In this video, I demonstrate what I've learned to be the most robust Austria Hungary opener for Axis and Allies 1914 as well as realistic mid and end game goals.
I can't wait for the other videos in this series are uploading! So I'm hoping for this series to come out along the same speed as the anniversary videos or even faster
I am glad to find out that its good for the more experienced player to be Austria-Hungary. I am starting an 8 player game over discord with friends and my 13 year old son wants to play Germany really bad because he is learning German in school. I played probably a hundred games of regular Axis and Allies on the PC(boardgame version not RTS) near his age and I imagine some of that experience will carry over. :P
Awesome comment, thanks for posting this. I really enjoy reading stuff like this. Just a heads up, it is an extremely difficult and unforgiving game as the CP. The Entente have a far easier time of things and I'm only saying this to help manage expectations for both you and your son.
Thank you for the rule clarification, that you don't need to attack enemy ships when entering the sea zone. We always played it the way it is in 1942, that you always have to attack them. In this case, the movement of the Austrian fleet would be suicide, because of the mines there is only little chance to win the fight and in case you win, the French would wipe the remaining fleet out.
Ya, this was a stock move for me in my first few games of 1914. I strongly recommend not doing this because it takes more out of the Austrians than its worth and really doesn't bother the Italians at all. The biggest turn off is that two Austrian troops attacking one Italian defender only have a 56% chance of clearing the territory (unless you bring the Austrian battleship - which I'm not doing for reasons explained in the video). So half the time you don't get the IPC and another half the time you lose an infantry and to top it off, you haven't caused any disruption at all for the Italians. Those Austrians are right smack in the middle of the flow of troops from Rome so the death of those Austrains is something the Italians do on their way up. In summation, imo 1) It causes no disruption to the Entente to speak of and 2) Austria needs every piece it can get for its other fronts. Really great question - thanks for asking this!
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I'm Superbattleshipyamato. Anyways, that's a curious statement. I'll admit one of my weaknesses is taking as many territories with IPCs as possible, even when it doesn't seem worth it. For example, in Global 1940 I'll use a Russian tank to take Western Ukraine and Eastern Poland, even if it gets annihilated by Germany the following turn. Increasingly it's looking to be more and more of a waste to do this. Under the prior logic taking Tuscany would've been a good idea because I would get more IPCs. But I have a feeling that since Austria Hungary's losing two infantry at the very least (probably 1 infantry and 1 artillery), the 2 IPCs gained probably wouldn't be worth it for the loss of 6-7 IPCs worth of units... Which brings me to another question. Is that logic correct? Is it worth it to sacrifice units solely to gain unspent IPCs even if the value of those sacrificed units are worth more than the unspent IPCs collected? Is an infantry worth the same as a territory with 3 IPCs? Lots of such questions going on in my head recently.
@@AChannelThatDoesNothing its a very good question in my opinion. In the specific case of Tuscany on AH1, I don't think it's ever worth it for the reasons stated above. However, there are instances where trading infantries to gain a territory despite the IPC loss as you mention is a good thing. As an example, in the mid-game of 1914 is the territory of Albania which will likely be under AH control. If there is a single infantry on it, it can be advantages to use a battleship and infantry (or two) to attempt to remove him and occupy the territory. This generally forces the AH player to send troops, artillery, etc in the WRONG direction causing disruptions for him on other fronts. So I guess the answer is sometimes/maybe its worth it, hah!
@@thegoodcaptain1217 So you should only do it when there are benefits other than IPCs (for example, you said taking Picardy as Germany would result in an IPC loss, which I guess is why you don't recommend invading Tuscany for the IPCs alone, because you lose more in the end). Got it.
Interesting starting moves! I always attacks Romiana in force but I am most intrigued by the naval move. Are all the Central powers going for this to force the British to spend money to dominate all seas? I sometimes buys a german transport just to create a threat...
That is one of the possible outcomes, yes. There are other opportunities that are not very obvious that I will review in the Germany video. Though I have seen a German transport purchase and have tooled around with one myself in a few games, I would/will be advising against the purchase of any naval units as the CP. Against a competent Entente player, the CP will have their hands full on the land, where the IPC are.
@@PMMagro this is an extraordinarily common statement . Even general hand grenade says this in his video. I notice those making this comment never state how many games they’ve played though - or how many different opponents/playgroups they’ve played against. Speaking for myself, and to expand on what I said in the intro video, I think most if not all the eight opponents I squared up against said something similar but I was able to win as the CP at least once against each of them (11 of 19 games played were wins as CP and two or three of the losses were very, very close) The CP are what I call “non-intuitive” to play whereas the Entente are very intuitive. Use of the naval rules is one small but important aspect for the CP. I hope you’ll stick around for the rest of the series. If you thought that naval move was interesting, I think you’ll love the rest of the videos.
@@PMMagro hey, in fact, would you like to play 1914? We can use TripleA and play by email? Let me know if you’re interested. I would love to get my numbers up regarding opponents (you would be the 9th). I play very friendly games.
The naval move without attacking is a rules glitch to me. It "works" for the CP but is just breaking the rules logics. It is needed as the French can make the Albanins join Italy before their turn (another glitchy thing allow a neutral to join-blitz)). I have played on a gaming convention yearly before so it typcially was some new player or two but totally many players and many games played. Also with a friend but we did make so many rules changes (Danish/Dardanelles Straits etc etc). This game to me is not final Out of box. It has some neat stuff and interesting things going but it is 95% done. @@thegoodcaptain1217
It really depends on the board state however, I usually move to Poland to be with the Germans. This is a bit of a complex move as it means your reinforcements from Vienna will be “alone” in Galatia and exposed to the Russians in Ukraine. The Russians are incentivized not to attack Galatia bc whatever they use to do it will not be available for the defense of Moscow on the following turn. Additionally, whatever forces they send in there can be crushed between the pincer of Austrians from Poland and newly placed reinforcements on the following turn. Check out the Germany video for more context though. Also, the video after Germany might help a bit. As of this posting, it is still to come.
@@frederikvoets5298 so at the end of AH2 my stock move in this case is 18 inf, 4 art and one fighter in Poland. About 10 infantry in Galacia and one infantry in Romania. With any Austrian artillery that cannot get into Poland - there have been a number of games where I move these into Budapest with a single infantry, further disincentivizing a Russian attack into Galacia.
Without exaggeration, you’re the first person I’ve ever heard admit this. I have a high suspicion that 99 percent of 1914 players who never watch these videos don’t know about this or don’t/didn’t think this rule is of any value. Thanks for sharing this.
I’ll admit when Im wrong and this completely changes the way my group is going to play. I have a feeling it probably shaped the way some of our games have turned out or will turn out
@@photographicsynthesis6781 I used this mapfile www.mediafire.com/file/16smmk4e62zqslv/AA1914_map_with_harbours.png/file I then used x-raypad.com to have it made up and shipped over (they're in Hong Kong, not cheap but its premium quality). Otherwise, take this file down to your local FedEx Kinkos. Ask them to see the "banner material" book they have. After you pick a texture/quality of material to print on, give them a dimension you'd like the map to be printed to and ask them not to change the aspect ratio. Cost will range between 40-80 bucks depending on the material you pick.
An infantry unit - in a capital - buying a plane. These are unrelated. The rule I think you mean to ask about here is better understood this way: wherever there is a non-infantry land/air unit, so too must their be an infantry from that same power. The only exception to this is that a transport can be loaded with any two units. I'm not sure what you're asking regarding Albania and SZ 18. Should they risk the minefield to try to activate that territory? Probably not as they would likely be better employed sea-lifting troops from Africa to Italy and that transport is essentially irreplaceable.
Just want to point out a mistake you made using the markers: you've placed Italian markers after AU take of Romania and Serbia, not the AU markers. Yes both flags do have the colors red white and green but AU has two sides of the flag, one Austrian (red white red horizontal) and the other Hungarian (red white green horizontal) with their emblems in the center, while Italy as we all know has the vertical green white red with it's different emblem. Also, I'm very unhappy of the decision by the maker of the game to name the AU province "Trieste", as Trieste was the most northwestern border city, while the whole province encompasses the Slovenian, Croatian and Bosnia Hezegovinian lands which have nothing to do with Trieste (other than having a Slovenian minority there).
Re: the roundels - yes, this gets fixed part of the way through the next video for Russia. Re: the province naming - the map is an almost exact copy of the board game Diplomacy.
The only thing I don't like about this game is that in casual play, I.e non optimized strategy and novice or casual players, the central powers almost never win. The economic slant towards the allies always catches up with the CP. With experienced players playing the CP this is a non-issue.
Disagree sharply when you say this is a non-issue with experienced players. The only time this game appears to be balanced is if a very, very experienced player takes the CP and an inexperienced player takes the Entente. Between experienced players the win rate for CP should be at or near 0%. My final video in this series addresses this unhappy circumstance.
Out of interest, why do you typically use two infantry as blockers, rather than just the one infantry? I've seen you use two Russian infantry as blockers in your video on the Russian revolution as well, in the Russian territories bordering Moscow.
@@haunteddirt great question. The full answer to this is detailed out in the French video. However, two infantry appears to be the most effective blocker in this version of axis and Allies. As for the stats as to why this is, I recommend watching the French video.
I can't wait for the other videos in this series are uploading! So I'm hoping for this series to come out along the same speed as the anniversary videos or even faster
I will do my bloody best to have a video drop every other week.
Very clearly and concisely explained. They have the same great quality as your Anniversary videos!
Thank you my friend.
Nicely done! I see how you implemented these strategies in our recent game...and crushed me! 😥😅
I am glad to find out that its good for the more experienced player to be Austria-Hungary. I am starting an 8 player game over discord with friends and my 13 year old son wants to play Germany really bad because he is learning German in school. I played probably a hundred games of regular Axis and Allies on the PC(boardgame version not RTS) near his age and I imagine some of that experience will carry over. :P
Awesome comment, thanks for posting this. I really enjoy reading stuff like this. Just a heads up, it is an extremely difficult and unforgiving game as the CP. The Entente have a far easier time of things and I'm only saying this to help manage expectations for both you and your son.
Thank you for the rule clarification, that you don't need to attack enemy ships when entering the sea zone.
We always played it the way it is in 1942, that you always have to attack them. In this case, the movement of the Austrian fleet would be suicide, because of the mines there is only little chance to win the fight and in case you win, the French would wipe the remaining fleet out.
This game is fun to play. I enjoy this game much more than the other A&A games
Why not take Venice first turn to hold the bottleneck?
If you just move in sea 17 , won't the naval mines activate?
@@dokkuh4522 yes, this is stated in in the video immediately after the move is recommended.
What do you think about an Austro-Hungarian turn 1 invasion of Tuscany?
Ya, this was a stock move for me in my first few games of 1914. I strongly recommend not doing this because it takes more out of the Austrians than its worth and really doesn't bother the Italians at all. The biggest turn off is that two Austrian troops attacking one Italian defender only have a 56% chance of clearing the territory (unless you bring the Austrian battleship - which I'm not doing for reasons explained in the video). So half the time you don't get the IPC and another half the time you lose an infantry and to top it off, you haven't caused any disruption at all for the Italians. Those Austrians are right smack in the middle of the flow of troops from Rome so the death of those Austrains is something the Italians do on their way up. In summation, imo 1) It causes no disruption to the Entente to speak of and 2) Austria needs every piece it can get for its other fronts. Really great question - thanks for asking this!
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I'm Superbattleshipyamato. Anyways, that's a curious statement.
I'll admit one of my weaknesses is taking as many territories with IPCs as possible, even when it doesn't seem worth it. For example, in Global 1940 I'll use a Russian tank to take Western Ukraine and Eastern Poland, even if it gets annihilated by Germany the following turn. Increasingly it's looking to be more and more of a waste to do this.
Under the prior logic taking Tuscany would've been a good idea because I would get more IPCs. But I have a feeling that since Austria Hungary's losing two infantry at the very least (probably 1 infantry and 1 artillery), the 2 IPCs gained probably wouldn't be worth it for the loss of 6-7 IPCs worth of units...
Which brings me to another question. Is that logic correct? Is it worth it to sacrifice units solely to gain unspent IPCs even if the value of those sacrificed units are worth more than the unspent IPCs collected? Is an infantry worth the same as a territory with 3 IPCs? Lots of such questions going on in my head recently.
@@AChannelThatDoesNothing its a very good question in my opinion. In the specific case of Tuscany on AH1, I don't think it's ever worth it for the reasons stated above. However, there are instances where trading infantries to gain a territory despite the IPC loss as you mention is a good thing. As an example, in the mid-game of 1914 is the territory of Albania which will likely be under AH control. If there is a single infantry on it, it can be advantages to use a battleship and infantry (or two) to attempt to remove him and occupy the territory. This generally forces the AH player to send troops, artillery, etc in the WRONG direction causing disruptions for him on other fronts. So I guess the answer is sometimes/maybe its worth it, hah!
@@thegoodcaptain1217 So you should only do it when there are benefits other than IPCs (for example, you said taking Picardy as Germany would result in an IPC loss, which I guess is why you don't recommend invading Tuscany for the IPCs alone, because you lose more in the end). Got it.
Interesting starting moves! I always attacks Romiana in force but I am most intrigued by the naval move.
Are all the Central powers going for this to force the British to spend money to dominate all seas? I sometimes buys a german transport just to create a threat...
That is one of the possible outcomes, yes. There are other opportunities that are not very obvious that I will review in the Germany video. Though I have seen a German transport purchase and have tooled around with one myself in a few games, I would/will be advising against the purchase of any naval units as the CP. Against a competent Entente player, the CP will have their hands full on the land, where the IPC are.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 I have never seen a CP win myself. Not once... So anything really seesm worth trying at this point.
@@PMMagro this is an extraordinarily common statement . Even general hand grenade says this in his video.
I notice those making this comment never state how many games they’ve played though - or how many different opponents/playgroups they’ve played against.
Speaking for myself, and to expand on what I said in the intro video, I think most if not all the eight opponents I squared up against said something similar but I was able to win as the CP at least once against each of them (11 of 19 games played were wins as CP and two or three of the losses were very, very close)
The CP are what I call “non-intuitive” to play whereas the Entente are very intuitive. Use of the naval rules is one small but important aspect for the CP.
I hope you’ll stick around for the rest of the series. If you thought that naval move was interesting, I think you’ll love the rest of the videos.
@@PMMagro hey, in fact, would you like to play 1914? We can use TripleA and play by email? Let me know if you’re interested. I would love to get my numbers up regarding opponents (you would be the 9th). I play very friendly games.
The naval move without attacking is a rules glitch to me. It "works" for the CP but is just breaking the rules logics. It is needed as the French can make the Albanins join Italy before their turn (another glitchy thing allow a neutral to join-blitz)). I have played on a gaming convention yearly before so it typcially was some new player or two but totally many players and many games played. Also with a friend but we did make so many rules changes (Danish/Dardanelles Straits etc etc). This game to me is not final Out of box. It has some neat stuff and interesting things going but it is 95% done. @@thegoodcaptain1217
What are your Austrian moves on turn 2 against Russia when they stacked Ukrain?
It really depends on the board state however, I usually move to Poland to be with the Germans. This is a bit of a complex move as it means your reinforcements from Vienna will be “alone” in Galatia and exposed to the Russians in Ukraine. The Russians are incentivized not to attack Galatia bc whatever they use to do it will not be available for the defense of Moscow on the following turn. Additionally, whatever forces they send in there can be crushed between the pincer of Austrians from Poland and newly placed reinforcements on the following turn. Check out the Germany video for more context though. Also, the video after Germany might help a bit. As of this posting, it is still to come.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 but then your troops in Roemania will be cut off and trapped? You need those troops to attack Ukrain sooner or later
@@frederikvoets5298 they don’t stay there. They move to Galicia as well and leave a blocker behind (single infantry).
@@frederikvoets5298 so at the end of AH2 my stock move in this case is 18 inf, 4 art and one fighter in Poland. About 10 infantry in Galacia and one infantry in Romania. With any Austrian artillery that cannot get into Poland - there have been a number of games where I move these into Budapest with a single infantry, further disincentivizing a Russian attack into Galacia.
Im gonna be honest I had no idea that navy’s could just sit there and not battle
Without exaggeration, you’re the first person I’ve ever heard admit this. I have a high suspicion that 99 percent of 1914 players who never watch these videos don’t know about this or don’t/didn’t think this rule is of any value. Thanks for sharing this.
I’ll admit when Im wrong and this completely changes the way my group is going to play. I have a feeling it probably shaped the way some of our games have turned out or will turn out
@@doggo1605 awesome! Good hunting!
@@thegoodcaptain1217I guess I'm apart of 1%😅
I didn't know that TBH and it surprised me to find it out. Then again all my experience is from the old PC version.
What kind of board do you have? I thought the game came with a two piece board
I had one made larger and printed onto neoprene (mouse pad material). It’s one piece and rolls up.
Did you make it from scratch or is there a print shop that’ll do that for you?
@@photographicsynthesis6781 I used this mapfile www.mediafire.com/file/16smmk4e62zqslv/AA1914_map_with_harbours.png/file I then used x-raypad.com to have it made up and shipped over (they're in Hong Kong, not cheap but its premium quality). Otherwise, take this file down to your local FedEx Kinkos. Ask them to see the "banner material" book they have. After you pick a texture/quality of material to print on, give them a dimension you'd like the map to be printed to and ask them not to change the aspect ratio. Cost will range between 40-80 bucks depending on the material you pick.
Thanks a bunch!
@@photographicsynthesis6781 anytime
In your balanced video, the Italians can move a transport into 18 and activate Albania. what are your thoughts..
Also, the rules about if you dont have an infant unit in a capital when you buy a plane, does that rule only count towards Bombay?
An infantry unit - in a capital - buying a plane. These are unrelated. The rule I think you mean to ask about here is better understood this way: wherever there is a non-infantry land/air unit, so too must their be an infantry from that same power. The only exception to this is that a transport can be loaded with any two units. I'm not sure what you're asking regarding Albania and SZ 18. Should they risk the minefield to try to activate that territory? Probably not as they would likely be better employed sea-lifting troops from Africa to Italy and that transport is essentially irreplaceable.
Just want to point out a mistake you made using the markers: you've placed Italian markers after AU take of Romania and Serbia, not the AU markers. Yes both flags do have the colors red white and green but AU has two sides of the flag, one Austrian (red white red horizontal) and the other Hungarian (red white green horizontal) with their emblems in the center, while Italy as we all know has the vertical green white red with it's different emblem.
Also, I'm very unhappy of the decision by the maker of the game to name the AU province "Trieste", as Trieste was the most northwestern border city, while the whole province encompasses the Slovenian, Croatian and Bosnia Hezegovinian lands which have nothing to do with Trieste (other than having a Slovenian minority there).
Re: the roundels - yes, this gets fixed part of the way through the next video for Russia. Re: the province naming - the map is an almost exact copy of the board game Diplomacy.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 np I just watched the next video, you corrected it in the naval Russian move, cool :)
The only thing I don't like about this game is that in casual play, I.e non optimized strategy and novice or casual players, the central powers almost never win. The economic slant towards the allies always catches up with the CP. With experienced players playing the CP this is a non-issue.
Disagree sharply when you say this is a non-issue with experienced players. The only time this game appears to be balanced is if a very, very experienced player takes the CP and an inexperienced player takes the Entente. Between experienced players the win rate for CP should be at or near 0%. My final video in this series addresses this unhappy circumstance.
Out of interest, why do you typically use two infantry as blockers, rather than just the one infantry? I've seen you use two Russian infantry as blockers in your video on the Russian revolution as well, in the Russian territories bordering Moscow.
Specifically, in this video, you send two German infantry to Tyrolia to serve as blockers.
@@haunteddirt great question. The full answer to this is detailed out in the French video. However, two infantry appears to be the most effective blocker in this version of axis and Allies. As for the stats as to why this is, I recommend watching the French video.
@@thegoodcaptain1217 Haha I've just watched the French video and realised this whole comment is thoroughly answered, whoops!