Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Got a question that you'd like me to answer?
I'll be checking in on this thread now and then and hope I can answer any questions you may have.
Post Reply
pellulo
Posts: 1282
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 10:12 pm
Location: P.R.
Contact:

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by pellulo » Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:07 pm

The A&A type proposed cover art for a WWI game, enjoy, Pellulo
http://pellula0.tripod.com/sitebuilderc ... s/10oo.jpg
Pellulo

User avatar
Imperious leader
Posts: 5207
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:04 am
Location: Moving up to phase line red...

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Imperious leader » Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:56 pm

Not working...
We really need an Axis and Allies World War one game so i can play that on August 1st, 2014.

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Flashman » Sat Nov 24, 2012 5:36 pm

I would love game art along these lines...

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a213/ ... eatwar.jpg

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Flashman » Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:10 pm

Just heard about this after a summer brainstorming the new version of Britannia.

Very much like most of what I've read so far, but my comments below are based on reading through just the above posts. Little disappointed no Japan (which had just defeated Russia), but I can understand why. The one round of combat per turn makes perfect sense. Also glad to see no Canada/India/Anzac nonesense. As long as colonies are sensibly limited in production, each empire should be integrated militarily.


My ten cents then:


1. Rail movement (of course).

I believe this would be the perfect game to introduce rail movement (that is, unlimited movement for land units along friendly tts during the non-combat phase).
Two main reasons:

This war, more than even WWII, was driven by railway timetables. Its said the Kaizer tried to stop the war, but was told he couldn't because the timetables wouldn't allow it.
Since this will be a relatively static game, the system would not be so radical a change as in the WWII versions. Gently does it, once established people will wonder why A&A didn't always have rail movement.
RM would be of particular benefit to the Central Powers, allowing them to shift forces from front to front as required.

Owing to the scarcity of rail lines in some regions at this period, it may be advantageous to have rails printed on the map where they are available. Personally, I'd prefer this to "stippled" terrain effects, especially if there are no actually game effects of terrain.

Finally, armoured trains would be the coolest A&A pieces ever:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armoured_t ... orld_War_I


2. Italy

I assume Italy join the Allies after a couple of turns. But wait on here, in 1914 it was by no means certain that Italy would not join the CPs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy_in_WWI

I would suggest using Italy as a tilting mechanism, forcing the pace of the early game. I seem to remember that Diplomacy has an official variant whereby after X number of turns you toss a coin to decide which side the country joins.

So: after X number of turns, if the CPs have achieved Y, Italy joins them. If they have not attained Y, Italy joins the Allies. Or, if you have 8 players, the Italy player can decide who to join.
It might make sense for Italy to have "Allied" unit sculpts to balance 4 vs 4.


3. Artillery

I very much support the suggestion that artillery should not be able to move during the combat phase. It fires an opening barrage, enemy artillery replies, and then the battle proper is fought normally. Art. on the attacking side are only allowed as casualties from the enemy art reply. They cannot move into the captured tt.

OR, divide into "field" and "heavy/rail" units.


4. Infantry.

I'm intrigued to find out if the sculpts will feature early or late war equipment. One possibility (I know this won't be included initially) is to have "basic" and "elite/veteran" infantry, with the latter represented by steel helmets, body armor, gasmasks etc.
I would also like infantry "trained" at specific depots rather than "built" in factories. Of course you still have to pay for the training. Something else probably beyond the scope of this production would be each unit keyed to a nationality within its respective empire, with political implications. For example ethnic "German" units in the Austrian army would be more reliable than ethnic Czechs raised in Prague. Perhaps each depot should be limited to a set number of recruits per game, (based broadly on its population), to reflect finite manpower. Also, players should have to recruit in each depot they hold, rather than for example France recruiting all infantry units in Paris.


5. Plastic colours.

My personal preferences:

G - Black
A - White
T - Yellow/Burnt Orange?
I - Grey
B - Tan
F - Blue
U - Green
R - Brown

PSR has these suggestions:

http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Sho ... aspx?id=29


However I'm intending to experiment with dying my units with RIT, so I can have whatever colours I like.


6. Navy

Are naval battles fought in the same way as on land, with only one round of combat? Otherwise, aircraft should certainly only participate in the first round.

Another of my old arguments is for coaling stations. That is, a naval unit must refuel in a friendly port each and every turn. In can start and/or end the turn at sea, but must refuel at some point.
Battleships are clearly more powerful with no carriers in the game, so I assume they'll have the 2 hit points, perhaps even 3 (big war ships were very difficult to sink). Should take 2 (or even 3) turns to build. I might even think about a separate naval battle-board, with tactical movements such as "crossing the T", but again this might be better suited to a stand alone game.


7. Factories.

Can't let this go without pulling for my preference for not allowing use of captured factories. Exception: in reference to 4. above, allow use of captured infantry depots, where the nationality is appropriate, e.g Russia can recruit Polish units in captured Cracow/Galicia.
And, obviously, money should be collected at the start of a player's turn.


8. Techs.

Though never a big fan of techs, surely tanks should not be available at the beginning. Moreover, if tanks are in the game, bombers should be too.

Regarding tanks: they actually did breakthrough when used in numbers, effectively they did have "blitzing" ability. They sometimes ended up deep into enemy tt, but without infantry support were sitting ducks. If we assume that they have the same normal movement as other land units (1, or unlimited travel by rail in NCM), allow tanks to "breakthrough", i.e. if an attack completely eliminates the enemy, surviving attacking tanks can move 1 further land tt (probably only into undefended areas). This actually reflects my preference for BT over BK in WWII A&A, but seems even more appropriate here. Presumably tanks will be 3-1 in combat.


9. Cavalry

I get the point about cavalry seeming to be redundant in the war. But why not let the game reflect this organically?

Cavalry cost more than infantry.
Have the breakthrough ability described above for tanks.
Whereas infantry will presumably be 1-2, cavalry is the reverse (or even 1-1?).

The effect should be that, on the western front, cavalry does indeed become redundant due to the static warfare; their extra movement is useless, they are less effective in defence, take up more transport room than infantry, and are more expensive (horse fodder). But, on the other fronts, cavalry movement can still be an asset, particularly to nations not yet equipped with armour.

Mmmm, already thinking about pressing RISK cavalry units into service...


10. Control markers

The usual roundels? Problem is, all the Allied powers used the same 3 ring roundels, with different colours.

A radical suggestion: there is only one Allied control marker design! The Allies are the good guys, they don't conquer tt, they liberate it. Therefore, when the Allies capture a CP occupied area, they merely remove the CP control marker. If it started as a neutral, they place a joint Allied marker to show that the liberated tt is now free, but friendly to Allied units. They cannot gain IPCs from the tt, but they can recruit infantry there if there is a depot. Occupied CP tt is treated in the same way, except for the recruitment, which must be of an "oppressed minority" nationality.
The idea here is to balance the industrial inferiority of the CPs.
The CPs each have their own control markers; they can annex and exploit occupied tt in a way the Allies cannot.

As a side issue, does each player still play a turn one after the other, with the possibility of the Allies having 5 turns versus CPs 3?

My preference for WWII A&A is four player, with USSR & Japan as separate powers, taking separate turns from the Western Allies and the Euro Axis. However, with no Japan/Pacific, ILs "All Axis/CP plays; then all Allies play" seems to make a lot of sense here.

Sgt. Ziegler
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:55 pm

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Sgt. Ziegler » Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:57 pm

Italy started the war as a central power, then shifted to the allies during the war as they were not winning, how will this be portrayed? Or will it? Sorry, my mistake, they were allied to germany, had a pact with austria-hungary, but wanted territory from austria, where a lot of italiens lived. Will italy be like russia in the latest AA version where they cannot join the war for a turn or so I'm guessing?

User avatar
Flashman
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:32 am
Location: Greater East Yorkshire Co-Prosperity Sphere

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Flashman » Mon Nov 26, 2012 6:07 pm

I hope its possible for them to join either side.

One idea is that, after a set number of turns, each side secretly bids IPCs for Italy. The winner pays the cash to the bank and controls Italy from then on.

If anyone attacks a neutral Italy it automatically joins the opposing alliance.

Noll
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 6:41 am

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Noll » Tue Nov 27, 2012 7:59 am

Sgt. Ziegler wrote:Italy started the war as a central power, then shifted to the allies during the war as they were not winning, how will this be portrayed? Or will it? Sorry, my mistake, they were allied to germany, had a pact with austria-hungary, but wanted territory from austria, where a lot of italiens lived. Will italy be like russia in the latest AA version where they cannot join the war for a turn or so I'm guessing?
Italy NEVER joined the war as a central power.

Italy refused to join to the war as he believed Austria was the offender, or at least thats what they said.

When Italy finally joined the war with UK and France, it was a minority that decided for it (against the whole Italian senate!! And the majority of the people!)

One of the intellectual that was promoting Italy joining the "Allies" was Benito Mussolini (he wasn't in charge yet).

Sgt. Ziegler
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:55 pm

Re: Axis & Allies 1914 WORLD WAR 1

Post by Sgt. Ziegler » Tue Nov 27, 2012 9:13 am

I realize they never joined as a central power, I didn't feel like rewriting my comment so I corrected myself part through

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests