-
I am looking this rule set over carefully as I think the DG version of WW 1 is one of the best games ever. There are always very close outcomes, it is elegant in its simplicity, but brutally hard to be really good at. I also believe in looking at small nuances for house rule additions to my games, and have posted some for my favorites, which we almost always play with. But I am not sure about some of these changes yet. Since we almost always play the historical game, my comments are based on the impact to that game.
For example:
1) I think it had been previously clarified that the Belgian 1 RP in parentheses is what it would have if DoWed and invaded in the non-Historical game. In the Historical, with the initial attacks already made, it starts at 0 as the 1 RP has been used.
2) Giving Serbia 5RPs is way out of line with their capabiltiy, preparedness, and support for other nations. Only 1 attack is possible in the Historical game, and it does create the historical result. Another option to them having 0 after turn 1 might be to give them 1 RP for each city they hold in Serbia, but it negates the need for the Allies to open the Greek supply route. In either case, giving them any RPs might need to be accompanied with Serbia ALSO losing double RPs if a German is in the attack
3) Giving Rumania 5RPs on activiation seems to make the historical collapse and surrender of their entire army in just a few months an impossibility. That number is just too high. A good Central Power player will position his Bulgars, Turks, AHs, and a few Germans close enough to destroy most, if not all, of Rumania in 1 turn, as it should be. They have to be played like the Bulgars. On the Bulgar entry turn, they also have 0 RPs which means only exerting ZOCs,carefully setting up a defense, or participating in attacks where they cannot be hit back, and where there are Turks, AH, or Ger units to absorb RP losses.
4) I really like the British Tank counter and am adding that to my game
5) Not sure on the Rumanian resource hex, adding 5 more points to the CP total?
6)The Turkish RP lend to Germany is interesting, but I do not think it should be done. RP management is a challenge for the Germans and does not need to be easier. Careful use of the Turkish forces is the Balkans so they can be in attacks and absorb RP losses should still be the CP method of using the Turkish units/RPs .
7) RP loss if the path is not on a rail line seems too detailed and potentiall extreme. Its a 6 month turn, RPs are abstract for material, supplies, and money, and since there typically aren't that many lent, it would be a major hit to the CP numbers and less likely to occur. Maybe a generic -1 RP off the total lent RPs from lender to each borrower if there are ANY number of non-continuous rail hexes used (ex. 1 hex off rail or 10 hexes off rail all = -1 RP loss from the lent amount).
8) I also agree on the sea move to Salonika and Trieste even though they are not clear terrain. We simply wrote BH on the back of the Destroyed Fort markers and use as beachheads for supply tracing. Also just agree that all coastal citys are ports (adding port symbols your choice), and that units and supply can move/trace through them.
9)I do not agree with the changed MP rate in Germany as France/Belgian had just as much rail network. It simply requires careful play.
10) I do not agree on restricting rail movement into enemy ZOCs or neutral hexes (if its neutral, and you move in in any way, you invaded and its not neutral anymore). Its a 6 month turn, a big game scale, and this also abstractly addresses all kinds of temp road networks behind the front lines for deployment and movement.
These house rule changes look good and I'm glad to see someone else puts this kind of effort into their favorite games. I'm going to try some of these with our group and discuss the others to see how they modify the play. Maybe more later.
Ron
-
- Edited Thu Jun 5, 2008 4:22 pm
Posted Thu Jun 5, 2008 2:25 pm
Here you go for some of those 'counters' then: 
