Minor Powers in A&A 1914

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

@Flashman:

Still don’t see how US can enter that early.

If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.

This would mean:

All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)

Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)

Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.

Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.

Q. And since this starts in 1914, I wonder how the nations that opted to stay neutral in the beginning will be played.

A. Many minor powers are neutral initially, including the US, which if not attacked by the Central Powers will enter the war on turn 4.

It’s right there in the accouncement

@Imperious:

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.

Really, you seem to fall into the trap of seeing “World War I” and “World War II” as single self-contained events.

WWII was in fact a collision of around 5 or 6 regional wars that happened to overlap. The “Allies” eventually co-operated, but didn’t even have the same enemies all the time. Only the Finnish-Soviet peace treaty stopped the UK and USSR being at war with each other.

So in WWI the Eastern and Western fronts were fought with little reference to each other; the armistice of December 1917 didn’t stop the war; that of November 1918 didn’t stop the fighting. The war in the east didn’t end in 1918; it collapsed into a series of regional conflicts going on well into the 1920s.
If the game is to have any resemblance to reality, it is this collapse of Great Powers, rather than military occupation, that brings victory or defeat.

Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ratio, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.

I’m wondering if, since there are no fighters on the map shot, Larry agrees with me that there were in effect no fighters in 1914. Since reconnaissance is unlikely to be a factor, early war machines are irrelevant.

@Flashman:

Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ration, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.

Sounds like how the Russian Generals lead there men into war.

@Yavid:

@Flashman:

Still don’t see how US can enter that early.

If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.

This would mean:

All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)

Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)

Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.

Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.

Q. And since this starts in 1914, I wonder how the nations that opted to stay neutral in the beginning will be played.

A. Many minor powers are neutral initially, including the US, which if not attacked by the Central Powers will enter the war on turn 4.

It’s right there in the accouncement

“And thus”, quoth the great prophet Yavid, “spaketh the Lord Larry”. “For his word is the law, and shall be neither questioned nor anticipated. For he who questioneth the Lord Larry shall be cast into the pit of Houserules, where he shall perish, for without official rules, houserules cannot be”.

“Except Imperious Leader, who shall be forgiven all, for he hath his own game to plug.”

The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.

The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.

World War 1 was also the continuing the Franco-Prussian war, but we don’t need to fight that twice either.

Larry agrees with me that there were in effect no fighters in 1914.

No rather Hasbro didn’t get those sculpts in the money shot for the box in time, due to China being China.

“Except Imperious Leader, who shall be forgiven all, for he hath his own game to plug.”

Yes sir, you got that right.

@Yavid:

@Flashman:

Moreover, if the Russians KNOW they’re going to disappear into the ether at the end of turn 4, even if they have a better than average win ration, they’re little more than a swarm of Lemmings, hurling themselves at the nearest German positions in complete disregard to holding any defensive line.

Sounds like how the Russian Generals lead there men into war.

Perhaps more realistically Russia cannot attack after turn 4, or build new units, but they do defend… Germany should at least have to clear them out by force to take over Eastern Europe. AND Germany should have to maintain some kind of garrison to hold down the tt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-DIbtc5IW8

@Imperious:

The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.

The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.

You say that like it cannot belong in a World War I game, and that is somehow some indisputable fact. Come off of it. He has shown that it was going on during the war. It’s plausible. I don’t like the idea myself, but to declare despotically that it can’t be in a WWI game is too much.

Here you go again with the value added words… Didn’t say it “cannot” belong, rather should not like having the battle of Haiti and her dreaded Dreadnoughts destroying the worlds navy’s. A game with Rio De Oro and Haiti on the same side would prove unstoppable as they proved in History.

http://warshipsresearch.blogspot.com/2011/09/dreadnought-of-haiti-according-to-dutch.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/España_class_battleship

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Imperious:

The purpose of the Red pieces is to fight the “loyal” Russian pieces to stop them reopening the Eastern Front.

The purpose of Russian Revolution is to take Russia out of the game, and not have them fight some other battles that belong to another game as a comic sideshow.

You say that like it cannot belong in a World War I game, and that is somehow some indisputable fact. Come off of it. He has shown that it was going on during the war. It’s plausible. I don’t like the idea myself, but to declare despotically that it can’t be in a WWI game is too much.

“You say that like…”

as in

“you say that as though…”

or

“your saying that in such a manner gives the appearance that you believe it to be fact that…”

I really can’t be bothered by your inability to actually read what is written. Stop reading what you want to see and read what is clearly there by standards of written English. I realize you have your own dictionary but don’t expect the rest of us to follow it.

I personally don’t like his idea, but to act as though it is crazy or whatever to have it in a WWI game is out of line, even for what I have seen out of you.

This:

Stop reading what you want to see

Take your own advice just for once. And stop hijacking the thread …again

@Flashman:

@Yavid:

@Flashman:

Still don’t see how US can enter that early.

If Larry wanted to fast track to the USA getting in the war earlier perhaps the game should have been “Axis and Allies 1917”.

This would mean:

All major nations already at war (no need for political rules)

Weapons such as tanks and fighters would already be in production (no need for tech schedule)

Starting in April 1917, Russia would still be in the war, but on it’s last legs. The CP would have to deliver a KO blow to France or Russia before the Americans get mobilized.
But then, any scenario that has a scheduled US entry is essentially the same thing.

Perhaps a 1917 scenario will be included.

Q. And since this starts in 1914, I wonder how the nations that opted to stay neutral in the beginning will be played.

A. Many minor powers are neutral initially, including the US, which if not attacked by the Central Powers will enter the war on turn 4.

It’s right there in the accouncement

“And thus”, quoth the great prophet Yavid, “spaketh the Lord Larry”. “For his word is the law, and shall be neither questioned nor anticipated. For he who questioneth the Lord Larry shall be cast into the pit of Houserules, where he shall perish, for without official rules, houserules cannot be”.

“Except Imperious Leader, who shall be forgiven all, for he hath his own game to plug.”

does it offend you that I’ve read the accouncement? and don’t antipate the game to include official rules that controdict what is in said accouncement? or that I have no interest in writing house rules for a game I’ve never played as if I know how to make it better without knowing anything about the game play of the game? Personally I would like to talk about what techs could be houseruled in but I’m waiting for more information about the game such as what will help the game out or make sense in the game. But I’m waiting till I know something more about the game. Like how it plays

@Imperious:

This:

Stop reading what you want to see

Take your own advice just for once. And stop hijacking the thread …again

You’re posting as though someone’s idea to include a feature in a game that was in the historical time period the game covers and is closely related to a feature we KNOW will be in the game (some form of revolution) has no business being in the thread.

Stop declaring things to be off-topic and only for other games simply because you don’t like the idea. I know you freak out anytime anyone else’s ideas deviate from your own and might possibly threaten your picture perfect games in la-la land, but its time to realize that there are plenty of people other than Imperious Leader who might be right about what can be historically appropriate, or fun, or good for the game.

I don’t like the idea of the reds and whites or whatever it was, but I am not going to say it’s off-topic as a tactic to shut the idea down.

@Flashman:

Even if they’re at the very gates of Berlin?

Sorry, Ivan, but the game balance requires that your entire army collapses at this point, so you all you Russkis have to disappear into thin air.

Politics, politics.

Excellent point. If the revolution has nothing to do with what is happening in the game and is based on a date that will often ignore the fact that the game will go differently from the actual war, we could end up with some bizzare scenarios. Imagine what might happen if Germany goes full-bore for France keeping a skeleton garrison in Germany, just enough to avoid losing berlin, and the russkies poof into thin air. All of a sudden axis wins because everything went according to the Holy Schedule while ignoring actual historical cause-and-effect.

@Imperious:

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

How do you know that the game is most likely over anyways at that point? Have you played it?

What if it isn’t?

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Flashman:

Even if they’re at the very gates of Berlin?

Sorry, Ivan, but the game balance requires that your entire army collapses at this point, so you all you Russkis have to disappear into thin air.

Politics, politics.

Excellent point. If the revolution has nothing to do with what is happening in the game and is based on a date that will often ignore the fact that the game will go differently from the actual war, we could end up with some bizzare scenarios. Imagine what might happen if Germany goes full-bore for France keeping a skeleton garrison in Germany, just enough to avoid losing berlin, and the russkies poof into thin air. All of a sudden axis wins because everything went according to the Holy Schedule while ignoring actual historical cause-and-effect.

@Imperious:

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

How do you know that the game is most likely over anyways at that point? Have you played it?

What if it isn’t?

That’s why I think Russian Revolution should be done in a “Japan Wins” in the Old Pacific game kind of way.

@Yavid:

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Flashman:

Even if they’re at the very gates of Berlin?

Sorry, Ivan, but the game balance requires that your entire army collapses at this point, so you all you Russkis have to disappear into thin air.

Politics, politics.

Excellent point. If the revolution has nothing to do with what is happening in the game and is based on a date that will often ignore the fact that the game will go differently from the actual war, we could end up with some bizzare scenarios. Imagine what might happen if Germany goes full-bore for France keeping a skeleton garrison in Germany, just enough to avoid losing berlin, and the russkies poof into thin air. All of a sudden axis wins because everything went according to the Holy Schedule while ignoring actual historical cause-and-effect.

@Imperious:

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

How do you know that the game is most likely over anyways at that point? Have you played it?

What if it isn’t?

That’s why I think Russian Revolution should be done in a “Japan Wins” in the Old Pacific game kind of way.

Hmm, For every 10 IPC in 1 turn collected, it was +1 for Japan, if they had multiples of 10 bombed out, they lost that many, and if they had less than 10 they lost. Is that what you are talking about, if income is less than X, Revolution happens?

Something I think would be really simple is at the end of russian turn add income to 1 or 2 dice rolls. If it’s less than X, revolution. Similar to AAP, but with a little more chance for those unpredictable peasants.

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Yavid:

@vonLettowVorbeck1914:

@Flashman:

Even if they’re at the very gates of Berlin?

Sorry, Ivan, but the game balance requires that your entire army collapses at this point, so you all you Russkis have to disappear into thin air.

Politics, politics.

Excellent point. If the revolution has nothing to do with what is happening in the game and is based on a date that will often ignore the fact that the game will go differently from the actual war, we could end up with some bizzare scenarios. Imagine what might happen if Germany goes full-bore for France keeping a skeleton garrison in Germany, just enough to avoid losing berlin, and the russkies poof into thin air. All of a sudden axis wins because everything went according to the Holy Schedule while ignoring actual historical cause-and-effect.

@Imperious:

If they got there, the game is most likely over anyway. But in that case they fall anyway to Lenin. If they didn’t fall the “red set” of pieces would be even more invalidated.

How do you know that the game is most likely over anyways at that point? Have you played it?

What if it isn’t?

That’s why I think Russian Revolution should be done in a “Japan Wins” in the Old Pacific game kind of way.

Hmm, For every 10 IPC in 1 turn collected, it was +1 for Japan, if they had multiples of 10 bombed out, they lost that many, and if they had less than 10 they lost. Is that what you are talking about, if income is less than X, Revolution happens?

Something I think would be really simple is at the end of russian turn add income to 1 or 2 dice rolls. If it’s less than X, revolution. Similar to AAP, but with a little more chance for those unpredictable peasants.

I’m talking about something like: for every $5 they collect they get a point they loss 1 point for each unit lost and for each the value of each tt lost. When they run out of points Revolution happens and they drop out of the war.

That seems cool. They have to be careful not to squander troops, which makes sense for keeping people happy.

The only problem with my system is that it completely discourages Russia from attacking. So maybe they should gain points for taking tt also.