they actually produced were in too small numbers to make any difference. Germany MIGHT have decided to mass produce tanks if they’d realized how important they’d become. But they didn’t. However, the PLAYER might make a different decision from Ludendorff; that’s what makes this a game, rather than a scripted replaying of history, right?
-
But again, in 1914 any power MIGHT have developed the idea; you can’t say that only Germany can have them because only Germany DID have them in great numbers.
Yea sure, the allies developed airships so Zeppelin sculpts should be distributed to everybody. Awesome. Just whitewash History because the internet says Russia made a balloon and extrapolate 600 foot floating war machines with the Czar painted on the side. Good for comics, but not good for a Historical game.
because some nation “thought” about it or built one prototype, does not mean 100’s of new sculpt ideas for piece junkies. At some point you got to just deal with reality and make a game based on what happened rather than Twilight Zone.
-
@Imperious:
because some nation “thought” about it or built one prototype, does not mean 100’s of new sculpt ideas for piece junkies. At some point you got to just deal with reality and make a game based on what happened rather than Twilight Zone.
Yeah we need to errata Global 1940 and make it illegal for Germany to buy Carriers, since none ever reached operational status in World War II. :roll:
-
Yeah we need to errata Global 1940 and make it illegal for Germany to buy Carriers, since none ever reached operational status in World War II. rolleyes
They built one and they don’t start with one. Makes good common sense. :roll:
-
Storm troops were not a fantasy, all Allied armies used them in large numbers. Their inclusion is fully justified historically, unlike German tanks.
And yet, your rules will probably allow Turkey to shell out tanks like peas from a pod even though Turkey at no time had the industry capable of producing anything more advanced than a peddle powered go-cart.
I’m the one dealing with historical reality; you’re prepared to compromise it at evey turn in the name of “game balance”.
Include what is possible given national and military policy, exclude what is impossible due to lack of capability, including Turkish tanks.
-
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.
-
Storm troops were not a fantasy, all Allied armies used them in large numbers. Their inclusion is fully justified historically, unlike German tanks.
Name all the divisions that the allies employed as Shock troops. Why are they not represented in any strategic wargame based on the Great War?
And yet, your rules will probably allow Turkey to shell out tanks like peas from a pod even though Turkey at no time had the industry capable of producing anything more advanced than a peddle powered go-cart.
WE assume the CP could sell them and railed them. And Turkey cant build tanks till 2 turns before the game ends (technology) and they cant even afford them, so the point is fail. Also, in Axis and Allies some sculpts are not denied some nations. This allows people to make up new scenarios and house rules like some people.
I’m the one dealing with historical reality; you’re prepared to compromise it at evey turn in the name of “game balance”.
Rather, we don’t look up stuff on the internet and find out they made one of whatever, and force feed the game to include 15 different sculpts of it because the internet said so.
Include what is possible given national and military policy, exclude what is impossible due to lack of capability, including Turkish tanks.
And AA guns, silly armored trains, aircraft carriers, and 15 different fighters…
-
And AA guns, silly armored trains, aircraft carriers, and 15 different fighters…
Yes, they were all real and had an impact on the war. Unlike Turkish weapons production.
BTW, you say Turkey can only build tanks 2 turns from the end. I assume from this that you do have a set number of turns, which presumably each represent a specific (and roughly equal) period.
So, on your scripted timeline, on which turns do the following key events occur:
1. Turkish entry (Nov 1 1914)
2. Italian entry (May 23 1915)
3. Wilson wins election by a gnat’s wing - war declaration delayed (Nov 7 1916)
4. The note that triggers the war (Jan 16 1917)
5. USW Declared (Feb 1 1917)
6. Uncle Sam goes to War (Apr 6 1917)
7. The (2nd) Russian Revolution (Nov 7 1917)
8. Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (end of eastern front war) (Mar 3 1918)
9. Allies invade Russia to re-open eastern front war (Aug 1918)
10. Germany surrenders (Nov 11 1918)Interested to see if these events match the turn record.
My guess is that history magically ends in March 1918 and that the last few months of the war are open to the players to decide what happens. But I could be wrong.
I’ve no objection to the inclusion of Turkish tank units, as long as they’re built in industrialized nations and transferred to Turkey by rail or sea transport. Same goes for any other unit: Turkey undoubtedly had modern weapons, but they were built by other countries. Even though (by your criteria) Austria and Turkey should not have tanks at all because historically they produced none.
-
Name all the divisions that the allies employed as Shock troops.
Are you saying that Allied shock troops are irrelevant because they weren’t organized on a divisional basis? Surely the total numbers is what counts. Artillery were organized under divisional command, yet they have separate units.
Even so the Italians evidently created an entire army corps of 2 divisions of Arditi:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arditi
Shock tactics used by Russia in the Brusilov offensive may well have given Germany the idea:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brusilov_Offensive#Breakthrough
Or it could have been the French:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_troops#Development_of_tactics
Britain used infiltration tactics similar to Germany’s in 1917/18, often employing Canadians and Anzacs in the role:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_troops#World_War_I
http://alihollington.typepad.com/historic_battlefields/2008/01/how-did-they-do.html
https://plus.google.com/photos/110169237000562683075/albums/5596620209409457953?banner=pwa&sqi&sqsi
Why are they not represented in any strategic wargame based on the Great War?
WWII. People see them as forerunners of the Nazi Stormtroopers, while Allied equivalents did not form long term political organizations. The name is associated with German elite units, so people miss the fact that the Allies had similar units, and in fact used them more effectively as they didn’t weaken standard formations to create them.
Moreover, in a game starting in 1914, nobody has them. But if they had decided to develop the concept, anyone might have done so later on, yes even the Turks since shock troops are about training not technology.
Allied shock troops were an integral part of later WWI just as much as the German storm troopers, and fully justify inclusion; unlike German tanks which were so few in number that they had no impact.
So, to be consistent, either:
-
Allow any power to train shock troops, or
-
Ban allied shock troops (on the grounds of lack of divisional formations, except Italy, obviously), but also ban German tanks on the same principle.
-
Suggested Topics
