Playable Nations in 1914

@Imperious:

WHERE did I say that USA and USSR had, have, or should have the ability to attack at any time in ANY version, 1940 or WWI? Where did I say that (other than in your mind)? Please stick to writing your own posts and stop writing mine in your own head and then responding to those fantasy posts.

What you did say is Global 40 has variable entry, but it does not.

Really? What turn does USA go to war against the axis?  What turn does Japan go to war against UK? What turn does Germany go to war against  Russia?

@Imperious:

Wait, the game is over already when in my scenario listed I clearly state that they are close to winning the war? No wonder you argue against things I don’t say, it’s now 100% clear that you don’t actually read the posts you respond to!

The British fought for four years. Why was ther not a major mutiny of their sailors. Were they not exhausted in terms of manpower and supplying food and supplies?

Germany mostly alone fought against all the allies. UK on the other hand had capable allies. France was close to manpower collapse, Russia was getting there.

The point was that the reasons you gave for Germany to have mutiny are difficulites many other nations faced. Why are they not facing the same potential for mutiny?

“And the Germans would still be exhausted in terms of manpower and supplying food and supplies for four years of fighting.”

Where then are the mechanics for other mutinies for other countries?

So? So what if it happens before turn 10? Why is turn 10 NECESSARY for it to be able to start to happen? Because it fits your timeline? Because that is automatically doom to the balance of the game if it happens before??

Because Historically that’s when it happens in game turns. Secondly, to allow it to happen on say turn 6 would make the game too easy for central powers to win. The setup and economics are based on balance of many factors including a player possibly leaving the game early would prove impossible. At least the playtest when this was considered didn’t make it balanced.

Just do whatever you want when you buy the game, i really don’t give a damm.

So now your argument is that your version is simpler. What does that have to do with balance anymore?<waits patiently=“” for=“” a=“” futile=“” attempt=“” at=“” showing=“” my=“” idea’s=“” imbalance=“” using=“” arguments=“” based=“” on=“” half-reading=“” posts=“” and=“” intentionally=“” being=“” unfair=“”></waits>

it is:

1. simpler
2. easier to remember
3. balanced
4. Historical
5. more fun
6. KISS
7. practical

use your point system, count all the dead units, deduct, take TT’s back and forth, deduct, etc whatever your hearts content my friend.

Really? What turn does USA go to war against the axis? � What turn does Japan go to war against UK? What turn does Germany go to war against � Russia?

USA cant attack Germany before turn 4
Russia cant attack Germany before turn 3

They are the only nations that are totally neutral, so they are restricted unless the AXIS attack early, but it does not go both ways. They are restricted.

Thats my final answer.

The point was that the reasons you gave for Germany to have mutiny are difficulites many other nations faced. Why are they not facing the same potential for mutiny?

Because they didn’t have a similar mutiny to the extent of which Germany faced this. The allies were basically fighting like a group, against Germany. Ottomans and Austro-Hungary were weak empires and could barley hold their own. It was Germany who faced everything.

“And the Germans would still be exhausted in terms of manpower and supplying food and supplies for four years of fighting.”

Where then are the mechanics for other mutinies for other countries?

Go add them. Add anything you want make your own game spend your own money. Enjoy life. Stop arguing about nonsense.

You may need a rabies shot soon. I find these posts amusing actually. Thanks for the fun!

@Imperious:

It is FIXED UNLESS THE AXIS start it early. Those allies don’t have the opportunity to start early. One side determines their fate, not both. It is not complicated.

Do you realize you used the world “unless?” If something is X unless Y, and Y happens (which it does almost every game), then it is not X!

@Imperious:

Take a step back. Or four. If you had read my posts you would have seen that when I was talking about the provocation points, I was referring to their potential in a WWI game. Nowhere did I say that anyone should be able to declare war at anytime.

You advocate a point system were early entry is possible, and i advocate a fixed turn where collapse is only possible STARTING ON THAT TURN.  I try to explain this but you don’t get it.

Not fixed. That’s variable. It doesn’t happen on the same turn every game. It’s variable. I try to explain that but you don’t get it. Get a dictionary and save yourself this foolishness.

@Imperious:

The simple FACT of the matter is that Global is a game where big events, such as beginnings of hostilities between powers, happen in DIFFERENT turns each game. And is that automatically “busted”?

NO BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ALLOW THOSE ALLIES TO ATTACK GERMANY EARLY.  The only way for that to happen is if Germany feels it is advantageous to attack them early. Both sides do not have a choice.

Ah. So how exactly did you get appointed the grand master of what counts as early for this WWI game? Why does a provocation point system automatically allow for something to happen too “early?” You act like my system means the revolution could happen turn 1.

@Imperious:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
IN the Great War example, we set the fixed date where you can start rolling for collapse. If the game didn’t have that, it also would be busted.

Prove it. Seriously, you say that, but where is any evidence? Why is a system that requires multiple turns of cumulative events automatically “busted”?

You would need to be at the table during playtesting and that has already occurred. When you buy the game you can do whatever you want.

Thanks for not answering the question at all :roll:. You claim that the system would need to have a fixed date and it would be busted otherwise, but supply no proof.  :roll:

@Imperious:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
I have no idea why this is complicated. It has a fixed minimum threshold where you start rolling and the modifiers are dependent on control by central powers of specific areas. If the Russian player does really well, they still need this fixed rule for entry.

That is not fixed like you were suggesting earlier. That is variable. What turn does the revolution happen? It depends. Therefore variable. I have no idea why this is so complicated.

@Imperious:

SIGH–- it does not begin before turn 10. You cant even roll before that turn. Jesus.

But it doesn’t automatically happen at turn 10. It could happen at a turn other than turn 10, Perhaps 11, Even 12. Possibly 13! Ooh, 14! Look it varies! But to you it’s still not variable.

@Imperious:

Your point is a entry at any time. Mine is that it can only start on a fixed turn in order to keep balance. Your “rebuttal” is that Global has variable turn entry, mine is that is not the case: USSR and USA cannot attack Axis Europe before their turns on their own accord. You seem to skip that every-time. I find it hilarious!

So the fact that USA and USSR must wait if not provoked somehow means that the same declaration always happen at the same time every game? What?

Where did I say entry at ANY TIME? Where did I say that. WHERE? That is a lie. There is a series of events, manipulable by both sides, that lead up to it.

@Imperious:

Because Historically that’s when it happens in game turns.

So? What if the war in the game is going differently that it did in the actual past. Or are you asserting it would have happened when it did no matter what?

@Imperious:

Secondly, to allow it to happen on say turn 6 would make the game too easy for central powers to win.

Why? Perhaps you intimately know the setup and rules of the game that is about to be released (in which case you should probably not be discussing it anyways), but if we are speculating on what the game would be like (the entire purpose of the thread), then why is is automatic that turn 6 for example be doom for balance? Why is it impossible to balance the game with other factors? Why is it impossible to make the system to the point

As for yours being simpler, you are probably right. But other than the simplicity points your list is at the very least a matter of opinion if not incorrect (ignoring historical cause an effect for replaying events even though causes were different is not historical).

@Imperious:

Really? What turn does USA go to war against the axis? � What turn does Japan go to war against UK? What turn does Germany go to war against � Russia?

USA cant attack Germany before turn 4
Russia cant attack Germany before turn 3

They are the only nations that are totally neutral, so they are restricted unless the AXIS attack early, but it does not go both ways. They are restricted.

Thats my final answer.

Then you are a troll. You are ignoring the actual question. The correct answers to all of those are that it DEPENDS. It can CHANGE. It is variable.

Nowhere did I say there should be no restrictions.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm

It is FIXED UNLESS THE AXIS start it early. Those allies don’t have the opportunity to start early. One side determines their fate, not both. It is not complicated.

Do you realize you used the world “unless?” If something is X unless Y, and Y happens (which it does almost every game), then it is not X!

LOL. The Russians and Americans cannot get into the war against the Euro-Axis UNLESS the Euro- Axis CHOOSE TO ATTACK EARLY. When will you admit that point?

An open system would allow both sides to enter at ANY TIME, without restrictions.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
Take a step back. Or four. If you had read my posts you would have seen that when I was talking about the provocation points, I was referring to their potential in a WWI game. Nowhere did I say that anyone should be able to declare war at anytime.

You advocate a point system were early entry is possible, and i advocate a fixed turn where collapse is only possible STARTING ON THAT TURN. � I try to explain this but you don’t get it.

Not fixed. That’s variable. It doesn’t happen on the same turn every game. It’s variable. I try to explain that but you don’t get it. Get a dictionary and save yourself this foolishness.

\

It is fixed because you CANT START BEFORE TURN X, the system does not allow the roll to occur before that date. What is unclear about that?

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
The simple FACT of the matter is that Global is a game where big events, such as beginnings of hostilities between powers, happen in DIFFERENT turns each game. And is that automatically “busted”?

NO BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ALLOW THOSE ALLIES TO ATTACK GERMANY EARLY. � The only way for that to happen is if Germany feels it is advantageous to attack them early. Both sides do not have a choice.
Ah. So how exactly did you get appointed the grand master of what counts as early for this WWI game? Why does a provocation point system automatically allow for something to happen too “early?” You act like my system means the revolution could happen turn 1.

Because the game Im talking about is another game with a 5 x 4 map and 32 different sculpts. If you actually participated in these threads earlier you might have figured that out ( or not). I am telling you what our experiences were after playing with this game since 2005. We tried different entry systems, everything. It could not balance.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
IN the Great War example, we set the fixed date where you can start rolling for collapse. If the game didn’t have that, it also would be busted.

Prove it. Seriously, you say that, but where is any evidence? Why is a system that requires multiple turns of cumulative events automatically “busted”?

Get time machine go back to about 2007, fly to Malibu, and record what happened. You will have your answer. The only thing that worked was having a fixed start date where you start rolling for collapse. If it was early, it shifted the game too much to the other side.

You would need to be at the table during playtesting and that has already occurred. When you buy the game you can do whatever you want.

Thanks for not answering the question at all rolleyes. You claim that the system would need to have a fixed date and it would be busted otherwise, but supply no proof. � rolleyes

Supply proof that it works if the Russians can possibly collapse in 1916, see how that works for allied victory.

You are ignoring the actual question. The correct answers to all of those are that it DEPENDS. It can CHANGE. It is variable.

Nowhere did I say there should be no restrictions.

Because Historically that’s when it happens in game turns.

In this game as in global one side has a fixed start date to enter. In the case of this game it too has a fixed date where the event can start having an effect.

So? What if the war in the game is going differently that it did in the actual past. Or are you asserting it would have happened when it did no matter what?

Yes i believe in eternal recurrence. It repeats the same thing.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:23:30 pm
Secondly, to allow it to happen on say turn 6 would make the game too easy for central powers to win.

Why? Perhaps you intimately know the setup and rules of the game that is about to be released (in which case you should probably not be discussing it anyways), but if we are speculating on what the game would be like (the entire purpose of the thread), then why is is automatic that turn 6 for example be doom for balance? Why is it impossible to balance the game with other factors? Why is it impossible to make the system to the point

Which game? I make no claims about the Axis and Allies 1914, Im talking about another game soon to be released. If you didn’t bloom late, you would have figured that out.

As for yours being simpler, you are probably right. But other than the simplicity points your list is at the very least a matter of opinion if not incorrect (ignoring historical cause an effect for replaying events even though causes were different is not historical).

This game system favors simple elegant solutions, not bogged down piece counts and accounting of unimaginable scope.

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?57uatsdxv9lntc6
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?cnmx2gtrz784q4a

Here. This might give you an idea of what is going on. These are prototype sculpts. Notice the Railgun. AA14 does not have Railgun, this game does.

@Imperious:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm

It is FIXED UNLESS THE AXIS start it early. Those allies don’t have the opportunity to start early. One side determines their fate, not both. It is not complicated.

Do you realize you used the world “unless?” If something is X unless Y, and Y happens (which it does almost every game), then it is not X!

LOL. The Russians and Americans cannot get into the war against the Euro-Axis UNLESS the Euro- Axis CHOOSE TO ATTACK EARLY. When will you admit that point?

Sure, I will I admit that point. But  that is neither here or there because:

@Imperious:

An open system would allow both sides to enter at ANY TIME, without restrictions.

I have never said anything about it being a open system. It has some restrictions, and has some variability. POWERS DO NOT START WAR AGAINST OTHER POWERS THE EXACT SAME TURNS EVERY SINGLE GAME. IT VARIES. THAT IS VARIABLE ENTRY. You ignored my clear questions getting to that point. What turn do Germany and USSR go to war in Global 1940? It depends. Therefore it is not fixed. It is variable.

Since you don’t know how to use a dictionary here you go:

A few definitions (definitions are statements describing the meaning of a word) of “fixed” from dictionary.com
definitely and permanently placed
not fluctuating or varying; definite

synonyms: constant, steady, unvarying, unwavering, firm.

Now for variable:
apt or liable to vary or change; changeable
capable of being varied or changed

Hmm, when does Japan go to war against the USA? When do Germany and Russia go to war? It is capable of being varied or changed. It is not definitely and permanently placed. It is VARIABLE, not fixed.

@Imperious:

Because the game Im talking about is another game with a 5 x 4 map and 32 different sculpts. If you actually participated in these threads earlier you might have figured that out ( or not). I am telling you what our experiences were after playing with this game since 2005. We tried different entry systems, everything. It could not balance.

Ah there it is. The fact that you have been around longer=you know more. Logical fallacy to the max. You must have heard what they say about those who talk the most… Are you saying that you and this group tried every possible scenario with a variable entry syste that was very similar to mine (or identical) and it was definititively proven to be hopeless to balance. I look forward to seeing these detailed findings. Please point me to them.

@Imperious:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
IN the Great War example, we set the fixed date where you can start rolling for collapse. If the game didn’t have that, it also would be busted.

Prove it. Seriously, you say that, but where is any evidence? Why is a system that requires multiple turns of cumulative events automatically “busted”?

Get time machine go back to about 2007, fly to Malibu, and record what happened. You will have your answer. The only thing that worked was having a fixed start date where you start rolling for collapse. If it was early, it shifted the game too much to the other side.

And you tried everyhting else? That’s how you know that’s the only thing that will ever work? Very scientific.  :roll: You are being dogmatic. How do you know what “early” for THIS COMING GAME will be? Do you know everything about it already? You can’t base everything you think about all WWI games based one your experience with one in 2007. Well, you could, but that would be irrational.

@Imperious:

You would need to be at the table during playtesting and that has already occurred. When you buy the game you can do whatever you want.

Thanks for not answering the question at all rolleyes. You claim that the system would need to have a fixed date and it would be busted otherwise, but supply no proof. � rolleyes

Supply proof that it works if the Russians can possibly collapse in 1916, see how that works for allied victory.

Well since we are speculating about the game, the French and British strength could be at a level where if the CP goes all out on Russia, they risk losing on the Western front. It’s quite simple really. Actually finding the optimal setup like that is not easy, but it never is. The point is that it’s very easy to see that the best way to solve an all out blitz into Russia is to make it difficult to do that on the other front. It’s pretty clear you’re stuck on having much of the game happen exactly as it did in the war (not a surprise, it’s pretty clear you can’t handle the possibility of ideas other than your own. That kind of change (oh no, the revolution didn’t happen exactly on my schedule, the game is ruined!) must drive you crazy!)

@Imperious:

So? What if the war in the game is going differently that it did in the actual past. Or are you asserting it would have happened when it did no matter what?

Yes i believe in eternal recurrence. It repeats the same thing.

There we go. I can’t argue against a core belief like that if it goes into the supernatural. But even if you believe that, you still ignore that in the game, the situation can be drastically different than in the war, which would lead to a different situation in russia as well. When you change causes, effects change.

@Imperious:

Which game? I make no claims about the Axis and Allies 1914, Im talking about another game soon to be released. If you didn’t bloom late, you would have figured that out.

Read the first post of this thread. Then read my posts. Actually read them. I was talking about the possibility of a system like mine in a WWI game. It’s hilarious that you admit knowing nothing about the new game but you know enough to say definitively what could not work.

@Imperious:

This game system favors simple elegant solutions, not bogged down piece counts and accounting of unimaginable scope.

:roll: Hyperbole much? I wrote it down in 5 lines. I realize for you, that might be imaginably difficult to understand, but give the average intellect a little more credit. Don’t drag us down with you.

It’s almost too funny that allegedly this entire time you have been posting about a different World War I game in a thread for this WWI game.

It’s almost too funny that allegedly this entire time you have been posting about a different World War I game in a thread for this WWI game.

Thats what you get for not reading the other threads and just jumping in the conversation arguing about what an actual game without a frame of reference. Enjoy your twilight zone moment.

Read the first post of this thread. Then read my posts. Actually read them. I was talking about the possibility of a system like mine in a WWI game. It’s hilarious that you admit knowing nothing about the new game but you know enough to say definitively what could not work.

No actually read my posts that you originally came into this thread responding too. Had you read my posts in other threads you might have a clue that i was talking about another game. You based all your gibberish on some notion that i was talking about what Larry’s game might be. If you notice even without early clues, i repost entire sections of the rulebook written in a format that might lead you to get the idea that these are rules for a game. I can only tell you what was done and what worked, since you have zero experience at this ( unless you too have a game coming out) you might be a bit more calm and less foaming at the mouth. You responded to me, but had not done any homework to see what i was talking about…another game. That’s what happens when you don’t participate.

Hmm, when does USSR go to war against the Germany? When does Russia go to war? It is a fixed time-frame, which is to say if the Axis don’t do something early, they cant get into the game. It is definitely and permanently placed. It is FIXED, not variable.  If USA and RUSSIA could attack Germany on turn one without Germany doing anything to provoke them, you might have a variable system because BOTH SIDES HAVE FULL LEVERAGE TO DO ANYTHING THEY WANT AT ANYTIME WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS. So stop babbling about gibberish.

This goes back in the trash can…

uote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm

It is FIXED UNLESS THE AXIS start it early. Those allies don’t have the opportunity to start early. One side determines their fate, not both. It is not complicated.

Do you realize you used the world “unless?” If something is X unless Y, and Y happens (which it does almost every game), then it is not X!

LOL. The Russians and Americans cannot get into the war against the Euro-Axis UNLESS the Euro- Axis CHOOSE TO ATTACK EARLY. When will you admit that point?

Sure, I will I admit that point. But � that is neither here or there because:

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
An open system would allow both sides to enter at ANY TIME, without restrictions.

I have never said anything about it being a open system. It has some restrictions, and has some variability. POWERS DO NOT START WAR AGAINST OTHER POWERS THE EXACT SAME TURNS EVERY SINGLE GAME. IT VARIES. THAT IS VARIABLE ENTRY. You ignored my clear questions getting to that point. What turn do Germany and USSR go to war in Global 1940? It depends. Therefore it is not fixed. It is variable.

Since you don’t know how to use a dictionary here you go:

A few definitions (definitions are statements describing the meaning of a word) of “fixed” from dictionary.com
definitely and permanently placed
not fluctuating or varying; definite

synonyms: constant, steady, unvarying, unwavering, firm.

Now for variable:
apt or liable to vary or change; changeable
capable of being varied or changed

Hmm, when does Japan go to war against the USA? When do Germany and Russia go to war? It is capable of being varied or changed. It is not definitely and permanently placed. It is VARIABLE, not fixed.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Because the game Im talking about is another game with a 5 x 4 map and 32 different sculpts. If you actually participated in these threads earlier you might have figured that out ( or not). I am telling you what our experiences were after playing with this game since 2005. We tried different entry systems, everything. It could not balance.

Ah there it is. The fact that you have been around longer=you know more. Logical fallacy to the max. You must have heard what they say about those who talk the most… Are you saying that you and this group tried every possible scenario with a variable entry syste that was very similar to mine (or identical) and it was definititively proven to be hopeless to balance. I look forward to seeing these detailed findings. Please point me to them.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 07:16:06 pm
Quote
Quote from: Imperious Leader on Today at 06:22:43 pm
IN the Great War example, we set the fixed date where you can start rolling for collapse. If the game didn’t have that, it also would be busted.

Prove it. Seriously, you say that, but where is any evidence? Why is a system that requires multiple turns of cumulative events automatically “busted”?

Get time machine go back to about 2007, fly to Malibu, and record what happened. You will have your answer. The only thing that worked was having a fixed start date where you start rolling for collapse. If it was early, it shifted the game too much to the other side.

And you tried everyhting else? That’s how you know that’s the only thing that will ever work? Very scientific. � rolleyes You are being dogmatic. How do you know what “early” for THIS COMING GAME will be? Do you know everything about it already? You can’t base everything you think about all WWI games based one your experience with one in 2007. Well, you could, but that would be irrational.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
You would need to be at the table during playtesting and that has already occurred. When you buy the game you can do whatever you want.

Thanks for not answering the question at all rolleyes. You claim that the system would need to have a fixed date and it would be busted otherwise, but supply no proof. � rolleyes

Supply proof that it works if the Russians can possibly collapse in 1916, see how that works for allied victory.

Well since we are speculating about the game, the French and British strength could be at a level where if the CP goes all out on Russia, they risk losing on the Western front. It’s quite simple really. Actually finding the optimal setup like that is not easy, but it never is. The point is that it’s very easy to see that the best way to solve an all out blitz into Russia is to make it difficult to do that on the other front. It’s pretty clear you’re stuck on having much of the game happen exactly as it did in the war (not a surprise, it’s pretty clear you can’t handle the possibility of ideas other than your own. That kind of change (oh no, the revolution didn’t happen exactly on my schedule, the game is ruined!) must drive you crazy!)

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Quote
So? What if the war in the game is going differently that it did in the actual past. Or are you asserting it would have happened when it did no matter what?

Yes i believe in eternal recurrence. It repeats the same thing.

There we go. I can’t argue against a core belief like that if it goes into the supernatural. But even if you believe that, you still ignore that in the game, the situation can be drastically different than in the war, which would lead to a different situation in russia as well. When you change causes, effects change.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
Which game? I make no claims about the Axis and Allies 1914, Im talking about another game soon to be released. If you didn’t bloom late, you would have figured that out.

Read the first post of this thread. Then read my posts. Actually read them. I was talking about the possibility of a system like mine in a WWI game. It’s hilarious that you admit knowing nothing about the new game but you know enough to say definitively what could not work.

Quote from: Imperious Leader on December 13, 2012, 10:01:26 pm
This game system favors simple elegant solutions, not bogged down piece counts and accounting of unimaginable scope.

rolleyes Hyperbole much? I wrote it down in 5 lines. I realize for you, that might be imaginably difficult to understand, but give the average intellect a little more credit. Don’t drag us down with you.

@Imperious:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?57uatsdxv9lntc6
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?cnmx2gtrz784q4a

Here. This might give you an idea of what is going on. These are prototype sculpts. Notice the Railgun. AA14 does not have Railgun, this game does.

Nice rail piece. Just needs rails printed on the map, or the effect is spoiled.

Is that the Emden with the dummy funnel? Great detail, there!

Are the red pieces Mexican, then? Or just Mexican Commies?

Are you planning 4 types of plane, or just tech upgrades for fighters?

Two types of infantry for each power?

You could get away with 3 sculpts for the upgrades (all basics in cloth caps):

Brodie hat: USA & UK
Adrian helmet: F, I & R
Stahlhelm: CPs

What’s your pitch for Italy colour; or do you go with Avalon Hill and have 8 different shades of brown…

And shouldn’t it be feldgrau (field grey) for Germany, freeing up light grey for Russia/Italy/Austria/whoever?

I’m thinking of dying all my A&A units for both wars, with each nation using the same colour in each. Germany isn’t going to be light grey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shades_of_grey

Are the red pieces Mexican, then? Or just Mexican Commies?

They are AA pieces to show scale comparison.

Are you planning 4 types of plane, or just tech upgrades for fighters?

All planes are upgraded for each nation on specific turns. No need to make different planes with or without interruptor gear, or metal aircraft

Two types of infantry for each power?

two- one is entrenched ( machine gun), Germany and Austro get Stosstrupen ( third infantry unit)

What’s your pitch for Italy colour; or do you go with Avalon Hill and have 8 different shades of brown…

not determined yet.

Shame, I prefer the method of only allowing newly built units to have the tech. Auto upgrade seems like cheating. If you want 3-3 fighters you should have to build them.

DFW BI (2 seater reconnaissance) (1-1-4)

Fokker Eindekker (2-2-2)

Albatross (3-3-2)

Gotha (Bomber) (4-1- 6)

Mind you I don’t consider the starting plane to be a fighter as such. Furthermore, players may choose to keep some of them for the longer range.

Since no other units (except possibly infantry as I’ve suggested elsewhere) are upgraded, I’d really like to see you push the boat out and make 4 types of plane.

Shame, I prefer the method of only allowing newly built units to have the tech. Auto upgrade seems like cheating. If you want 3-3 fighters you should have to build them.

When a nation develops something like Interrupter gear they outfit all their existing planes. They don’t just throw the air force in the dumpster when they can easily retrofit whatever development.

All metal aircraft frames might involve new planes, but game cant sustain dozens of plane types. It is a strategic wargame, not a game about airpower.

Bombers are a separate unit.

The 4 types of planes will be ready when i get the Indian pieces as well as the Cartwrights, and the salsa colored Mexican army

Mmmm, I’ll just have to buy my Albatrosses from someone else.

And the Fokkers. Even if you give us one type of Fokker, I’ll definitely want another. One kind with interrupter gear; and the other Fokker without.

By the way, will this game be going on general sale, or are you planning to buy every copy yourself?

@Imperious:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/?57uatsdxv9lntc6
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?cnmx2gtrz784q4a

those rock!
, how many types of naval units are in your game?