User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Which is better: 1775 or 1776 start?

Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:58 am

I really enjoy the 1776 start; however, most players I combat prefer the 1775 start. I think 1776 is a bit more historical.
What are your thoughts on when to start the Rebellion?

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Fri Jan 25, 2013 1:13 pm

I prefer 1775 start because it's the very beginning of the war and you can choose your strategy at the start (leave or stay in Boston, Canada ? attack on the South at Norfolk for the Brits, and operation Canada or not for the American etc...)
Like in AACW I prefer start in april 61 because you have to make all by yourself (armies, command, production, strategy ...)

:thumbsup:
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

User avatar
Xaloc
General of the Army
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: Majorca

Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:26 pm

to be honest, I've never played the 1776 campaign, when I play AWI, I like to play it from the very beginning, the 1775 campaign. I guess I should try the '76 too.

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Sat Jan 26, 2013 4:53 am

Interesting, thank you for your responses. I like the 1862 start in ACW for the same reason I like the 1776 state in WIA. It plays more historically, but still lots of fun and both players can win.

Incentives for Canadian advance by Colonial army is so strong, I always send the Canadian Invasion armies.
I do realize the added scope for the player, but sometimes the focus of a different start causes some fun alternative play.

User avatar
Xaloc
General of the Army
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: Majorca

Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:00 pm

I agree with you, the 76 start (or 62 in ACW) is more historical as some strategic decisions have already been taken for you and that a different start is a fresh view. Now, i can tell you i'm really interested in trying this 76 campaign as i never played it.

In the Canadian case, well I simply ignore it, moving the forces reserved for the invasion to reinforce different areas (Albany, New England...).

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:10 am

It is a new game. Fun.

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:22 am

I should have said in addition, the 1776 game starts with the Colonial forces at the gates of Quebec. The invasion has occurred.

homet
Corporal
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:55 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Sun Jan 27, 2013 6:01 pm

I've recently completed two 1775 games with the same opponent. The first was a very tense, back and forth game that either player could have won. The second was a complete British rout of the Americans. What changed? The first game was the first time that either of us had played the 1775 game and the usual caution associated with the lack of understanding about when reinforcements would occur, the strength of the enemy, the best strategic goals, etc. restrained Colonial and British actions. In the second game, my opponent now knew what the strength and general reinforcement schedule of the Colonials would be and used it to his advantage. On turn three (first turn where British forces unlock) he moved from Boston to N.Y. On turn four he captured Philadelphia and the route was on.

We've discussed giving the game another try using the 1776 scenario, which does look much more historically accurate as a starting point. One thought I had if trying the 1775 scenario again was to impose a "house rule" for the British troops that start in Boston. Historically, the British left Boston in mid-March of 1776 and didn't return to N.Y. until late August. During that time, the moved their forces back to Halifax (including citizens from Boston as well who didn't want to stay) to regroup, determine a course of action through correspondences with England, resupply and then execute their plan. My "house rule" would be to require that when the British leave Boston, they would have to go back to Halifax for a minimum of 5 months before coming back in force to the Colonies.

I've thought this "house rule" might be useful for the 1776 scenario as well.

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Mon Jan 28, 2013 3:21 am

This is a great game no matter which scenario you play. I have never played House Rules because I am certain the game balance is pretty well set. That said, some thoughts.

I know many players hate Hard Activation. That is, if a commander is not active, he is locked. This is a simply way to make 1775 and 1776 'historical.' I am not sure I would advocate hard activation in any game except WIA. But the leaders of the Seven Years War (French and Indian War), the American Revolution and the War of 1812 were often very poor. For the European troops in the virgin American world, inertia was often a response to conditions not suited to European battles of open warfare.
This would be one thing to try. The British player will hate it.

The 1775 start will always be unbalanced due to limitations on American recruitment and the demand for the Americans to take Montreal or suffer penalties; as well as early British initiate, as you state. It is a challenge to have sufficient forces to delay British success while needing to invade Canada. However, the American cause can win 1775. They need to preserve one area, New England or Upper South as a minimum, until the French arrive. If you like the 1775 start, locking the British into Boston is a decent solution.

In the 1776 the Boston British are limit by supply. An aggressive British move to New York can succeed, but the Americans can deploy much stronger forces to counter this move. This is part of the reason I asked this question on the forum. I find 1776 lays out the war, while 1775 is not as accurate for reasons such as you state. All start dates are not equal.

Americans are the harder side to play against balanced opponents with equal familiarity of the game. Literally as the game information says for 1775, the Americans need to be aggressive and then play a waiting game. I do prefer the 1776 start, because the more historical limitations on British initial objects and strength causes this to happen.

Last thought. House Rules are a nice fix for issues which cannot otherwise be explained. You force a much more historical play with this house rule. But if history games are about the 'what if' then you have eliminated one channel of the what if speculation.

I think you will both find with more play, the Americans have war winning options with either the 1775 or 1776 start. Difficult to thread the eye of the needle or should I say, “These are the times which try mens' souls.”

My recommendation, try hard activation where leaders are locked if not active and see if this solves your concerns.
If not, try your house rules. My guess is with balanced players the British will continue to win. The critical year does not depend upon early British success, but upon good use of British forces in 1776 no matter the game start.
And if the House Rule work, play away and let the forum know how this worked.
If the House Rules do not work, try more hit and run away as the Americans and less Defense of Posts.

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Mon Jan 28, 2013 5:07 pm

1776 is a better start for the American because the "Canadian affair" is resolved yet.

Hard activation ? why not, but the problem would be that you may prefer move your units without leader...

:wavey:
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

homet
Corporal
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:55 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:15 am

I had mentioned earlier that my partner and I had twice played the 1775 scenario with very different outcomes. In the second go around, where the British routed the Americans, we actually used the Hard Activation rule. What my opponent (the British player) realized is that while the British have some average thee star generals (in terms of strategic ratings), they have a number of very good two star generals. The two star generals were widely used for offensive activities while the three star generals help guard key strategic cities.

I also should add that despite the unbalanced second game I played, I have thoroughly enjoyed WIA and am now engaged in the second of two tense War of 1812 scenarios.

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:37 am

You are reinforcing Fenris's point, just use other leaders. Hmm, I am too grounded in using historical leaders for historical tasks, but you are correct. This is a problem I ignored.

I do agree, it is a great game in all the various scenarios.

Try the 1776 start. That was the original purpose of my post. I think 1776 is a great, balanced game.

User avatar
FENRIS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1463
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2012 11:02 am
Location: Marseille (France)

Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:20 pm

Durk wrote:You are reinforcing Fenris's point, just use other leaders. Hmm, I am too grounded in using historical leaders for historical tasks, but you are correct. This is a problem I ignored.

I do agree, it is a great game in all the various scenarios.

Try the 1776 start. That was the original purpose of my post. I think 1776 is a great, balanced game.


I'm trying the 1776 scenario, finally very interesting.

WIA is a great game and ALL scenarios are interesting. I play this game from years and always enjoy the possibilities.

:thumbsup: :indien:
[color="#FF8C00"][/color]Eylau 1807

"Rendez-vous, général, votre témérité vous a emporté trop loin ; vous êtes dans nos dernières lignes." (un russe)

" Regardez un peu ces figures-là si elles veulent se rendre !" (Lepic)[color="#FF8C00"][/color][I]
[/I]

User avatar
Durk
Posts: 2921
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 4:36 am
Location: Wyoming

Thu Jan 31, 2013 5:07 am

I am tying 1776 in a new start as the Colonial faction. We will see.
By the way, does anyone know if the Sudden Death can be turned on?

Return to “BoA2: Wars in America”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests