Well what do you guys think?
I don’t know I just got mine today, stupid CSI didn’t send mine till saturday, they sent me two when I only ordered one, I won’t be returning the other.
@Last:
Well what do you guys think?
LOVED it. It’s not without its quirks, of course, and several OOB rules have been ironed out, but at its core is an excellent wargame. 9/10
4 out of 10
8 out of 10
All in all the Game mechanics are awesome, the new Units look great and the involvement of 8 Powers gives players a lot of possible strategies for winning the great war.
I think 2 Edition with fixed errors and even some more units (hoping for GE-infantry 16-18 with the M-16 helmets) will blow our minds!!
I’d like early and late war versions of all infantry. Then we can use early war as “raw” troops thrown into the frontline untrained, and steel helmeted veterans with more punch in battle.
Akaris to make Africa move dynamic.
Naval setup rebalanced.
Revolution possible for all powers.
Bombers as a new unit (available turn 5?)
Russian Civil War replacing dead zones/force fields.
I think 2 Edition with fixed errors and even some more units (hoping for GE-infantry 16-18 with the M-16 helmets) will blow our minds!!
And our budgets.
I liked the game a lot. I only played two full games so far, but they were both a lot of fun. The Allies won 1 game and the CPs won the other. Both games lasted until round 10 when it was just decided to call them because they were leaning heavily in 1 direction. No games are perfect, but this is a really great game. I think it is very balanced too. I plan to play this game many more times over the coming years.
The biggest problem that I encountered was the lack of playing pieces. I was constantly low on German infantry, German artillery, UK infantry, UK transports, US transports, and both sets of colored chips. Fortunately, I have like a thousand other games and just used the other games’ pieces to fill the void. That is not Larry’s fault. The fault lies with WoTC. They are too cheap to throw in more playing pieces.
I consider this game to be more like the original axis and allies from the 80s. It has fewer types of playing pieces. It is more simple. I would like to see a more advanced version of this game in the future, just like how they came out with the more advanced versions of the ww2 axis and allies games. I am willing to bet that if this game sells well, we will see another version of it. If there is a new version, it will probably take into account many of the house rules that others have proposed.
@CWO:
I think 2 Edition with fixed errors and even some more units (hoping for GE-infantry 16-18 with the M-16 helmets) will blow our minds!!Â
And our budgets.
I believe that 2 edition comes out in August 2014, so if I´m right we´ll have enough time to safe some money or to plan a bank robbery.
American movement is effectively already banned- can’t load transports until at war.
I liked the game a lot. I only played two full games so far, but they were both a lot of fun. The Allies won 1 game and the CPs won the other. Both games lasted until round 10 when it was just decided to call them because they were leaning heavily in 1 direction. No games are perfect, but this is a really great game. I think it is very balanced too. I plan to play this game many more times over the coming years.
The biggest problem that I encountered was the lack of playing pieces. I was constantly low on German infantry, German artillery, UK infantry, UK transports, US transports, and both sets of colored chips. Fortunately, I have like a thousand other games and just used the other games’ pieces to fill the void. That is not Larry’s fault. The fault lies with WoTC. They are too cheap to throw in more playing pieces.
I consider this game to be more like the original axis and allies from the 80s. It has fewer types of playing pieces. It is more simple. I would like to see a more advanced version of this game in the future, just like how they came out with the more advanced versions of the ww2 axis and allies games. I am willing to bet that if this game sells well, we will see another version of it. If there is a new version, it will probably take into account many of the house rules that others have proposed.
I don’t see this game as ‘simple,’ – we have tons of new rules and new game mechanics. Tough to play the CP’s, fighting on two fronts. I agree that the number of unique units is low, but not as bad as classic A&A.
I consider this game to be more like the original axis and allies from the 80s.�
Very much so. The Milton Bradley edition and the 1914 game both have nation-specific infantry sculpts combined with generic equipment sculpts. They have the same number (7) of equipment sculpt categories: tanks, fighters, battleships, submarines and transport ships in both games, and artillery and cruisers in AA1914 rather than bombers and aircraft carriers in the Milton Bradley game. AA1914 has sculpts for eight nations rather than five, but it has zero auxiliary sculpts rather than the two categories (anti-aircraft artillery and industrial complexes) found in the Milton Bradley game.
That said, my sculpt collection and I are both happy to be getting eight new distinct infantry sculpts, which I’m reassigning for use as various Second World War minor nations. I’m disappointed that so few pieces are provided in the game, especially at the price for which it’s being sold, and I’m also disappointed that the equipment sculpts are generic, but I’m hopeful that these two problems will be corrected if and when a second edition is ever published.
I’m not bothered by the lack of nations specific pieces - unique infantry and I’m happy.
I’d rather have 2 or 3 new units types next edition than a different model of cruiser for the Central Powers.
Give me bombers and I don’t care if they all look the same. Askaris can be generic and made in a neutral colour anyway.
A proper production board would be nice…
But please speed up the Central Powers movement somehow. The average game seems to be lasting around 8-10 turns; it takes 4 or 5 for new units to reach Paris and Rome from Berlin and Vienna unimpeded.
Let them board the trains, and reduce starting units to balance if needed.
Oh, and power up those submarines.
Perhaps the simplest tweak is to allow ALL units to move 2 spaces, as long as they stop when entering an area containing enemy units, or which is enemy controlled.
Fighters excepted (maybe move 3?), and ships still subject to current rules regarding subs and transports.
This would at least produce some equality of mobility between the sides, though of course SZs are a lot larger and would still make control of the seas a big strategic advantage.
Maybe restrict movement in Africa to one space only due to lack of rails; also Arabia, Afghanistan.
Units at the front would still be restricted to a slogging match, but reinforcements could be brought up much more quickly. Might try this next time.
Might even think about tanks being able to breakthrough and attack a 2nd space with an infantry for each armour.
Perhaps, with the greater mobility, the suggestion that units can never move out of one contested area into another would make more sense.
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! 
