The "US attacked early hack" is a bit of a stretch. Just because you place a US military piece to REPRESENT a neutral power being attacked doesn't mean the US is getting attacked. Common now..
I've heard on UA-cam that the new owners of the A&A franchise is releasing a new A&A 1914, but without improvements, and that a 1914 second edition may be in the works by Renegade Games.
When you create a board game like this you try to find a balance between realism and gameplay. If this was modeled 100% at after the Great War it would probably be rather lame. But as it stands this is considered one of the better games in the series. And yes it needs more units.
Nice review. Mostly how i felt during my first game of AA WW1. However, we were 8 players, exactly 1 per nations, the game wasnt finished (not even close) after 12 hours, but i'd "almost kill" just to be able to play again with max. players!
I feel this is a totally unfair and inexperienced review. I have played this game more times than I care to admit against a plethora of different opponents. It's a solid game. There is an official errata that was released that addresses 90% of the issues you discuss. It's been out almost as long as the game's been out. Even a small bit of research would have revealed this. I feel like you were out to tear this game up from the jump. I don't think what you did here is right or fair to the teams that created it. I think you should remove this video from your lineup not because of your opinion but because it is incredibly imprecise. You sound silly to someone who has actually played the game.
I don't want to defend the game at all but: At 16:00 the whole Russian Revolution stuff was clarified in errata: "All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.” Errata is not a big deal in the board wargame space, but many people don't even know errata is a thing. I'm certain with how the original rule was written the 'or' was meant to result in inclusive logic. I see what the designer was trying to achieve with the Russian Revolution rules. The Revolution and Civil War in Russia is a complex thing to try to portray. Really, most of what he tries is 'alright' in terms of trying to portray WWI history within the A&A framework. Problem with A&A is that is a very light on simulation value, even for WW2. The most egregious fault of the game, however, in terms of portraying WWI are the victory conditions. The taking of capitals is a bizarre requirement for WWI, which was decided in terms of national morale. Berlin was not taken. Vienna was not taken. Istanbul was not taken. There is no model of morale in the game, and that fact alone disrupts its value in terms of history.
Axis and allies "a game of alternative history" it is not meant to be a mimic of the real historical events. If it was it would be pretty boring. Think of it as a world war skin for a table top war game.
@@calebkinney4428 I think the lack of a morale method of victory is the issue. Plenty of WWI games allow for victories of an ahistorical nature, if players manage to lose capital cities. Just a bizarre situation that could have been handled differently.
I understand where you are coming from. I think one of the things I like about a&a is that you can add as many house rules as you like and people do. The core mechanics do a good job of holding up to alterations.
Most times the game doesn't end with a official victory condition, but with one site doesn't see a chance to win anymore (and giving up). So your proposed "moral system" actually is there.
You said something historically inaccurate, Istanbul was only the name of the city after 1930, the city was still called Constantinople throughout the Ottoman Empire’s entire existence. And also the entente did occupy Constantinople from 1918 to 1923, search up the Turkish war of independence.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with a number of your comments. I agree the game needs some tweaks and adjustments but they are mostly minor and overall I think 1914 is one of the best AAA games out there. My biggest argument against your review is trying to desperately represent an accurate depiction of how the war actually was. This is first and foremost a*game*, which means it has to have a certain amount of leeway in order to be playable without the outcome being a foregone conclusion because it's so historically accurate. The first problem is the matter of fleets. Of course if we went with actual fleet sizes the Axis would never have a prayer of doing ANYTHING remotely naval except desperately try to send submarines (which, to be fair, they did mostly due later in the war). You have to give the Axis a chance to at least slow down the Entente in the seas early on or you're just looking at an inevitable loss every time. I think the early naval balance issues are minor and countries like France should actually be a bit weaker to help out the Axis. The only thing we changed so far is ship costs for Cruisers and Subs to give them a better ratio compared to Battleships. I do agree the submarine warfare is too weak. It should be much stronger and we have a house rule that increases the amount of sea zones and the level of IPC damage you inflict. We're still tweaking it but it helps. Fighters promoting on a 1-to-1 basis is nonsense. It makes aircraft literally pointless at 6 IPCs unless you take their cost down to 1 or 2 and even then, why not just pump out more units ? Fighters work well as designed, since it technically makes it so you get 1 more kill per 6 Artillery. It's not imbalanced at all. The only thing we did in our games was to limit air combat to one round and declare winner whoever has more airplanes. Battleships bombarding has ALWAYS been iffy in any AAA game. It would take fleets of warships to destroy one infantry division, so let's just take this one as a mechanic to help out with a single turn of amphibious assault. I've never seen anyone build ridiculous fleets of Battleships to kill tons of units that way, especially since the rules call for at least 1 unit landed per Battleship firing. Also if you looked up Larry Harris's comments on the rules, you actually CANNOT use US troops to represent neutral territories until the US in actually in the war. That's just plain wrong. Finally, the 1 IPC cost per Infantry while lowering down their value. This is a personal opinion. My question is simple : why ? Yes, men were lost at a horrendous rate, but then how many tokens do you want to move around just to see this ? If I have 10 units and lose 9, I will feel the pinch as much as having 30 and losing 27, so this feels a lot more like a "cosmetic" thing. A 3 IPC Infantry can represent 50 000 men if you want, or it can represent 5 000. This game goes heavy on Infantry anyway and you're asking to make it even more about Infantry ? Other AAA games often had this issue where it was often best to just spam a meat shield of Infantry. This game at least rewards you for using synergies and with no units moving faster than the guy with the rifle, I don't feel it takes away from the game. Realism is great in a game, so long as it doesn't get in the way of the game itself. I think you prefer realism over gameplay and it's fine. Personally, I think AAA1914 is the best Axis and Allies game around, especially with a few minor tweaks, which it lends itself to extremely well. I even made an unofficial House Rules Book that people can use to help with it and, frankly, the changes are minor, not at all what you seem to be implying. TL:DR - This game is not nearly as bad as you make it appear to be and deserves a fair shot from anyone who enjoys wargames.
I honestly loved this one. Obviously it has its issues, but we liked adding in our house rules and I liked the aspect of of the neutral countries and I felt the gameplay was designed to be like ww1 combat. Idk that’s just my opinion
This dude clearly hasn’t read the rule book well enough and he claims to love A&A but most of this video is him complaining about features that exist in all A&A games. When he complained about the game not featuring an influenza mechanic he lost. Clearly he hasn’t taken the time to fully understand how the game works & plays. But he’s dead on about too few pieces and the map being criminally small.
Yeah, just what I thought. The other games he recommended in the beginning has Germany almost always destroying the British navy on turn one as well. So why complain about it here. The same is also true when it comes to technology and not covering other world events.
Axis and Allies was never meant to embrace fully the world wars. You want to play a game like Axis and Allies that is about close to WWII on global scale? Try Historical Board Gaming 1936, politics matter in that game.
Artillery was the #1 killer in WW I. But how to use it in the game might be a Gordian knot.Some of the preliminary bombardments lasted for two weeks. Some just a few hours or stretching in to days. How to incorporate that in to the game? I agree on the fact that the Infantry is expensive but not the use of cavalry since the game is by itself not "to scale". The USA is NOT in the war until it is attacked or by round 4. So keep them away from Greece or Portugal or Norway and Sweden. The new revised rules states clearly that the USA has one task until attacked or round 4 is in session: Keep the US fleet by its shores. No adventures for them until attacked or round 4. Easy rules to live by.
Global War 1914 will be out in the next couple of months. As a WW1 fan I think you'll be pleased with the results from all of the work we put into it. You'll be able to find it here; www.historicalboardgaming.com/Global-War-1914_c_550.html
Have not ventured into 1914 yet but peaks my interest. I might try HBG WW1 game first when it is available. Paths of Glory is great but different type of game. There are some other house rules to the game included a global map I have seen online. I wish Siredblood would tackle this one too like he has done with Global 1940. Good video!
Im not seeing a problem with that Russian Rule: It states that all Russian Units that are outside of either of these two options: Russian "Home" Areas, Russian Controlled areas. In other words if the unit is outside of one case or the other case it is removed. Using "and" would imply that the area would need to satisfy BOTH those criteria to stay on the board instead of one. So Russian units may stay on the board in contested "home" areas which remain contested then for the rest of the game AND on Controlled Spaces which then remain Russian for the rest of the game.
This game had a lot of problems and we had to stop playing it. It had a lot of great ideas though. Larry Harris made so many good games that it’s hard to understand what happened here. I wonder if he was rushed or something. I do like the map a lot too. Tanks were basically nearly unusable too in this version.
@@calebkinney4428 I’ll never sell it because I have multiple copies of every Axis and Allie’s game. Supposedly there was an official fix to this game of some sort but I never played it.
I upgraded mine from historical boardgaming. Bought extra pieces when they had them. More chips, they have WW1 themed IPC. I made rules for MG emplacements, poison gas, trenches, barbwire and a big technology chart. No tanks unless you get the tech. It works well, everything bogs down and technology becomes the main way of breaking the stalemate. Works a bit too well I think. Added stormtroopers for Germans. And now I’ve purchased your card deck to add to the quagmire my older son and I created. Good review you got another follower!👍🏻
17:00 Thanks for this review - I had this game on my list, but time is scarce and Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition with some Home Rules (including more politics) is way too much fun. The rule with the airplane reminds me of the destroyers being able to eliminate certain sub abilities. We changed that to a 1:1-basis (one destroyer prevents the first strike, submerging or passing through the seazone of only one sub instead of two, three or even more subs. It works way better than the OOB rule.
For the IPC tracker I used the pop out card that came with the country roundels and just set the roundels on the black underside of the card piece as a makeshift tracker :D
Adding house rules really help this game out. Also on the part shortages I got that too when I purchased it years ago. I got a hold wizard of the coast and they sent me a crap ton of parts to make up for it. For custom rule, we bypass the trench warfare because it slows everything down. I also pick up zipplins and other 3D along with cash from historic gaming to help the game out. Nice video
I wouldn't go that far as a Nether regions exam, but the game Could be better though! You overlooked Machine guns which were the biggest part of the War, even More than all those units you mentioned combined+the Turkish Straits is not represented either! Mainly because how slow the game is, it's the only version I haven't played over the now popular UA-cam wars- the tournament rules makes it a little more faster thankfully, I'm liking the cheaper buy of the Infantries idea although I would make them 2 Ipcs each instead!!!
@06:33 You forgot that the USA had tanks in WW1 also, albeit using French & British models. I will stick to playing Strategic Command WW1 on the computer as it has all the bells & whistles you are talking about + more :)
Actually bombardments from battleships were a lot more effective than bombing from bombers. I remember reading accounts of German soldiers on DDay discussing the aerial vs naval bombardment and the aerial was a joke that landed off target and did little damage where as the naval bombardment did a lot of damage and was quite terrifying. It is ridiculous though that battleships can kill units in these large swaths of land though.. like obviously a battleship shouldn't be able to reach 200 miles inland to pick off units just because some bois are landing on the coast of that same territory.
I love 1914. EXCEPT, it is too simple, and couple of glaring map issues - especially too few sea areas - which needs an offset with better ship speeds.
Thanks for the cool review. For what it's worth, A&A Spring 1942 (a friend called it the "dormitory edition") also has a map board that just isn't big enough in places, like the Eastern Front. This issue must have been encountered during play-testing.
Well done! I actually thought this review was both funny and enlightening. I can’t wait to apply your new rules and applications in my next go at it. I would be very interested in a AA 1940 SE Global video of you get the chance. I feel like most reviews out there for Global are lack luster. You have a good grasp on production value (as seen in this video), that I think a video for global would do well. I look forward to seeing what videos you make next!
@@BoardGameHackers Would love to hear your thoughts on 1942 2nd Edition, and Global 40 (Pacific 1940 + Europe 1940). And the 50th Anniversary edition, if you have it.
Also poker chips are simply superior to paper money, you can read how many IPCs a power has from across a table without picking it up, counting it, and then oh, yeah I forgot, better repeat that - yeah no thanks. It also takes up less table space.
We are 90% complete, if you have any 1914 tech research ideas let us know. When the deck is complete there will be a link in this description and a video going over the cards.
@@BoardGameHackers I am very impressed that you replied quickly and I appreciate that. Most people don't reply at all. Thanks for keeping an update! Looking forward to it!
After seeing the price for this game, I ended up buying "An Attrition Of Souls" to scratch that WW1 itch, much better buy to me, I was pleasantly surprised at how good and how many options it had. I don't think it's in print anymore either, but either way, even a new copy probably isn't as expensive as this game.
Something that I'm gonna correct you, is you called balloons "Hot Air Balloons". Balloons at that time were gas filled, so no they weren't filled with hot air.
Not wrong dude, on so many points. Every version has the Russian problem too. We get it, Russia is a big place and so is Africa. Can we get some fucking space in Europe please.
It's WW1 and no cavalry? Unfortunately, the map on the Balkans is completely wrong. Especially for WW1, Bosnia must be mentioned here completely in its borders. Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia but never fully intrigued its empire. A pity. 2 main reasons why I will not buy the game. I was hoping the game makers knew more of the actual past and history.
Dude, you are so disgusted with the whole game for the entire video, a tad unfair and quite annoying actually. If this game is a prostate exam, you need some laxative.
I bought this game about 4 years ago and I've only played it once. I could tell even from the beginning that it had insufficient plastic units and that the rules made it evident that the game was broken. And I am of course very annoyed with the game map's inaccuracies: Greece bordering with the Ottomans, Poland being connected to the sea (it should be landlocked, ceding its northern territory to Germany) and Italy's northern border is completely way off. Why didn't the game designers just do a Google Image search of European maps as the continent actually was in 1914? The entire history of human knowledge can easily be looked up on the internet. Yea, I understand that games like these are supposed to be an abstraction of actual history, but these glaring visual inaccuracies do not help suspend disbelief. I'm sorry to say it, but Larry Harris is a hack. I understand that game designers can't all be historians, but he should have actually read a little bit of history or actually talked to an actual historian about it. And why didn't the game publishers properly playtest this? I will admit that the way the map incorporates Africa is clever somewhat, but the African theater was basically a sideshow in WW1. I would have made the game map emphasize Europe and take out Africa entirely, as well as India. Heck, I'd even try to exclude everything west of France as well. Take for example Sid Meier's Gettysburg for the PC. The game actually feels like you're reenacting American Civil war battles on maps that look like those you see from old Encyclopedias.
@@BoardGameHackers Maybe I'm kind of being harsh on Larry Harris here. I love the original 1984 A&A. And I like what I've seen so far of "War Room". However, A&A 1914 does need to be fixed. One thing that struck out at me was how "all over the place" the IPC values are. I would have liked to see IPC values as follows where they use a combination of logarithmic scale and nicely rounded numbers to reflect something that still maintains balance and proper ranking in order: Germany: 36 IPC Austria: 24 IPC Ottoman: 20 IPC (Totals for Central/Axis: 80 -- a nice round number) Russia: 30 IPC France: 25 IPC British: 35 IPC (Total for starting Allies: 90 -- also a nice round number!) Italy: 20 IPC (Italy should not enter until later in the game, as far as I am concerned), because they did not enter until 1915) US: 40 IPC (Total for -all-- of the Allies when Italy and US enter: 150 -- I love how symmetrical this number is) There's no way that Austria-Hungary should have more IPCs than France. And while I'm also giving Ottomans way more IPCs than what they should have historically, this gives them some type of presence in the game and a nicely rounded starting IPC value. Maybe the 20 value should reflect a combination between them and Bulgaria. Yeah, I'm kind of autistic. Larry Harris should have hired me to design the IPC values. Moreover, I understand that for marketing purposes, the game had to be called "Axis & Allies 1914", but for a nerd like me, I would have loved it if they had called it "Centrals & Allies".
If managing IPC counts is too difficult for you, if you need a CFO to assist w/ 3rd grade math and writing down numbers, you definitely should not be playing Axis & Allies games.
Being difficult and being a pain in the ass are separate things. In a game that already takes 12 hours, you just want some things to run smoothly. If you don't subscribe to that point then you've never felt the joy of playing with poker chips.
I like this game alot. But it is unbalanced badly. REALLY badly. I think it might be 90/10 who si going to win. And tthat is probably to much , 10%, for the weak side.
And this is why you're wrong because the Germans use gas attacks in World War II and many of the game's you say is a good games plus there was disease in World War II and stuff so you're basically saying all axis and allies are bad because of the same reasons you say this game is bad and plus how do you make different Scopes this was made in 2013 a lot of people were lazy in that time and please stop ripping on this game it's a good game and also why not just take games from the risk game pieces I mean and why not you know at the rules from the end World War II and then just add him to the World War 1 version
![Axis & Allies TIPS For Rookies [Part 1]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wcLRnFp82-M/mqdefault.jpg)
The "US attacked early hack" is a bit of a stretch. Just because you place a US military piece to REPRESENT a neutral power being attacked doesn't mean the US is getting attacked. Common now..
Yeah this guy is a clown
Actually 1914 has thematically representative mechanics to trenches.
What I learn from this vid is A&A 1914 really need a revised/2nd edition!
I've heard on UA-cam that the new owners of the A&A franchise is releasing a new A&A 1914, but without improvements, and that a 1914 second edition may be in the works by Renegade Games.
When you create a board game like this you try to find a balance between realism and gameplay. If this was modeled 100% at after the Great War it would probably be rather lame. But as it stands this is considered one of the better games in the series. And yes it needs more units.
Nice review. Mostly how i felt during my first game of AA WW1. However, we were 8 players, exactly 1 per nations, the game wasnt finished (not even close) after 12 hours, but i'd "almost kill" just to be able to play again with max. players!
I feel this is a totally unfair and inexperienced review. I have played this game more times than I care to admit against a plethora of different opponents. It's a solid game. There is an official errata that was released that addresses 90% of the issues you discuss. It's been out almost as long as the game's been out. Even a small bit of research would have revealed this. I feel like you were out to tear this game up from the jump. I don't think what you did here is right or fair to the teams that created it. I think you should remove this video from your lineup not because of your opinion but because it is incredibly imprecise. You sound silly to someone who has actually played the game.
I don't want to defend the game at all but:
At 16:00 the whole Russian Revolution stuff was clarified in errata:
"All Russian units outside of original Russian territories are immediately removed from the board, and Russia will no longer have a turn.”
Errata is not a big deal in the board wargame space, but many people don't even know errata is a thing. I'm certain with how the original rule was written the 'or' was meant to result in inclusive logic.
I see what the designer was trying to achieve with the Russian Revolution rules. The Revolution and Civil War in Russia is a complex thing to try to portray. Really, most of what he tries is 'alright' in terms of trying to portray WWI history within the A&A framework. Problem with A&A is that is a very light on simulation value, even for WW2.
The most egregious fault of the game, however, in terms of portraying WWI are the victory conditions. The taking of capitals is a bizarre requirement for WWI, which was decided in terms of national morale. Berlin was not taken. Vienna was not taken. Istanbul was not taken. There is no model of morale in the game, and that fact alone disrupts its value in terms of history.
Axis and allies "a game of alternative history" it is not meant to be a mimic of the real historical events. If it was it would be pretty boring. Think of it as a world war skin for a table top war game.
@@calebkinney4428 I think the lack of a morale method of victory is the issue. Plenty of WWI games allow for victories of an ahistorical nature, if players manage to lose capital cities. Just a bizarre situation that could have been handled differently.
I understand where you are coming from. I think one of the things I like about a&a is that you can add as many house rules as you like and people do. The core mechanics do a good job of holding up to alterations.
Most times the game doesn't end with a official victory condition, but with one site doesn't see a chance to win anymore (and giving up). So your proposed "moral system" actually is there.
You said something historically inaccurate, Istanbul was only the name of the city after 1930, the city was still called Constantinople throughout the Ottoman Empire’s entire existence. And also the entente did occupy Constantinople from 1918 to 1923, search up the Turkish war of independence.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with a number of your comments. I agree the game needs some tweaks and adjustments but they are mostly minor and overall I think 1914 is one of the best AAA games out there.
My biggest argument against your review is trying to desperately represent an accurate depiction of how the war actually was. This is first and foremost a*game*, which means it has to have a certain amount of leeway in order to be playable without the outcome being a foregone conclusion because it's so historically accurate.
The first problem is the matter of fleets. Of course if we went with actual fleet sizes the Axis would never have a prayer of doing ANYTHING remotely naval except desperately try to send submarines (which, to be fair, they did mostly due later in the war). You have to give the Axis a chance to at least slow down the Entente in the seas early on or you're just looking at an inevitable loss every time. I think the early naval balance issues are minor and countries like France should actually be a bit weaker to help out the Axis. The only thing we changed so far is ship costs for Cruisers and Subs to give them a better ratio compared to Battleships.
I do agree the submarine warfare is too weak. It should be much stronger and we have a house rule that increases the amount of sea zones and the level of IPC damage you inflict. We're still tweaking it but it helps.
Fighters promoting on a 1-to-1 basis is nonsense. It makes aircraft literally pointless at 6 IPCs unless you take their cost down to 1 or 2 and even then, why not just pump out more units ? Fighters work well as designed, since it technically makes it so you get 1 more kill per 6 Artillery. It's not imbalanced at all. The only thing we did in our games was to limit air combat to one round and declare winner whoever has more airplanes.
Battleships bombarding has ALWAYS been iffy in any AAA game. It would take fleets of warships to destroy one infantry division, so let's just take this one as a mechanic to help out with a single turn of amphibious assault. I've never seen anyone build ridiculous fleets of Battleships to kill tons of units that way, especially since the rules call for at least 1 unit landed per Battleship firing.
Also if you looked up Larry Harris's comments on the rules, you actually CANNOT use US troops to represent neutral territories until the US in actually in the war. That's just plain wrong.
Finally, the 1 IPC cost per Infantry while lowering down their value. This is a personal opinion. My question is simple : why ? Yes, men were lost at a horrendous rate, but then how many tokens do you want to move around just to see this ? If I have 10 units and lose 9, I will feel the pinch as much as having 30 and losing 27, so this feels a lot more like a "cosmetic" thing. A 3 IPC Infantry can represent 50 000 men if you want, or it can represent 5 000. This game goes heavy on Infantry anyway and you're asking to make it even more about Infantry ? Other AAA games often had this issue where it was often best to just spam a meat shield of Infantry. This game at least rewards you for using synergies and with no units moving faster than the guy with the rifle, I don't feel it takes away from the game.
Realism is great in a game, so long as it doesn't get in the way of the game itself. I think you prefer realism over gameplay and it's fine. Personally, I think AAA1914 is the best Axis and Allies game around, especially with a few minor tweaks, which it lends itself to extremely well. I even made an unofficial House Rules Book that people can use to help with it and, frankly, the changes are minor, not at all what you seem to be implying.
TL:DR - This game is not nearly as bad as you make it appear to be and deserves a fair shot from anyone who enjoys wargames.
I honestly loved this one. Obviously it has its issues, but we liked adding in our house rules and I liked the aspect of of the neutral countries and I felt the gameplay was designed to be like ww1 combat. Idk that’s just my opinion
Plus having 8 players is also really cool
He showed off tattoos as a way of confirming to the viewers that he’s educated on the subject of the First World War. Lmfao.
Well, technically, Greece bordered the Ottoman Empire prior to the first Balkan War
This dude clearly hasn’t read the rule book well enough and he claims to love A&A but most of this video is him complaining about features that exist in all A&A games. When he complained about the game not featuring an influenza mechanic he lost. Clearly he hasn’t taken the time to fully understand how the game works & plays. But he’s dead on about too few pieces and the map being criminally small.
Yeah, just what I thought. The other games he recommended in the beginning has Germany almost always destroying the British navy on turn one as well. So why complain about it here. The same is also true when it comes to technology and not covering other world events.
Axis and Allies was never meant to embrace fully the world wars. You want to play a game like Axis and Allies that is about close to WWII on global scale? Try Historical Board Gaming 1936, politics matter in that game.
Artillery was the #1 killer in WW I. But how to use it in the game might be a Gordian knot.Some of the preliminary bombardments lasted for two weeks. Some just a few hours or stretching in to days. How to incorporate that in to the game?
I agree on the fact that the Infantry is expensive but not the use of cavalry since the game is by itself not "to scale".
The USA is NOT in the war until it is attacked or by round 4. So keep them away from Greece or Portugal or Norway and Sweden. The new revised rules states clearly that the USA has one task until attacked or round 4 is in session: Keep the US fleet by its shores. No adventures for them until attacked or round 4. Easy rules to live by.
Back in print now, and they fixed the issues with the amount of pieces and chips
Global War 1914 will be out in the next couple of months. As a WW1 fan I think you'll be pleased with the results from all of the work we put into it. You'll be able to find it here; www.historicalboardgaming.com/Global-War-1914_c_550.html
I bought two copies so I would have enough pieces because they just did not have enough come with the game.
Bingo!
Great review. It does need so many fixes. I'd be great if you could post your suggested fixes and initial set up suggestions soemwhere.
.
Have not ventured into 1914 yet but peaks my interest. I might try HBG WW1 game first when it is available. Paths of Glory is great but different type of game. There are some other house rules to the game included a global map I have seen online. I wish Siredblood would tackle this one too like he has done with Global 1940. Good video!
It's labelled a sea zone for plane movement! Gosh, did you even play the game??
I just got the 1914 re-release. I like it but you need 2 copies to have enough pieces and chips.
Im not seeing a problem with that Russian Rule: It states that all Russian Units that are outside of either of these two options: Russian "Home" Areas, Russian Controlled areas. In other words if the unit is outside of one case or the other case it is removed. Using "and" would imply that the area would need to satisfy BOTH those criteria to stay on the board instead of one. So Russian units may stay on the board in contested "home" areas which remain contested then for the rest of the game AND on Controlled Spaces which then remain Russian for the rest of the game.
This game had a lot of problems and we had to stop playing it. It had a lot of great ideas though. Larry Harris made so many good games that it’s hard to understand what happened here. I wonder if he was rushed or something. I do like the map a lot too. Tanks were basically nearly unusable too in this version.
Want to sell your copy?
@@calebkinney4428 I’ll never sell it because I have multiple copies of every Axis and Allie’s game. Supposedly there was an official fix to this game of some sort but I never played it.
@@CBs_Bill_from_Montana a true collector. :-)
@@calebkinney4428 they releasing this again. Preorders now!
I upgraded mine from historical boardgaming. Bought extra pieces when they had them. More chips, they have WW1 themed IPC. I made rules for MG emplacements, poison gas, trenches, barbwire and a big technology chart. No tanks unless you get the tech. It works well, everything bogs down and technology becomes the main way of breaking the stalemate. Works a bit too well I think. Added stormtroopers for Germans.
And now I’ve purchased your card deck to add to the quagmire my older son and I created.
Good review you got another follower!👍🏻
Thank you for putting all the links in the description👍
No problem 😊
I think he's being too hard on the game. But I don't have a copy so I don't know for sure.
hilarious and fun review, thanks much from a newbie to these games!
Glad you enjoyed!
17:00 Thanks for this review - I had this game on my list, but time is scarce and Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition with some Home Rules (including more politics) is way too much fun. The rule with the airplane reminds me of the destroyers being able to eliminate certain sub abilities. We changed that to a 1:1-basis (one destroyer prevents the first strike, submerging or passing through the seazone of only one sub instead of two, three or even more subs. It works way better than the OOB rule.
HGB's GW 1914 is fixing a lot of these problems
Is that the free version or the one they are sold out of?
@@BoardGameHackers The "sold out" one, Though it says "sold out", I don't think it had came out yet.
@@david2006 ok thanks
@@david2006 it’s still not officially available yet but will be very soon.
My prostate is flaring up again. I hope they don't shove that camera up my winky -hole again (without anaethesia) - so cruel. Nice video.
For the IPC tracker I used the pop out card that came with the country roundels and just set the roundels on the black underside of the card piece as a makeshift tracker :D
Good idea
Railroads, where are the railroads.
Adding house rules really help this game out. Also on the part shortages I got that too when I purchased it years ago. I got a hold wizard of the coast and they sent me a crap ton of parts to make up for it. For custom rule, we bypass the trench warfare because it slows everything down. I also pick up zipplins and other 3D along with cash from historic gaming to help the game out. Nice video
salutations, TotalBoardGame. this is exceptionally exhilarating video. thanks. :)
Glad you enjoyed it!
I wouldn't go that far as a Nether regions exam, but the game Could be better though! You overlooked Machine guns which were the biggest part of the War, even More than all those units you mentioned combined+the Turkish Straits is not represented either! Mainly because how slow the game is, it's the only version I haven't played over the now popular UA-cam wars- the tournament rules makes it a little more faster thankfully, I'm liking the cheaper buy of the Infantries idea although I would make them 2 Ipcs each instead!!!
machine guns were mainly used in defense and are represented fairly well with infantry defending at 3 or less
Completely agree with your review and things you added but a great game
@06:33 You forgot that the USA had tanks in WW1 also, albeit using French & British models.
I will stick to playing Strategic Command WW1 on the computer as it has all the bells & whistles you are talking about + more :)
Strategic Command WW1, I'll have to check that out, thanks.
Actually bombardments from battleships were a lot more effective than bombing from bombers. I remember reading accounts of German soldiers on DDay discussing the aerial vs naval bombardment and the aerial was a joke that landed off target and did little damage where as the naval bombardment did a lot of damage and was quite terrifying. It is ridiculous though that battleships can kill units in these large swaths of land though.. like obviously a battleship shouldn't be able to reach 200 miles inland to pick off units just because some bois are landing on the coast of that same territory.
So many maps need to shrink Russia and expand Europe, China, etc.
Nice video as usual! Now i see what you meen with the ipc tracker haha..
I love 1914. EXCEPT, it is too simple, and couple of glaring map issues - especially too few sea areas - which needs an offset with better ship speeds.
Who has ever gotten tanks into battle in this game? My games all ended before they could get to the front. What is the key to sustaining a long game?
Thanks for the cool review. For what it's worth, A&A Spring 1942 (a friend called it the "dormitory edition") also has a map board that just isn't big enough in places, like the Eastern Front. This issue must have been encountered during play-testing.
it does do a good job at conjuring the exasperation and futility of the great war
Well done! I actually thought this review was both funny and enlightening. I can’t wait to apply your new rules and applications in my next go at it. I would be very interested in a AA 1940 SE Global video of you get the chance. I feel like most reviews out there for Global are lack luster. You have a good grasp on production value (as seen in this video), that I think a video for global would do well. I look forward to seeing what videos you make next!
Thank you! I have the rules more than 2/3rds done. I would love to turn my sights on 1940 SE Global. Cheers
Thanks for the honest review. Hard to find good reviews between all the ones who drool after this.
You bet
@@BoardGameHackers Would love to hear your thoughts on 1942 2nd Edition, and Global 40 (Pacific 1940 + Europe 1940).
And the 50th Anniversary edition, if you have it.
These are the changes i would make
Infantry 2 IPC
Machine gun 4 IPC 1 attack 3 defense 1 move
Artillery 4 IPC
Cavalry 6 IPC 3 attack 2 defense 2 move
Tank 7 IPC Increase defense by 1 decrease movement by 1 Also tanks are unlocked by technology
Biplane 10 IPC
Zeppelin 12 IPC 4 attack 1 defense 2 move
Submarine 6 IPC
Transport 7 IPC
Destroyer 8 IPC
Cruiser 12 IPC
Battleship 20 IPC
some very interesting ideas here. thanks. come back for the finished game card deck. Almost ready to launch. cheers
Sarah, you should play Global 1940...
@@calebkinney4428 Y
@@saraholeary3817 I think you would like the complexity!
@@calebkinney4428 I will look into it. Thank you for the reccommendation.
I’ve got 1914 in original shrink. Don’t really need it as the 2 other copies I own get used for play. Guess I should ask people if they want it.
Still have one????
Also poker chips are simply superior to paper money, you can read how many IPCs a power has from across a table without picking it up, counting it, and then oh, yeah I forgot, better repeat that - yeah no thanks. It also takes up less table space.
I just bought another one at Barnes & Noble 😃
Excited to see Imperial Borders for Larry Davis suppose to be on kickstarter later this year hoping it will be an upgrade to this game.
I like how you aren’t giving any respect to the pieces and the board and i can’t wait for the summer so that i could afford the game.
Where's the links to the customary cards and rules as well as figurines? Am I missing something here or?
We are 90% complete, if you have any 1914 tech research ideas let us know. When the deck is complete there will be a link in this description and a video going over the cards.
@@BoardGameHackers I am very impressed that you replied quickly and I appreciate that. Most people don't reply at all. Thanks for keeping an update! Looking forward to it!
Will the deck be for sale? Will you release a print and play?
@@BoardGameHackers Hello BGH! Checking back in again! It's been two years, have you guys completed the new set of cards, rules, and units?
After seeing the price for this game, I ended up buying "An Attrition Of Souls" to scratch that WW1 itch, much better buy to me, I was pleasantly surprised at how good and how many options it had. I don't think it's in print anymore either, but either way, even a new copy probably isn't as expensive as this game.
It's up for preorder by Renegade games - you don't have to buy it on ebay anymore.
I was confused when I saw the 1914 part.
Game is back in print.
Do you have the 1941 Anniversary Edition? Best version in my opinion.
No. I've been looking tho
Something that I'm gonna correct you, is you called balloons "Hot Air Balloons". Balloons at that time were gas filled, so no they weren't filled with hot air.
Super funny intro. That was good! 🙂
I love how KY stays on the table. Sponsorship?
If only... I would never have to buy A&A pieces again!
17:19 this is literally what GW1914 has haha
I'll have to find the rules!
Not wrong dude, on so many points. Every version has the Russian problem too. We get it, Russia is a big place and so is Africa. Can we get some fucking space in Europe please.
It's WW1 and no cavalry?
Unfortunately, the map on the Balkans is completely wrong. Especially for WW1, Bosnia must be mentioned here completely in its borders. Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia but never fully intrigued its empire. A pity. 2 main reasons why I will not buy the game.
I was hoping the game makers knew more of the actual past and history.
Is the link to the A&A: 1914 research cards coming anytime soon?
yes. I am a little more than 2/3rds done. I will be launching a video with the deck when finished. thanks for watching!
Dude, you are so disgusted with the whole game for the entire video, a tad unfair and quite annoying actually. If this game is a prostate exam, you need some laxative.
haha nice
I bought this game about 4 years ago and I've only played it once. I could tell even from the beginning that it had insufficient plastic units and that the rules made it evident that the game was broken. And I am of course very annoyed with the game map's inaccuracies: Greece bordering with the Ottomans, Poland being connected to the sea (it should be landlocked, ceding its northern territory to Germany) and Italy's northern border is completely way off. Why didn't the game designers just do a Google Image search of European maps as the continent actually was in 1914? The entire history of human knowledge can easily be looked up on the internet. Yea, I understand that games like these are supposed to be an abstraction of actual history, but these glaring visual inaccuracies do not help suspend disbelief.
I'm sorry to say it, but Larry Harris is a hack. I understand that game designers can't all be historians, but he should have actually read a little bit of history or actually talked to an actual historian about it. And why didn't the game publishers properly playtest this?
I will admit that the way the map incorporates Africa is clever somewhat, but the African theater was basically a sideshow in WW1. I would have made the game map emphasize Europe and take out Africa entirely, as well as India. Heck, I'd even try to exclude everything west of France as well.
Take for example Sid Meier's Gettysburg for the PC. The game actually feels like you're reenacting American Civil war battles on maps that look like those you see from old Encyclopedias.
I agree with a lot of your points.
@@BoardGameHackers Maybe I'm kind of being harsh on Larry Harris here. I love the original 1984 A&A. And I like what I've seen so far of "War Room". However, A&A 1914 does need to be fixed. One thing that struck out at me was how "all over the place" the IPC values are. I would have liked to see IPC values as follows where they use a combination of logarithmic scale and nicely rounded numbers to reflect something that still maintains balance and proper ranking in order:
Germany: 36 IPC
Austria: 24 IPC
Ottoman: 20 IPC (Totals for Central/Axis: 80 -- a nice round number)
Russia: 30 IPC
France: 25 IPC
British: 35 IPC (Total for starting Allies: 90 -- also a nice round number!)
Italy: 20 IPC (Italy should not enter until later in the game, as far as I am concerned), because they did not enter until 1915)
US: 40 IPC (Total for -all-- of the Allies when Italy and US enter: 150 -- I love how symmetrical this number is)
There's no way that Austria-Hungary should have more IPCs than France. And while I'm also giving Ottomans way more IPCs than what they should have historically, this gives them some type of presence in the game and a nicely rounded starting IPC value. Maybe the 20 value should reflect a combination between them and Bulgaria.
Yeah, I'm kind of autistic. Larry Harris should have hired me to design the IPC values.
Moreover, I understand that for marketing purposes, the game had to be called "Axis & Allies 1914", but for a nerd like me, I would have loved it if they had called it "Centrals & Allies".
OMG I didn’t shave my legs! LOL That was hysterical.
If managing IPC counts is too difficult for you, if you need a CFO to assist w/ 3rd grade math and writing down numbers, you definitely should not be playing Axis & Allies games.
Being difficult and being a pain in the ass are separate things. In a game that already takes 12 hours, you just want some things to run smoothly. If you don't subscribe to that point then you've never felt the joy of playing with poker chips.
Did you seriously like your own comment?
Did you cough? Watch this next: ua-cam.com/video/pByZLg7yDzw/v-deo.html
Hey just saw this vid. Great style and content. Mind if I share over at my blog?
It’s like Germany at the start of 1940 Europe
Sounds like I'd be better off sticking with sid Meier's civ
This could just b the 1st edition. The next edition could be more advanced.
Is a next edition coming?
@@rickhulsen3897 maybe.
great video, cant wait until those cards and rules are finished!!! (＾ワ＾)
Have you done the zombie edition
not yet. that is in our que!
@@BoardGameHackers i have on my main channel called Jeffrey scarbrough board games & geek things
Is there still going to be a 1914 card deck?
Yes its done. I just need to list it on a site.
I like this game alot. But it is unbalanced badly. REALLY badly. I think it might be 90/10 who si going to win. And tthat is probably to much , 10%, for the weak side.
Looking for players in the Central Florida area.
Im gonna pass thanks
If anyone decides to play this game. Use the tournament rules.
And this is why you're wrong because the Germans use gas attacks in World War II and many of the game's you say is a good games plus there was disease in World War II and stuff so you're basically saying all axis and allies are bad because of the same reasons you say this game is bad and plus how do you make different Scopes this was made in 2013 a lot of people were lazy in that time and please stop ripping on this game it's a good game and also why not just take games from the risk game pieces I mean and why not you know at the rules from the end World War II and then just add him to the World War 1 version
What are you talking about? Greece and Turkey have a land border.
not in 1914. I triple checked before complaining.
@@BoardGameHackers They have a strat that is about 200 miles wide
During WW1, Greece shared its border with Bulgaria, not Turkey
@@arki7730 I didn't use a WW1 map which was why I was wrong
@@board-qu9iu okay, understandable
USPS needs a postate exam.
ahaha. thanks I missed that. all fixed now
This game Axis & Allies 1914 was so poorly written like the bible that I had to come up with my own interpretations and translation.
HATE HATE HATE!!! 😭😭 hilarious go play Catan “I’ll trade ya sticks for rocks”
Cringeeeeeeeee affffffff
Chill bro chill