Finally bought this game!

From a simple math min/max perspective which some are intersested in, a naval strat is extremly unwise. Simple plus/minus math will tell you you need to add appr. 81 IPC worth of naval as CP in total accross the board (using the starting naval as ref) to even break even which means if you wanna “controll” something you will need to add more than the competition.
As CP you cant ever get into a building race with the allies as your starting income is so much less, but rather you need to as fast as possible close the incomecap.

Consider sz17. (I will assume the ottoman and russian navy cancel each out). Allies can after turn1 have 2 BS (France+Italy)+3Cruisers(UK+Italy+France which means AH wont be able to break even, even if the go all out navy. After turn2 the allies will have additional 1BS+Crusie (UK) in the zone and again AH wont be able to break even, even if they spent all during 2 turns. After this france plus Italy can with great ease together spend equal to AH for each turn.
So I have to ask how in hell are AH suppose to get controll over sz17?=)

I suppose you can counter and say “the allies dont counter my moves in my games” but then what is the point of argue the value of strats. I can  ask what do you think about my “attack-AH-first-as-Italy strat”, assuming AH dont defend their borders?=)

@KimRYoung:

Question,

Since you used the optional Russian Revolution rules, did youuse the rules from the game, or the new revisions from Krieg?

Thanks, looks like you had a great game!

Kim

Thanks, Kim.  I used the Russian Revolution rules from Krieg, which is great because that is how I was planning on playing anyway.  Make no mistake, RR is a GREAT thing for the Central Powers.  (Frankly, I think I even prefer it over capturing Moscow in retrospect.)

Haven’t ordered mine yet. I would suggest the infantry size discrepancy is either an optical illusion or perhaps a subtle attempt by Avalon to aid player’s abiity to distinguish oposing forces on a crowded board.

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!

Too Damn Cute IMO 😛

it was very impressive that you were able to take Moscow indeed. Not pressuring OE from India was a large mistake, drawing OE away from russia. Also, Italy not pressing AH and therefore drawing units away from Russia was also poor on their part. Britain was worthless, and italy was not used in an intelligent way. Nice win

@Flashman:

The other main objective is that the SZs bordering Africa have no mines, which should make naval combat more lively; the CP fleets can link up, or invade north Africa.

That definitely think that could change things up a lot.  Those mines in SZ17 and the large allied fleets make any early AH naval plans difficult.

@wittmann:

I think paying a token amount to repair a Battleship would be a good idea in any A&A game.

Agreed.  Many times extensive repairs would almost cost the same as it would to build a new ship…  You need supplies, metal (copper, iron, steel), rare earths, manpower, etc.  Not to mention taking up a drydock that otherwise could be used to build a new ship.