Good to know.
First Game - Allies in A Rout
-
@Tyberius:
U.S. forces didn’t attack anyone.Â
below is from the FAQ thread (pg. 14):
As the United States is neutral before it’s at war, it has no friends or enemies; therefore it may not move units into territories controlled by other Allied powers. It also may not load units onto transports before it’s at war.
What you did was not Legal with the US., Sorry
Kim
-
@Tyberius:
U.S. forces didn’t attack anyone.�
below is from the FAQ thread (pg. 14):
As the United States is neutral before it’s at war, it has no friends or enemies; therefore it may not move units into territories controlled by other Allied powers. It also may not load units onto transports before it’s at war.
What you did was not Legal with the US., Sorry
Kim
Yes, according to the FAQ it was illegal. But as I said in my intro, I played the game using only what was in the original rulebook. The rulebook states the following:
The United States begins the game neutral, but with Allied sympathies. While it remains neutral, the United States may not move land or air units into Central Powers-controlled or contested territories or attack Central Powers sea units. It will not enter the war unless either its units are attacked by the Central Powers or it loses income to a German submarine attack (see “Collect Income”, page 23). However, if it is not yet at war at the beginning of its fourth turn, the United States will enter the war at that time.
I agree, the modified version as stated in the FAQ makes more sense. But for now I wanted to test this game with rules straight from rulebook.
-
British troops on American transports is a little sketchy.
-
I really like this game, and have played OOB several times (only sniffed a CP win once). I would defiantly use the FAQ in your next game though. Even w/US unable to doing anything before the 4th turn the CP will have a hard time. Movement on land causes much trouble for the CP, and reinforcements come to slow (need to chose a direction and stick with it to keep fresh troops coming). Russia as you found out can be really tricky, and in our games Russia rarely attempts to bulk up in Poland, or Romania (it’s kinda suicide for them). We also see them move everything they can to Ukraine the first turn (tough nut to crack). You might try a major push with say Germany (nearly everything) to one front (have a few Austrians w/them), and have the other CP power(s) defend on the other front. It seems to serve them better instead of say spiting Germany into both fronts (and you don’t have quite enough on either to push through).
The allies also have a major advantage at sea. Many ppl are reducing the French sz 15 fleet to only a cruiser (swapping BB for cruiser, and removing the transport). This isn’t an official change at this point, but Larry has acknowledged a problem, and it is likely to happen (and it has happened in his new tournament rules that also include faster land movement among other things). These are just suggestions, but I think it plays out better.
-
British troops on American transports is a little sketchy.
It is sketchy. But, according to rulebook, not illegal :-o
-
@WILD:
I really like this game, and have played OOB several times (only sniffed a CP win once). I would defiantly use the FAQ in your next game though. Even w/US unable to doing anything before the 4th turn the CP will have a hard time. Movement on land causes much trouble for the CP, and reinforcements come to slow (need to chose a direction and stick with it to keep fresh troops coming). Russia as you found out can be really tricky, and in our games Russia rarely attempts to bulk up in Poland, or Romania (it’s kinda suicide for them). We also see them move everything they can to Ukraine the first turn (tough nut to crack). You might try a major push with say Germany (nearly everything) to one front (have a few Austrians w/them), and have the other CP power(s) defend on the other front. It seems to serve them better instead of say spiting Germany into both fronts (and you don’t have quite enough on either to push through).
The allies also have a major advantage at sea. Many ppl are reducing the French sz 15 fleet to only a cruiser (swapping BB for cruiser, and removing the transport). This isn’t an official change at this point, but Larry has acknowledged a problem, and it is likely to happen (and it has happened in his new tournament rules that also include faster land movement among other things). These are just suggestions, but I think it plays out better.
From my experience it seems like Germany has to commit to one front as well. I was really surprised how quickly Russian infantry can pile up on the Eastern Front after four turns. FAQ rules seem quite logical. But I’d like to play a couple more games before adopting them. But all told, your suggestions all make sense.
-
It’s pretty fascinating to me how splitting up forces over different fronts really hampers the CP.
100 Austrians and 100 Germans (to use nice round numbers for the sake of clarity example) attacking the French (100 inf) in a territory is far weaker than 200 Germans or 200 Austrians
Austrians 100@ 3= 50 hits
French 100@ 3= 50 hits50 Austrians, 50 French lost
Germans, 100@3= 50 hits,
French 50@3= 25 hitsThat’s 75 on the CP, whereas if a force of 200 had attacked instead of 2 100’s, the casualties would have been 50.
It’s worse to have a multinational army since the defender gets to fire at you twice. At first I thought that this was silly, but then I realized that there was a lot of disunity and lack of coordination between powers in WWI, so it is actually pretty cool (although then I guess it is a bit weird that there is no penalty for defending, but whatevers)
This isn’t really news to A&A, but it seems in our games players are tempted to have multiple powers attack one territory more often than in other versions, which makes it pretty salient in WWI A&A.
-
So… let Germany unilaterally attack France with full force, while AH takes on Russia by it single-handedly?
What you wrote on splitting forces makes a lot of sense, but I’m trying to figure out how it can help in an actual game. =/
It’s pretty fascinating to me how splitting up forces over different fronts really hampers the CP.
100 Austrians and 100 Germans (to use nice round numbers for the sake of clarity example) attacking the French (100 inf) in a territory is far weaker than 200 Germans or 200 Austrians
Austrians 100@ 3= 50 hits
French 100@ 3= 50 hits50 Austrians, 50 French lost
Germans, 100@3= 50 hits,
French 50@3= 25 hitsThat’s 75 on the CP, whereas if a force of 200 had attacked instead of 2 100’s, the casualties would have been 50.
It’s worse to have a multinational army since the defender gets to fire at you twice. At first I thought that this was silly, but then I realized that there was a lot of disunity and lack of coordination between powers in WWI, so it is actually pretty cool (although then I guess it is a bit weird that there is no penalty for defending, but whatevers)
This isn’t really news to A&A, but it seems in our games players are tempted to have multiple powers attack one territory more often than in other versions, which makes it pretty salient in WWI A&A.
-
Yep, makes sense for the CP to have Germany go full tilt in one front, and Austria the other. We have seen Germany push France back to the brink, and Austria start off defending against Russia (and those damn Italians) then actually gaining the upper hand on their front as well with an aggressive Russia (they will need some inf from Germany, and the Turks). It is also helpful to have say a 10 unit friendly force with you to take out smaller adversaries, or grab more land so you don’t splinter off your main force. This can also help you to gain air superiority for the larger partner. Like Austria sacrifices a few inf and ftrs into a French stack just to force a dog fight and kill off a couple allied ftrs. Then Germany goes in full force, finishes off the air, and has very happy artillery.
-
AH softening France’s air force up to open the way for Germany to have air supremacy: this will henceforth be known as the “Happy Artillery” strategy. Thanks for making my day, WB.
@WILD:
Yep, makes sense for the CP to have Germany go full tilt in one front, and Austria the other. We have seen Germany push France back to the brink, and Austria start off defending against Russia (and those damn Italians) then actually gaining the upper hand on their front as well with an aggressive Russia (they will need some inf from Germany, and the Turks). It is also helpful to have say a 10 unit friendly force with you to take out smaller adversaries, or grab more land so you don’t splinter off your main force. This can also help you to gain air superiority for the larger partner. Like Austria sacrifices a few inf and ftrs into a French stack just to force a dog fight and kill off a couple allied ftrs. Then Germany goes in full force, finishes off the air, and has very happy artillery.
Suggested Topics
