German subs also operated out of Constantinople, though probably under nominal Ottoman control.
The most obvious use of cruisers is as defacto destroyers in anti-sub role; Battleships sunk a total of 1 sub in the war (by ramming).
A U.S. battleship, wasn’t it? Assigned to the Grand Fleet in Scapa Flow?
I just kind of look at cruisers as representing about half a battleship, i.e. a crusier squadron at most.
I know you want to fix the OOB but I have found the tournament rules even this thing up quite a bit. I do think the game would have been better with more production zones per country and more victory city’s. We have had more central victories with the tourney rules because of the collapse system that Larry has come up with. I really like this game and hope he does an upgrade with new units and a bigger map. Cool game.
Don’t you find it a pain in the arse having to check the collapse thresholds, especially as they’re given in the negative?
Doesn’t the collapse system inevitably lead to KTF and KIF?
I think my VC system is simpler.
Do you play with time limits, if so is the Economic Victory system viable; i.e. can the Allies ever win an EV?
I do agree with you Flash we only play for about 6 hours. At that point we kind of come to an agreement who is the victor or call it a draw. I am with you that there should be a victory point system it would make achieving victory easier to calculate. After having multiple cocktails and the combat fatigue of playing this you sometimes lose track of what it takes for all of the countries to collapse.
As the co-champion in the Origins 1914 tournament I might have a little insight here maybe…
My partner at the time also won the GenCon 1914 tourney as well…so I know how he plays.
By now he has probably over 30 games of experience…6 games in tourney format.
I myself have played the game 10-12 times- 3 in the tourney format.
The tourney format at GenCon and Origins were slightly different than Larry tourney rules (here -->
(http://www.harrisgamedesign.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=18335)
…GenCon/Origins adopted them but changed 2 things:
1. They didn’t use the new setup
2. They allowed US to enter at turn 3 instead of 4.
This yielded in an average 18-20 IPCs given to the Allies in order for the other side to take the Axis. However, personally I like the tournament rules AS written by Larry WITH the setup changes and the US still entering on round 4. This makes the bid much lower too- balancing the game better IMHO.
I agree, just played Larry’s tourney rules last week for the first time and accomplished our first “real” CP victory. The game was over in 4 rounds and all players were relieved by the relatively quick play. I think with the new tourney rules this game is getting closer to being one of the best A&A games. But as a WWI buff I’m a bit biased on that point. Looking forward to a new and improved 2nd edition in the future.
Our games ended at about the 6 hour mark. I’m safe to tell people its a solid 6 hour game give or take an hour.
This is my suggestion for a balanced A&A1914 second edition:
Set-Up like the TT-Rules (but OOB-Setup for Africa)
New IPCs:
Germany has 37 IPC with
Hannover 3 IPC
Kiel 3 IPC
France still has 24 IPC but with
Picardy 3 IPC
Lorraine 3 IPC and
Burgundy-tt erased (its 6 Inf 2 Art were split and 3Inf/1 Art go to Brest, the other 3 Inf/1Art to Bordeaux)
Switzerland 4 IPC
Norway 3 IPC
Sweden 3 IPC
Additional USW-Zones: 2,3,4,7,8,9,15
Faster economical/political collapse for:
Russia 10/12
Different economical/political collapse for:
France 12/14
Germany 18/20
Edit: changed Switzerland to 4 IPC and gave the Burgundy units to Brest and Bordeaux.
(Because from Marseille they could be shipped with two transports and 1 BS to the Ottomans Round1 and contest Smyrna; Together with the invasion of Mesopotamia by Russia and Trans Jordan by Britain OE would be in economical collapse before they get a turn.)
Surprised you haven’t corrected the Prussia-Poland and the Bulgaria-Greece borders.
My guess is that on this map Germany will take Paris most of the time; making Switzerland impassable may be the only way to balance Paris being nearer.
Surprised you haven’t corrected the Prussia-Poland and the Bulgaria-Greece borders.
My guess is that on this map Germany will take Paris most of the time; making Switzerland impassable may be the only way to balance Paris being nearer.
I did not want to change too much of the OOB-map because I dont know what was the intention behind this unhistorical borders (also Finland/Norway etc.)
What I can tell from 2 games we played this map is that Germany allthough they threw everything into the West could only manage to contest Paris (actually for the first time ever in A&A1914) but couldnt manage to capture it because of arriving Americans. Maybe it was bad luck on dices…
This scnario keeps Great Britain on focusing more on the Western front than putting all their forces into the Near East wich gives the Ottomans time to breathe. I also like that Russia goes faster to Revolution just in time for the US entry…
Dont forget that Switzerland is not that easy to take with 3 IPCs…
But possibly worth it given the strategic location. My inclination would be to make it 4 to reflect the terrain.
Yes thats true I corrected Switzerland up to 4 IPC.
I suggested a rule once concerning limited India builds:
India can build four units (IPC worth of India)
This can be increased by +1 for conquering Afghanistan and +2 by conquering Persia. This way it isn’t four builds from the start and Britain really has to do something to get those builds and it will be ultimately limited to 7 builds.
Nice tavenier.
I think sorting out India’s production(lessening it), will greatly help balance.
As I suggested elsewhere, allow units to be placed in any controlled homeland tt up to the IPC value in number of units.
For the UK, India (and Canada if you wish) counts as homeland. I don’t like more than this for India, as it should be naturally limited to the capacity of India and the Pacific colonies, representing the flow of manpower from these areas. Britain should not be allowed to teleport units to India out of home production.
As I suggested elsewhere, allow units to be placed in any controlled homeland tt up to the IPC value in number of units.
Goes this together with the OOB-movement or are the PTR still needed?
I would say keep PTR movement, but not in Africa or Persia.
OR allow unlimited movement within original tts; for example France can place limited units on the border but can move from Paris to anywhere in France.
An absolute OOB change is canning the Russian Revolution rules. Not only does it make the game formulaic, but it also ignores everything that happened in a political sense in World War I in other countries. The collapse rules are better but they need to be modified a bit because not letting a nation try to retake its capital on its own turn (or enough points to avoid not getting money) leads to crazy suicide attacks where only one guy needs to survive to sink, say, Italy or the Ottoman Empire.
I also think a limit on builds in India would make a LOT of sense. That and also perhaps limited ability to build in Africa. Add the 2-movement options from the tournament rules and you’re there.
My suggestions were playtested several times with OOB Rules:
Set Up:
5 additional Infantry and 3 Additional Artillery in Hannover.
1 German Cruiser in SZ 26.
Map:
Switzerland is worth 3-4 IPCs
Russian Revolution:
RR occurs if Russian Homeland-tts (Look for definiton in the PTR) worth 10 IPC are occupied by the CPs after the Russian Players Turn.
Russia is required to immediately surrender and leave the game at that time. It no longer has a turn, and all of its land, air, and sea units are removed from the board. Control of any territories that it was contesting is established, if necessary, using the rules for moving all units on one side out of a contested territory (see “Land Units”, page 15 of the rulebook). It also loses control of any territories that it controls, including its homeland territories. If units belonging to other powers on the same side are in these territories, control will likewise be established using the rules for moving all units on one side out of a contested territory; otherwise these territories will be uncontrolled (place any national control marker on it face down to denote this status) until another power moves into them. If a territory originally controlled by the surrendered power is captured by one if its former allies, the capturing power takes control of it. Russias IPC treasury will be claimed by the first enemy power to gain control of its capital.
Unrestricted Submarine Warfare:
USW takes place in SZs � 2,3,4,7,8,9,15.
German player roles one dice for EVERY Sub that is in one of that SZs when it comes to collect income for the British player.
The result will be split up between BE and US. (If its an odd number, the Brits suffer more)
If US loses income for a second time, it will enter the war. (Generally US declares war R4, so beginning USW in R3 won´t change that)
I am new at posting but I have hammered out a good way of balancing the game so that CP players have a 50% chance of winning, with minimal changes from the original rules and setup:
1. Switzerland is always impassable
2. Britain can only build 4 units on India
3. Italy is neutral First Round
4. Both sides use railroads for all internal movements. Railroads (with unlimited transport distance) are assumed to exist wherever territories connect friendly uncontested territories. The Central Powers have the Interior Lines strategic advantage of shuttling troops from Front to Front, but the Allied Powers are able to transport reinforcements to the Fronts when they arrive from Britain or USA.
This works; we have played it out and it is the balance that the game needs, in my opinion.
