Just got my copy of Renegades new release. Reading thru the rules and watching your excellent series in preparation for out first ever game. As always, another great video series - thank you!
I do hope that rulebook you're holding is updated. As stated in the intro video, the original game manual needed an errata and official QandA to make sense of everything. They said they would fix that with this release. Anyway, thanks for the comment, happy gaming and if you or anyone on your team would like a friendly game via TripleA, please don't hesitate to reach out. =)
At the beginning, the Ottomans have a 29-16 advantage in units. T1, UK goes full bore into India for7-8 units, the Ottomans get 8-11 with Bulgaria and reinforcements, so the balance has not altered much. Add 4 on the Persian invasion, and 2 for possibly Afghanistan. My thought T1 for the Ottomans is 2art,1 fighter, and move 1 to Bulgaria to activate. The goal is increasing IPC taking Serbia, and Greece t2, and maybe Albania T3. They get Serbia with help from AH not taking Serbia, but knocking it down , and contesting, making it easier for the Ottomans. This would also free up more for AH to take Romania T1 since they are not intent on eliminating Serbia T1..This is realistically the only time the Ottomans can increase their IPC, and having between 23-25 early can make it tougher on the UK. There are variables in the Naval areas that can certainly affect Albania in particular, but I think a little early help from AH can reduce the threat early.
My 'knee jerk' reaction to this is to advise against it. I feel the most important CP economy is the Austrian. It's capital is centrally located and closer to every important enemy and ally. Reducing its IPC for the sake of the Ottomans to 'slow down' the Brits can be done by sending Austrians down to reinforce if needs be. I don't want to say it 'never' but the Ottoman capital/center of production only goes one way, while in contrast the Austrian capital/center of production is extraordinarily flexible.
The Canada to Egypt pipeline isn’t the only way for THE ENTENTE to reinforce Egypt. Any entente power can send units that direction Via transport or can walk units there which start in Africa.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 also true - it’s just in the video you spoke as though Canada to Egypt was the only way for Egypt to be reinforced. I usually send more units to Egypt out Of India rather than which come from Canada / UK proper.
I'm not too sure about doing a non-A&A game although Fortress America is in the line-up of games I have my eye on. I will likely not review any of the Global War games from HBG. I fundamentally disagree with most aspects of those games. Too many rules. Too many pieces. Too far away from the Larry Harris game concept.
@@Sooper-Pumpkin I think they took a game engine that was designed to be light and weighed it down with excessive amounts of rules and pieces (coastal subs, really?). At a certain point its hard to see the game through all the chrome.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Someone finally said it! Global war is just an A&A knockoff game. Ugly childishly colorful map, not properly balanced/playtested, all the pieces are way too expensive... HBG has made a lot of money off you suckers. You're hardly getting more than what g40 gives you but its like 10x the price
Maybe take a look at "Amerika" by HBG. It's like fortress America but arguably more balanced, and has the sleek d12 GW combat system with target selection without all the absurdly specific units and rules on top of rules.
I feel like if the Ottomans actually did this in real life the empire would've collapsed. The ethnic groups unhappy with the Ottomans would've revolted long before the withdrawal to Constantinople. Perhaps in addition to a Russian Revolution there should also be something like that for every power, or at least Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire who like Russia were unstable absolute monarchies ruling over many unhappy ethnic groups. Also, such revolutions would be historically accurate. Good video. I can definitely see very clearly that you recommended exactly what you did when you played with me.
I feel that Axis and Allies in general is a game that is slightly more complex than Risk and should be granted a large degree of extrapolation regarding alignment with history. I think the best part of this game system is it’s simplicity even at the expense of historical accuracy.
@@TheGlobalWarVeteran I think I read that. It feels so, I don't know, damaging when an economic collapse happens. I guess that is what happens when nations go under political crisis. But still, having a nation crippled but still in the game seems worse and more painful (why am I personifying nations now) than just having them leave like Russia in the out of box rules.
@@youknowme1475 sorry that’s incorrect. AH, Germany and the Ottoman Empire together were called the central powers not the triple alliance. The triple alliance was Italy, Germany, and Ah and it was defensive in nature which is why Italy didn’t join them in the fight and eventually joined the fight against them.
