@generalhandgrenade i read all this and I’m still confused.
Turn 1 1939 setup, British attack Italian navy in Mediterranean, do Brits need to deploy a fighter to MAP to make sure subs are eliminated? Is there a separate battle for other naval units? Please post examples and thank you.
Ill sign up for a year on the nerdherd group $10/month option str8 away if you fix tech and an an options to develop tech on both charts at the same time, get multiple techs on the same turn, keep tokens on both charts. Thanks again
@regularkid What about tech? It doesn’t appear to be working. I know we played a game and realized the option for airborne forces never came up after a player had developed it. I’m pretty sure something wierd is going on with jets as well. The image of the fighter on the board does not change. Super subs dont get strips, etc. Thanks. Love the map/
@regularkid
yo why so much hate on bombers,? you guys already ruined them with attack of 3 and now they cost more…
requests
checkbox for normal attack 4 bombers
must have airbase to produce planes, like naval units
checkbox tech tokens persist until they hit and are dedicated to a chart
more than one tech a turn
Will someone please do a feature request?
We play with tech and do not remove tokens option. Our group would like to be able to development more than one tech a turn. We would also like to have tokens assigned to the corresponding tech chart.
Thanks for your time and best regards.
I can’t loose with the Allies, please play me on tripleA.
If I read through all 96 pages of the FAQ thread do I get a certificate or a degree or something?
I’d like to get my money back for this broken PoS!!!
Holy smokes 69 pages for FAQ…is there a class I can take to learn how to play this game
I think they have moved on to other things.
Haven’t been on this site in a little bit, I was checking to see if 1914 was fixed yet, clearly it is still broken, what a shame
productivity at our office is at zero, we have a four way war going, i love it from an A&A player, it is a lot though…Apple people get it for a dollar
To answer your inital question…The same reason there wasn’t enough pieces or IPCs or the game could only be won by one side–
money.
How could it have been done for play balance when only one side can win? Looks like greed, laziness, and a lack of caring about putting out quality products. It doesn’t take much play testing to figure out the CPs can’t win. The SM option is a joke. I wonder what will happen first, this game gets fixed or another one comes out.
I’m going to play with whatever rules Flashman proposes, as LH is too busy to correct the many errors. We as an internet community should come up with our own official rules.
Also please see my rail unit image below. When we do RR movement we run this guy around the board and whistle the tune to Thomas the Tank Engine.
Besides the strategic movement ideas, I think something has to be done about the mined seazones. The mines make it very hard for the CP to deal with the Allies naval forces.
Also, I just love how some of the people on here love Larry Harris sooo much that they would acknowledge he is rushing games out without play testing people outside of his inner circle.
How about a new unit similar to naval bases or air bases in 1940? This would be a Railroad or transportation hub which would allow land units plus 1 to movement? Or all units moving from a capital can move two spaces.
1914 was broken oob just like global was. Cut corners to increase profits.
Itâ€
s our right as consumers to spend our hard earned money on whatever we please. If we decide to buy inferior or broken products see AA1914 OOB, so be it. But we also get the right to bitch at the designer for it!
Loki17
I see there is some debate as to calling it strategic movement or railroad movement but why don’t we just call it teleportation or ‘beaming’ like they do in Star Trek?
How in the world do you say this is the best WW1 game or a 10 out of 10 when only the allies can win? Unless of course you are playing a wetrard!
