• 1


  • I don’t think so. D-Day was slanted toward the Axis, obviously NOT for historical reasons…


  • Also, every WWII global or theatre game since revised has been slanted towards the Axis…


  • Perhaps that it is very difficult to completely balance a game on this scale with two ‘teams’ or ‘sides’ that make different amounts of money and have differing starting units?

    A&A 1914 is kind of a breath of fresh air in giving the CPs a tough path to victory when most of the other games give the Allies the tougher path.  Perhaps 1914 is too slanted to the Allies,– time will tell.


  • Yes a definite message is being given.  It is that a new revised 2nd edition will be coming out with some tweaks.  This way the AH/Hasbro/Wizards will be able to sell more product and increase there bottom line.

    The other message is that despite having computer simulations and a virtual army of potential play testers (here)  the game still comes out broken.  I mean come on man.

    Despite my complaing I like the game a lot; however, I would like to see what it takes to balance the game for the Axis.

    See my earlier post:
    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=30684.30


  • Agreed.  I too wish A&A expanded their reach to other conflicts, but it took a long time to even get Larry to consider a WWI game, much less develop it.

    I think to sell well an A&A game has to cover a large conflict, with many countries involved.  They have stopped making tactical level games after all.

    I would love to see a Napoleonic era game though- probably the only other massively scaled war.

    I’d also love to see a Punic war game; or a ‘rise of Rome.’

    Perhaps a 1948 WWIII game…  maybe.

    Not sure of other large scale conflicts that they could make.


  • Have you tried the Napoleonic war scenario in Triplea?  I highly recommend it- it has all the politics you are talking about!

    The 7 years’ war may be good too- I like your thinking.


  • http://triplea.sourceforge.net/mywiki

    It is a gaming engine- it allows you to play online turn based games.  It comes with a rudimentary AI so you could play by yourself, but it really shines in either online real-time games or play by forum here.

    There are some excellent games you can download with it- including games that will never be made into physical board games because they would take too long to play, such as ‘New World Order’ and ‘World at War.’

    There are fantasy games such as a Lord of the Rings based game, WWII games, WWIII games, WWI games (not 1914 yet…).  You can also download all the Axis and Allies based games (clones).  People play the Global 1940 the most I think.


  • @rjpeters70:

    By the same token you could do a good American Revolution game, that included American Colonies, British, French, Spanish, and Iroquis Nation as players. � Hell, you could even break the American Colonies up into three players: � New England, Mid-Atlantic, and South.

    True, that is also a good one.

  • Customizer

    Remember this topic, from before any of us even got the game?

    http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=29865.msg1073796#msg1073796

    Nothing yet has changed my opinion.


  • @BJCard:

    Also, every WWII global or theatre game since revised has been slanted towards the Axis…

    Well, OOB G40 was allied slanted.


  • @ghr2:

    @BJCard:

    Also, every WWII global or theatre game since revised has been slanted towards the Axis…

    Well, OOB G40 was allied slanted.

    It was?  I suppose maybe-  did not play a bunch of OOB games, mostly Alpha and 2nd edition.


  • @ghr2:

    @BJCard:

    Also, every WWII global or theatre game since revised has been slanted towards the Axis…

    Well, OOB G40 was allied slanted.

    I thought G40 was pretty even. Europe 1940 was very allied slanted.


  • Ya, the US did not have to worry about holding it’s NO’s, US can build a major in europe (like norway), and a few other reasons.


  • G40 Alpha 2 -

    I don’t remember it being too axis slanted, even though sealion was VERY popular.  A lot of folks argued that US can focus 100% pac and then save europe at the end.


  • Well, perhaps OOB was fairly even- however it was very easy to do Sealion and take India.  I suppose if the Axis didn’t do Sealion/India than it was more even?  2nd edition made it harder to do either, but most of the bids still go to Allies.


  • I still believe the addition of railroads,factories and fortifications could have opened up a ton of options for this game, therefore a lot of different  results.


  • I think larrys definition of playtesting is 10 games with the same few people.

    We have played 100s of games as a community already, and what are we at 66% Allied victory?


  • @oztea:

    I think larrys definition of playtesting is 10 games with the same few people.

    We have played 100s of games as a community already, and what are we at 66% Allied victory?

    For 1914?  Probably more like 75-85% allied victory.


  • I think poor playtesting.

    As in my opinion I find ww1 a very ‘fair’ war.  There was never an exact clear winner until the very end.


  • I said it in a earlier post if they would playtest these games more we wouldn’t get as many of them ,but I believe the community would be a lot happier because it would be a better game. I think this games mechanics are great. I love the way the combat works but I do feel the Central will typically run out of gas 80% of the time. With a few more unit types(Heavy artillery,bombers) and maybe industrial tech(Gas,long range aircraft and advance artillery) this game could be the best ever. Heres to Second edition boys and girls cause it’s a coming.


  • I agree. Larry isn’t trying to send us a message, this just wasn’t playtested enough. No way was the outcome of WW1 inevitable. Either side could have won the whole time.

Suggested Topics

  • 3
  • 1
  • 1
  • 4
  • 4
  • 4
  • 10
  • 47
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

23
Online

15.7k
Users

37.2k
Topics

1.6m
Posts