Bill,
In hindsight, you’re probably correct about this. At the time, we just didn’t see it and too much focus on the western front.
The Austrians DID take out Romania on turn one, Russia did not withdraw. In fact she went on the attack a couple times capturing Galicia. At the time it looked like a good idea, but the Austrians and Germans and Turks pretty much went all out send the bulk of their forces into Russia. This was why the French and British were able to capture 3 German territories and free Belgium in the west.
I m sure next game the Russians will take a different approach if they are pushed like that again. As far as not using the optional Russian Revolution rules, at this point we believe they are to convoluted as far as the movement goes, and also depriving the CP of victory capital, but more importantly the IPCs from taking Moscow and the remaining territories. Just don’t see it as any advantage for the Central Powers.
I definitely agree the Allies under played the importance of sending troops into India and that was a lesson learned. Waited to long and the Turks captured Bombay.
As for the allies losing naval dominance, that occurred when the Central Powers gained a lead in the IPC race, and they all each had at least 4 battleships!
Looking forward to playing again next weekend and see lots of different strategies for both sides.
Thanks
Kim
What did the UK do in the Mid east?�  I find that even with minimal investment there the UK can hold off the Ottoman easily.
UK played poorly it seems. To much focus on the naval situation in the west after losing ships off Canada and seeing the German threat against the Grand Fleet.
When the Germans ran through the minefields and lost no ships and sank her fleet, she spent most of her money rebuilding.
The Turks made no attacks to treaten the UK early on, sending most everthing into Russia and Serbia, so I think the UK got lulled asleep. When the Turks turned to move on her, she could not afford the two front war and Russia was out by then.
Will definitely make sure to but more effort into the middle east next game!
Thanks BJ
Kim
Wow that is a lot of CP Battleships! How did they afford them and still have a large enough army?
Wow that is a lot of CP Battleships! How did they afford them and still have a large enough army?
Near the end of the game the total IPC count was 150 for the CP to 60 for the Allies. They had over run Denmark, Sweden, Greece, Persia too.
They started buying a BB every turn and just built up large fleets to break up the transport shuttle from Uk and US.
Kim
I agree with much of what Bill has said here. Playing the “keep the army in the field” and only fight their main force when you absolutely HAVE to strategy with both Russia and Italy, combined with heavy India investment with the Brits is the way to go for the Allies. I’m really hoping to find a CP strategy that can compete with this approach…
Thank you for that KimRYoung.
Made for a good read, but I think Allied errors won it for the CPs.
Losing India and Africa should not happen and as UK I would never build Transports on T1. Protect the existing fleet with a 24 or 30 IPC build.
Navy and control of the seas is all important.
Interesting game. I would like to see how it played out if replayed exactly, because some of those lucky rolls seemed to be in very significant engagements. Even so, it’s another interesting take on the game.
For the record, when I clicked on this I was hoping perhaps it was Kim Jong-un’s game report. ;)
Interesting game. I would like to see how it played out if replayed exactly, because some of those lucky rolls seemed to be in very significant engagements. Even so, it’s another interesting take on the game.
For the record, when I clicked on this I was hoping perhaps it was Kim Jong-un’s game report. ;)
Would be funny. It would be like Spanish Morocco being a separate power and declaring to the world they are invading Germany…
Guy’s, I’m just a 60 year old white dude. But for many years for those who have not meet me always think I’m Korean. In fact in Korea, Young Kim is about as comman a name as John Smith.
My name comes from the Rudyard Kipling book “Kim” which was made into a movie that my mom saw when she was pregnant with me. She just liked the name.
Kim Jung Un probably would only like this game if he could get tech rolls to try for long range nukes :lol:
Kim
@rjpeters70:
Dude, no offense was meant whatsoever. I was not knocking you or Koreans at all (I’ve even been to the ROK, and loved it). It’s just the first thing that jumps in my head these days, given that we have a crazy dictator actively threatening nuclear war named Kim.
I’m not offended at all RJ, just letting everyone know who I am. It was also bad in the late 60’s when the name Kim became a common girls name (short for Kimberly), then if they didn’t know, they thought I was a girl. In H.S. I got put in an all girls health education class, which I thought was great! I still get mail to Ms. Kim Young :lol:
Kim (white, non-Korean male 8-)
@rjpeters70:
Dude, no offense was meant whatsoever.� I was not knocking you or Koreans at all (I’ve even been to the ROK, and loved it).� It’s just the first thing that jumps in my head these days, given that we have a crazy dictator actively threatening nuclear war named Kim.
I’m not offended at all RJ, just letting everyone know who I am. It was also bad in the late 60’s when the name Kim became a common girls name (short for Kimberly), then if they didn’t know, they thought I was a girl. In H.S. I got put in an all girls health education class, which I thought was great! I still get mail to Ms. Kim Young :lol:
Kim (white, non-Korean male 8-)
For what it’s worth, I know a Korean named Robert E. Lee.
