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?
-
http://triplea.sourceforge.net/mywiki
It is a gaming engine- it allows you to play online turn based games. It comes with a rudimentary AI so you could play by yourself, but it really shines in either online real-time games or play by forum here.
There are some excellent games you can download with it- including games that will never be made into physical board games because they would take too long to play, such as ‘New World Order’ and ‘World at War.’
There are fantasy games such as a Lord of the Rings based game, WWII games, WWIII games, WWI games (not 1914 yet…). You can also download all the Axis and Allies based games (clones). People play the Global 1940 the most I think.
-
@rjpeters70:
By the same token you could do a good American Revolution game, that included American Colonies, British, French, Spanish, and Iroquis Nation as players. � Hell, you could even break the American Colonies up into three players: � New England, Mid-Atlantic, and South.
True, that is also a good one.
-
Remember this topic, from before any of us even got the game?
http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29865.msg1073796#msg1073796
Nothing yet has changed my opinion.
-
Also, every WWII global or theatre game since revised has been slanted towards the Axis…
Well, OOB G40 was allied slanted.
-
-
-
Ya, the US did not have to worry about holding it’s NO’s, US can build a major in europe (like norway), and a few other reasons.
-
G40 Alpha 2 -
I don’t remember it being too axis slanted, even though sealion was VERY popular. A lot of folks argued that US can focus 100% pac and then save europe at the end.
-
Well, perhaps OOB was fairly even- however it was very easy to do Sealion and take India. I suppose if the Axis didn’t do Sealion/India than it was more even? 2nd edition made it harder to do either, but most of the bids still go to Allies.
-
I still believe the addition of railroads,factories and fortifications could have opened up a ton of options for this game, therefore a lot of different results.
-
I think larrys definition of playtesting is 10 games with the same few people.
We have played 100s of games as a community already, and what are we at 66% Allied victory?
-
I think larrys definition of playtesting is 10 games with the same few people.
We have played 100s of games as a community already, and what are we at 66% Allied victory?
For 1914? Probably more like 75-85% allied victory.
-
I think poor playtesting.
As in my opinion I find ww1 a very ‘fair’ war. There was never an exact clear winner until the very end.
-
I said it in a earlier post if they would playtest these games more we wouldn’t get as many of them ,but I believe the community would be a lot happier because it would be a better game. I think this games mechanics are great. I love the way the combat works but I do feel the Central will typically run out of gas 80% of the time. With a few more unit types(Heavy artillery,bombers) and maybe industrial tech(Gas,long range aircraft and advance artillery) this game could be the best ever. Heres to Second edition boys and girls cause it’s a coming.
-
I agree. Larry isn’t trying to send us a message, this just wasn’t playtested enough. No way was the outcome of WW1 inevitable. Either side could have won the whole time.
Suggested Topics
