• I am working on this map now. Seize of Africa is smaller and much more like the original map.

    Will take some days but I hope I finish it before August 1…

    Flashman could you please help me with Flags, IPC-Numbers, USW-Signs, tt-scripture?

    1914lpha.png

  • Customizer

    No Hejaz?

    Had to change colours for my own palette.

    Did you want Petrograd as joint capital?

    I still prefer Rome reaching the Adriatic - its too small as it is.

    1914Alpha1.PNG


  • Looks Nice!

    How would Hejaz and the rest of Trans Jordan look like !?

    What do you think about the Sea Zones in the med?
    I am not sure about AHs possible easy invasion of South Italy now…

    How much IPCs should Texas get? I was thinking about 5 IPC as it also represents some other states in the South of US that Mexico wanted to get back.

    Could you please keep the old tt-names if possible? (Italians never fought in Upper Austria but in Tyrol, also I am familiar with the old names now even if theyre not correct, they will always remind me on LH when I play)

    St. Petersburg (1914) as a joint capital please…

    Do you have the flags of the minor powers also?

    Since I am printing it on XXL Rome will be big enough for me

    What do you think about tt of Montenegro? (guess I know because its even smaller than Rome)
    But maybe we could just add 1 IPC in that tt, same colour as Serbia, if Serbia survives R1 they get one Inf and Art R2 as Montenegrian Reinforcements.

    Will make a wishlist for the IPCs…

  • Customizer

    Update.

    I still like Victory Cities in this game to provide short game victory conditions.

    What do you think of Denmark as a combined land/sea area, blocking movement from SZ10 to 11, and the Kiel canal added?

    1914Alpha2.PNG


  • Great job on the maps! I’d like to point out one thing. New Delhi is included as a city in India, but it wasn’t made capital until after WW1.

  • Customizer

    Mmmm, the capital was officially moved to Delhi in 1911 but the city wasn’t built until 1931!

    Probably go with Bombay, then.

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


  • There shouldn´t be that focus on Denmark. Historically no power had plans to invade them.

    Sea Zones look great now but need USW signs in 3, 4, 9 and 15.

    My first wishes for the IPC-changes:

    Mexico 3 (4)
    USA 35 (war entry R6 without collecting income before)
    Texas 5
    Belgium 3
    Switzerland 6
    Serbia 3
    Bulgaria 4

    what do you think?

    Can you explain the “new” tts in Africa please?

    Which scripture do you use for tt-names ?

  • Customizer

    Times New Roman 16

    Liberia is an American colony; arguably it should be an American aligned neutral.

    I don’t see armies marching through the western Sahara, hence the Sahara tt now stretches to the Atlantic.

    For Kufra see:

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

    Being generous, Kufra might be worth 1 IPC, hence Austria (landing in North Africa) or Turkey (driving through Egypt) could activate its units.

  • Customizer

    This version illustrates the Victory City idea.

    These serve three functions:

    1. 2-space movement is only permitted from VC to VC provided all three tts are friendly. Note that only the Austro-Hungarian and Russian joint capitals feature adjacent VCs.

    2. Limited placement of infantry may be permitted in non-capital VCs up to the IPC value.

    3. A Central Powers VC index is created stipulating the number of VCs that Alliance must hold at the end of each game round to win, given that a game is not won outright within allotted time limits (replacing the economic victory in the PTR which is a CP walkover). This varies from round to round.

    1914Alpha3VCs.PNG


  • I am not sure about adding more and more tts. The original game seems to go forever, so this could make it even more impossible to get a full victory.
    Though I think about dividing Livonia for better protection of the Tzar…

    Delete Marseille and add Amiens,

    Triest (instead of Budapest) and Strassburg (instead of Munich) had been more realistic goals for the Allies.

    Kiew instead of Baku

    Why did you delete Sevastopol?

    I´d prefer to give every tt a small textured “Capital”

    Do you have a template I can use for IPC numbers?

    Why did you stretch the Thuringia tt? It looks weird and Thuringia has nothing to do with Hohenlohe-Franken…

  • Customizer

    The idea is that the VCs are two spaces apart, joint capitals excepted. For example, if Germany captures Warsaw it becomes a lot easier to move forces into eastern Europe (i.e. from Berlin to Warsaw by 2 space train move). Verdun performs a similar role in the west. These provide major targets to fight over, rather than a simple one space at a time slog towards the enemy capital.

    The VCs are primarily goals for the Central Powers; the number they hold after any given turn determines how well they’re doing at that stage, and can determine a “winner” for a game that has to stop there.

    The few CP home VCs are really to make them guard against silly mistakes; if the Allies start capturing and holding places like Cologne and Budapest they’ve pretty much won already. But its the number held by the CP that determines success, not the greatest number overall.

    I prefer this over Larry’s “economic victory” because it can reflect the fact that the CPs are in essence the “attacking” alliance in the early game; under EV its a virtually certain CP win, allowing them to just take a few objectives and then defend them until time runs out. Under VCs, they have to keep attacking.


  • Why is it a fact that the CPs were the “attacking alliance”? The Entente wanted to conquer CP-tts even more than CPs wanted French/Russian soil.

    Biggest joke of the game is that it gives the impression that even AH is the aggresor against Italy, wtf?!

    First soldiers that crossed the borders in 1914 were Russians. Russia made the first attacks in East Prussia and in Galicia.

    Same in the west where french frontierguards entered the Sundgau before the German Mobilization was even finished.

    France wanted to regain Elsass-Lothringen and wasnt expecting that the Germans overrun Belgium and its fortificatians as quick as they did. (GE had no other choice to do so, Belgium was not THAT neutral and was willing to allow the french and british army a march through while in the east 1.2 Million Russian soldiers marched towards Berlin/Vienna)

    As LH would say, this is not WWII…

    I prefer to have a 12 Round game with more historical rules (Mobilization of Minor Powers, Italy/USA in special (later) Rounds)

    If CPs don´t manage to take over Paris or London they´re doomed. fact. Like in the real war. These are the only VCs for the CPs together with Rome or Petrograd/Moscow. Do you believe there would have been a rightful peace under other circumstances for example if CPs hold Verdun, Warzawa, Venice and Kiev? No way. Only thing here is to give GE a better Starting Set up (for example 4 Inf for Kiel, 3 Art for Hannover and esp. some more for Ruhr) and let them play this game against time with some kind of a chance untill US is feelable on the western front. The CPs have no time to waste because the 4 countries are economically outclassed against the rest of the world.

    I am more interested in your rules regarding the two Capital Cities of Russia, the Russian Revolution and reds vs whites.
    What do you think of the possibility of Mexico invading the US?
    Even USW and Askari needs to be talked about. Which tts in Africa should have an Askari sign? I was thinking about placing one Inf. per turn for every Round of play. (like the other Inf worth 3 IPC otherwise BE produces Askari in Egypt and attacks OE with this “cheap” Inf.)


  • I am not clompletely done with my german game map. (still have to work on Africa and Mid-East)

    Made a connection of Petrograd and Belarus.

    2 new tts for AH.

    1914Alpha8.PNG


  • **Possible Starting IPCs:

    OE (13):
    Constantinople 3
    Smyrna 2
    Ankara 2
    Armeinia 1
    Mesopotamia 2
    Syrian Dessert 1
    Trans Jordan 1
    Hejaz 1

    Aligned:
    Bulgaria 4
    Kufra 1

    Italy (17):
    Rome 3
    Piedmont 3
    Venice 2
    Toscana 2
    Naples 2
    Sicily 1
    Tripolis 1
    Cyr 1
    Somalia 1
    Eritrea 1

    Russia (29):
    Finland 2
    Karelia 1
    Petrograd 2
    Livonia 2
    Poland 3
    Belarus 2
    Moscow 4
    Ural 1
    Ukraine 3
    Sevastopol 2
    Don 2
    Volga 2
    Caucasus 2
    Kazakhstan 1

    Aligned:
    Romania 3
    Serbia 3

    Germany (38):
    Berlin 6
    Hannover 3
    Prussia 4
    Silesia 4
    Ruhr 6
    Kiel 4
    Munich 4
    Alsace 3
    Kamerun 1
    Togo 1
    East Afr 1
    South West Afr 1

    Aligned
    Mexico 3

    USA (42):

    Washington 37
    Texas 5

    Aligned
    Liberia 1

    Austria (26):

    Vienna 6
    Budapest 6 (4 if Transylvania 2)
    Tirol 3
    Triest 4
    Bohemia 4
    Galicia 3

    Britain (33)

    London 6
    Canada 4
    Scotland 2
    Ireland 1
    Yorkshire 2
    Wales 3
    Egypt 2
    Marmorica 1
    Sudan 1
    Darfur 1
    Br. East Africa 1
    Rhodesia 1
    South Africa 1
    Gold Coast 1
    Nigeria 1
    India 4

    Aligned:
    Portugal 2
    Greece 2
    Arabia 1

    France (25)
    Picardy 2
    Lorraine 2
    Paris 6
    Brest 2
    Bordeaux 2
    Marseille 2
    Burgundy 2
    French Marocco 1
    Algeria 1
    Tunesia 1
    Senegal 1
    Ivory Coast 1
    Madagascar 1
    French Aequatorial 1

    Aligned
    Belgium 3

    Neutrals (only changes):
    Switzerland 6
    Albania 1
    Spain 6**

  • Customizer

    New thought:

    Constantinople:

    As it stands, an Allied fleet could sail from SZ 19 to SZ 20 and invade Armenia; or from SZ21 to invade Greece. This seems wrong; somehow the Ottoman capital should block this movement.

    So why not move the SZ border to lie between the two halfs of the tt, much as Egypt controls the Suez canal:

    Porte.PNG


  • Like it. With this new arranged SZ Constantinople (Gallipoli) is also easier to attack by the MEF.

    Will Smyrna keep the port or should the sign be moved to (Western-)Constantinople ?

  • Customizer

    Mmmm, I still think Turkey should have minefields either side of the straits, so keep the base. But perhaps place it in Constantinople (i.e. Gallipoli), so the Allies cannot take Smyrna by land and thus avoid dealing with the mines during an AA on the capital.

    Also mocked up a division of Greece, solving the alignment problem. This gives us pro-Allied Macedonia (which had been part of Greece for less than a year), and pro-German Greece. Or if you prefer Salonika & Athens.

    An “activation” of one part automatically counter-activates the other; e.g. if the Allies land a unit in Macedonia, activating it for the Allies, then southern Greece automatically joins the CPs and places units without the need for the CPs to move a unit there.

    But, as you say, we can go on subdividing areas forever, and you may consider this to be a move too far.

    Incidentally, don’t you find it a help to have mines printed on the map?

    Macedon.PNG


  • I use tiny wooden dices in red and blue for naval mines which can be removed when the naval base is captured.

    At least when we include Macedonia, we have to think about Montenegro too.

    Was there real fighting between pro royalist army and the pro-Entente Macedonian units?

    Could you give me some IPC-Points I could use for the Map? (1-8, 37)

    What do you think about Mexico, attacking Texas and getting some Infantry every Round they manage to survive? How strong should it be? IF the Mexicans agreed to the German offer, would it have the US keep away from Europe for some Rounds/months?

  • Customizer

    Since the USA might come under threat, what about dividing it up a little more?

    USAdiv.PNG

  • Customizer

    The most obvious anomaly with this map remains that of the original: Berlin is still closer to Moscow than it is to Paris (assuming you go through the most plausible route).

    How does reducing Russian tts to the same physical size of French/German areas effect the game?

    Is it fatal, as it means Germany/Austria have no chance of defeating Russia in time?

    Can this problem not be solved by the implementation of

    a) rapid (unlimited) rail movement between important centres allowing reinforcements of distant fronts

    and

    b) use of political collapse rules including casualty factors (that is Germany can defeat Russia without having to occupy Moscow, or come anywhere near it; the Allies can defeat Germany without having to occupy a single foot of German home soil?

Suggested Topics

  • 15
  • 16
  • 3
  • 7
  • 111
  • 12
  • 6
  • 34
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts