Time of games

@Auztria: Yes. If they truly had a historically accurate setup, Russia would have almost as many troops at start as Germany and Austria-Hungary combined. The Ottoman Empire would have no fleet, Germany would have extra cruisers in the Mediterranean and Indian Ocean, Britain would have just 1 infantry, and Africa would be even more barren. Of course they can’t do that, simply for gameplay reasons. If Russia could conquer Galicia and East Prussia effortlessly every game, people would quickly grow bored. But you see… I went to school to be a historian! I will have to do a little bit of experimenting with the Russian infantry bordering Galicia and East Prussia. Naturally, it raises my hackles that the Russians can’t do much more than poke the CPs on this front. The Russian TTs containing six infantry probably ought to have eight (on the western border). Any attack they make in Prussia or Galicia is going to be bulldozed by a massive A-H or German attack with at least 12 infantry in each case to throw at the hapless Russians. I have a soft spot for those intrepid Bulgarians c. 1915. This has led to some experimenting on my end to make them a playable country in lieu of a country in the direct Ottoman pale. Instead of collecting income, they would do something like China does in A&A:Pacific 1.0–crank out people or arty (no planes, tanks or ships). I even thought about allowing the Germans to give them a subsidy (1 IPC or something along those lines). Australia is often talked about for its commitment to the war (and justly so), but I was blown away when I read the Bulgarian stats. 1,200,000 mobilized out of about 5 million people!!  If Italy is in this game, surely Bulgars can’t hurt…

we must not play right or just have different playing styles but the CP for us usually win, i played a game where my ally germany built  transports on the first turn and took Norway, and sweden. I was Austria and fuming so i said screw it and went full bore into italy and russia by the time he finished his norwegian expedition i had no infantry or artillery left. The entire German army was intact we eventually won because of that extra production and i had driven the italians and russians far enough back he was able to wipe the french off the board. Now whenever he does something stupid i say yeah like take norway, it gives us a good chuckle but we usually have a winner by turn 7 or 8 and it is about 60/40 Allies vs central.

@ossel: @BJCard: Viet nam war could be made into a fun game, with helicopter rules or something like that.� The US would have superior military, but fewer units- maybe some kind of home morale system affected by US troop losses?� Would the Vietnamese/Chinese have human wave tactics?� Perhaps you could change history and fight the war like it was a war and not a police action.� It would be hard to model a war in which the US forces never lost a significant battle, but was still forced to stop fighting. I have a scenario I’m working on for Vietnam. It involves helicopter landings, infiltrating Vietnamese troops, and terrain difficulties. I have the map and rules pretty well done, just need to playtest it and refine the rules a bit. Also need to figure out victory conditions (probably use a morale system like you mentioned). I’d be happy to post it on this board if anyone’s interested (would that go in “House Rules,” or “Modifications?”). FYI Guys, I’ve just posted my Vietnam ruleset and map over in “Other Variants”: http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30166.0 Those of you who are interested, let me know what you think.

If I were Germany I’d feel completely cheated by the Revolution. UNLESS it created a new Bolshevik power friendly to the Central powers… @ossel: I find it interesting that none of the games posted on this forum have ended with the victory conditions that are stated in the rules…which doesn’t really surprise me due to the nature of the war, but I kind of wish there had been more of a design consideration for alternate game endings, besides ‘we don’t feel like playing anymore.’ Flashman, remember what Sun Tzu said: Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting. I think the Allies are giving up too soon as well, but taking Moscow is a major morale victory for the CP’s, and it seems to be very effective. [Edit]: I guess revolution was triggered in this game, but the effect is similar.

Hey Flashman, you are well informed and have good ideas BUT I can assure you that these thoughts will lead to complex rules which Larry would like to prevent especially for this initial release which is supposed to bring some numbers in! I am curious how he avoids some of your described problems but we will see. In an advanced game/collector’s editon whatsoever things might be different!

I envisioned calvary working like this. Attack at a 2 Move at a 2 Defend at a 3 (If on a territory containing defending infantry) Defend at a 2 otherwise. Cavalry played a minor role during the entire war. (Lawrence of Arabia for example) Cavalry would have one other feature. They alone would be able to leave a contested zone and attack an empty adjacent enemy controlled territory. By turn 4 they would no longer allowed to be built. I do agree the game is great as is.

That’s always been my problem. It isn’t too hard to get your troops outside the capitol, bit you have to make sure you’ve brought enough to get the job done. If you only contest the territory the defender can reinforce during the battle and you can’t. So if you don’t take the capitol quickly you’re screwed.  Sounds like an entertaining game.

These are estimates… USA - 23 France - around 40.  France had taken Portugal and a bunch of territories in Africa. u.k. - around 38 or so, from all the ottoman territories it took. Italy - weak.  Around 6 or 8. Austria - no territories gained and none lost, so around 25? Germany - powerhouse…around 60 from all the Russian territory, and now Italian territory and very close to Rome. ottoman empire - around 6 a round.