The Lamps Are Going Out Again

Second game.  This time I was the Central Powers and remembered to take photos.

Set up

The start of 1915.

The Germans have been thrown out of Belgium

and Serbia is holding off the might of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Already the Germans are referring to their ally as being like "shackled to a corpse"

German U-boat activity is proving effective.

But by 1916 Serbia has fallen and the Germans are heavily entrenched on all fronts.

But just look at all their technology cards!

They have five to the Allies one.

By 1917 the Allies had suffered a few disasters.

The Tsar took command and things went pear shaped.

The Rumanians tried to come to their rescue,

and staged a successful invasion of Galicia,

until they realised they were on their own and heavily outnumbered.

Still it took a lot of Austrian effort to crush them.

The Gallipoli landing was a disaster.

However the Germans have almost been driven out of Africa

and the German Imperials Navy has been sunk.

But the start of 1917 sees Russia conquered

and the US entry track has started to go backwards.

Come 1918 and Greece has entered the war and conquered Bulgaria.

Turkey is again cut off as it turns out you can't send supplies through the Caucasus.

Austro-Hungary was getting ready for a big push into Italy,

but troops needed to be diverted to the Balkans. 

Game over.

The US never entered the war.

The Greek triumph was short lived,

but saved Italy and possibly a few lives on the Western Front,

as Germany had to send troops to stop the Greeks.

All this represented a Victory for the Triple Entente, although I'm not convinced.

(scroll down to the very bottom of this post to find the adjudicated outcome)

Additional Commentary

The following are comments from Richard who was the Triple Entente player.

This game rates as one of my all time favourites, despite my (obvious) frustration with it revolving around competitive die rolls!

There are only a few things which I can criticise it for. Perhaps the effect of the blockade is understated somewhat, although historically it only really started to bight in 1918 and there are cards to reflect that (which didn't come up this game). I think anything harsher and the game would be almost impossible for the CP to win, so all, in all, it's probably justified in game terms.

Otherwise it has the most brilliant, really simple mechanism to make you play it like it was WW1 with you needing to send in wave after wave of assaults knowing you probably aren't going to break through and just to wear the enemy down, whilst simultaneously exhausting your own forces.

The Western Front was completely static after entrenching was allowed and the Eastern Front was fluid. I love all the little chrome elements, which reference things that happened during the war. If you didn't know much about the conflict it would be a great learning experience.

It was an exciting game from start to finish and so absorbing. After our last session on Tuesday I was totally exhausted from the concentration. I ended up going to bed even earlier than normally.

The game has the CP really up against it, which I suppose is a reflection of the historical issues associated with the likelihood of a CP victory. For a realistic chance of victory, I think the CP needs to go for broke on the first 2 turns to try and get to Paris. Whoever is the CP next time should try that strategy. Although, having said that, in this game, if the CP had Belgium it would have given them the win.

Although harder for the CP, in my opinion, there is no easy victory in the game, which is one of the reasons it's so good I think.

I know myself I made several strategy errors, which I'm definitely going to try and correct next time around. I think I'm going to make up a little "battle card" which lists the decisions you need to make (such as using gas) before starting die rolls. as we both constantly forgot things. I also have a specific strategy I'd like to explore as the CP which neither of us really did in either game.

In terms of this game, a CP victory was very close and would have only needed them to have had Belgium, which would have made it 7 more VPs than Entente:

Russia +4

Rumania +1

Greece +1

USA Neutral +1

Belgium +1

East Africa -1

So in game terms, forcing the CP out of Belgium on turn 1 ended up sealing the (eventual) victory so it was a very close run thing. Other than the first couple of turns the Entente were on the back foot for the whole game. It was amazing how the game turned around from turn 3. I think we were both expecting a short game with the Entente in Belgium and 6 Russian armies on Germany's doorstep.

In this game, you getting both U Technology cards early on really crippled the British, which meant fewer attacks in the west and thus more German largesse in terms of production transfers. In the previous game, me not getting Bulgaria as a belligerent early enough meant Turkey couldn't be reinforced and you were able to conquer it relatively easily. You raped the British with U Boats this game and the USA didn't enter. I did nothing with my U Boats in the previous game and the US entered with enough time to provide an avalanche of PPs and you had a lot of British points to prop up the French who were down to 3 PPs for the whole game, and you still managed to cling on in France and had enough forces to send 4 armies to Turkey. In neither game did convoys occur to the Entente...

Despite all that, it was still a struggle for both sides in both games. 

Aside from an automatic victory, the eventual winner seems to be the side which does well in the Balkans/Turkey. The CP conquering or forcing Russia out is a pre-requisite of course. If the CP holds the Balkans/Turkey and does more or less historical on the western front, which would mean holding Belgium and the Somme at the end of the game, even if the USA entered and the Entente captured East Africa it could still win. If the Entente has any Turkish areas, it would make a CP win very difficult.

I think there are a lot of aspects to this game left to explore. What makes it really exciting is how certain events can really turn the game.

I feel, in both games, I should have paused to consider the strategic situation based on what had come up and then try and adjust. You just get so caught up in the game play sometimes to make this difficult - in some ways this almost simulates the criticism of the unimaginative generalship of WW1. I think one of the best things about the game is that you always feel like you've got a chance right up until the end.

All in all, a 10/10 game made better with a 10/10 opponent.

STP

On further checking, Serbia is a VP for the CP since it was a enemy controlled area at the start of the game.

So that gives the CP the necessary 7 point margin.

I'm going to claim a moral victory on the grounds that not a single furrow of Flanders fields was touched, the rape of Belgium was called off before you could get your britches down and we did it all with leaky boats and no help from the yanks.