I was wondering if there was a version of TA 1914 with the tournament rules variant from Larry Harris. If there is, I can’t find it, so if someone could link that I would much appreciate it. If this version does not exist is there the possibility of one being made by one of the fine individuals on this site?
How is it?
-
Wow. So really the game doesn’t work as is?
-
The game is fine as is ;) (maybe increase the cost of battlehips by 2)
Just is tough for the CP (takes alot of patience)
Games dont take nearly as long as G40
-
How does it compare to G40?
-
How does it compare to G40?
Not nearly as long, all the powers have a major impact on the game and you have to plan your strategies further in advance. Naval combat is actually more frequent than in G40 as naval units aren’t nearly as costly to produce and subsequentially, mines aren’t as devastating.
-
@Hitlers:
How does it compare to G40?
Not nearly as long, all the powers have a major impact on the game and you have to plan your strategies further in advance. Naval combat is actually more frequent than in G40 as naval units aren’t nearly as costly to produce and subsequentially, mines aren’t as devastating.
Naval combat is more frequent? How so? There’s rarely any naval combat in the 1914 games I’ve played- one or two battles in the north sea/atlantic and one or two in the med… that’s it.
-
@Hitlers:
How does it compare to G40?
Not nearly as long, all the powers have a major impact on the game and you have to plan your strategies further in advance. Naval combat is actually more frequent than in G40 as naval units aren’t nearly as costly to produce and subsequentially, mines aren’t as devastating.
Naval combat is more frequent? How so? There’s rarely any naval combat in the 1914 games I’ve played- one or two battles in the north sea/atlantic and one or two in the med… that’s it.
The CPs have little chance of winning if you don’t contest the seas. With how cheap battleships are, I buy one every turn with Germany.
-
i think battleships are too cheap
-
@Uncrustable:
i think battleships are too cheap
I would disagree. For this time period everyone was building battleships. It was so out of control that after the war, The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 was designed to stop to the battleship arms race.
Under the assuption that this game goes beyond the 1918 armistice, large fleets of battleships would have been the norm. The Germans would have had 4 Baden class battleships and several large 2nd generation battlecruisers. Britain had 4 Hood class battlecruisers planned! (yes the same Hood that was the pride of the fleet in WWII).
Definitely in our game at the end, every nation had around 4 battleships in a long game (around 16 turns) that the CP won, and I figure that would have been about right if you assume the war going into the 1920’s. Seemed VERY WW I to me :-)
Kim
-
@Uncrustable:
i think battleships are too cheap
I would disagree. For this time period everyone was building battleships. It was so out of control that after the war, The Washington Naval Treaty of 1922 was designed to stop to the battleship arms race.
Under the assuption that this game goes beyond the 1918 armistice, large fleets of battleships would have been the norm. The Germans would have had 4 Baden class battleships and several large 2nd generation battlecruisers. Britain had 4 Hood class battlecruisers planned! (yes the same Hood that was the pride of the fleet in WWII).
Definitely in our game at the end, every nation had around 4 battleships in a long game (around 16 turns) that the CP won, and I figure that would have been about right if you assume the war going into the 1920’s. Seemed VERY WW I to me :-)
Kim
So nations in WW1 built far more capital battleships/battlecruisers rather than smaller cruisers ? I doubt it.
It makes no logical sense to buy subs over battleships and cruisers are worse than both unless you want long range.
Increasing the cost to 14 would fix this and/or giving cruisers the bombardment ability. -
So nations in WW1 built far more capital battleships/battlecruisers rather than smaller cruisers ? I doubt it.
Yes that is true, and after the war EVERYONE was building battleships and battlecrusier. Look at the OB for Jutland, there are virtually no cruisers, it is all battleships and battlecruisers.
It makes no logical sense to buy subs over battleships and cruisers are worse than both unless you want long range.
Increasing the cost to 14 would fix this and/or giving cruisers the bombardment ability.You probably have not figured out the value of long range movement for cruisers yet. That’s ok, once you figure it out just like Flashman and tanks you’ll see their value. They are definitely need dependent, so in some cases, not as valuable (don’t buy) and in others, will be a real threat.
Subs are of value for several reasons, first is soak off, but two subs are capable of getting two hits in combat, where a battleship can only get one. Also, don’t discount the ability of subs to move unhindered through enemy sea zones and not have to stop. Again if you have not done it, you probably have not seen the value.
All this ships have special abilities that will be of value in the right situation. If it is not an immediate need for such, you will probably just build a battleship, and that’s fine, cause that’s what the Great Powers where enamored with.
Larry did a good job with this.
Kim
-
Absolutely, freaking love this game. Love it even more than WWII 1942 I think. More interesting gameplay, more historically accurate IMHO (e.g. Russia was never under threat of attack by Japan, Japan’s more critical to the success of the Axis than Germany, etc.), more interesting powers, and I love all the optional/delayed stuff (Russian Revolution, unrestricted sub warfare, U.S. entry on 4th turn, tank purchase beginning on the 4th turn, etc.). Can’t wait to play again! :-D
Suggested Topics
