Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread


  • Admin

    @epinikion I don't think so. I think the changes counter the no free techs for Germany, WW gas cost change, and no house rules on farming. Essentially the changes are +4 production for Germany, -3 production for UK, and -25 TUV starting units for Entente (in non-border territories that don't really impact the game til round 3-4). It looks like more on paper then it is when you play the game. If I hadn't pointed out the removed starting units, most players wouldn't even notice.

    But the only way to tell is on the battlefield so hopefully folks play some games (preferably with no house rules) and upload the saves here.


  • Admin

    ok, thx for your answer redrum. I misunderstood your line "removed several units". It is in fact only one unit per ter and you are right: its not near first rounds frontline (except bessarabia, but thats only 1 conscript. So still more or less first view: probably its well done. Thank you.



  • Split Belarus into 2 territories: Yes

    Add German factory somewhere in eastern Germany: In Silesia

    No teching for Italy: No idea

    Additional balance around round 1 sea battles: Depends on the proposal

    Increase neutral strength in Mexico: Mexico is fine right now.

    Provide path to German neutral farming in South America (remove 1 infantry from Peru, add 1 factory for Bolivia, etc): Its not historical and there would be no way for entente to counter Germany in the area.

    Have each major nation start with a different tech: Depends.


    My proposals would be:

    -Setting all options default low luck.

    -Moving Mindanao and Luzon units to Manila

    -Moving Hawaii units to Honolulu.

    -Moving Cambodia and Annam units to Cochinchina

    -Moving Malaya Cavalry to Singapore

    • Making East Prussia 3 and West Prussia 3 (With Industry Tech, East Prussian fac would become more viable to press Russia if Belarus will be splitted)

    -Making Bulgara German territory, -2 Income from Brandenburg +2 Income to Vienna for maintaining the same Production Powers, These units will be remain as Austrian.
    (Goal is giving Germany more strategic options such as Helping Turkey against possible rushes in Anatolia. Building ships to protect Turkish fleet, Invading Russia, helping against Serbs etc.

    -Adding newbie guide to notes (for to attract more player).


  • Admin

    i vote for no more changes. We need games, not more ideas, to balance.


  • Moderators

    I've played quite a few games on this map. These changes are nice but I still don't think its well balanced.

    I think many Entente players are making some mistakes with the amount of farming and early purchases. I find that just maximizing the number of units purchased forces central powers to spread very thin. Russia can threaten to stack Belarus on round 3, and in order to stop this the Central Powers have to send so many early resources.

    With that said, Germany taking Mexico city wasn't something I ever came across. I really think the Central Power player has to outplay the other guy, the only wins I've seen involved clever use of gas or taking switzerland and the Entente being totally unprepared for it.



  • I think its well balanced right now, having testing a game up to round 9 without any rule. Centrals and Entente have almost the same Income power.

    So game is good with the latest update. Please not nerfing more Entente. With that game I am agree with epinkion anymore. No more changes (besides adding newbie guide to notes and setting default ll to all options)

    dom.tsvg


  • Admin

    To balance a map like this is really difficult. Therefore we need more games. I am currently playing vs NGMC. My centrals got 1 starting tech plus Italy is not allowed to go into tech. Thats the two remaining rules. So you see i think its still a bit in Ententes favor. We will see how it goes.


  • Moderators

    I know there's already too many changes to test; I just wanted to note that in the long run, it feels like some improvements to the tech balance could be made. Certain techs/categories are just a lot better than other ones, and it'd be nice if there was more diversity in the choices.


  • Admin

    @zlefin Open to suggestions. I've made a few tweaks to the techs that were clearly very OP as well as divided techs into 6 instead of 3 categories.


  • Moderators

    I'm not really sure what to suggest exactly; the first set (science, victory bonds, working women) seems to be almost always taken first by every nation.

    Then a mix of categories 2, 4, and 3; categories 5 and 6 are almost never taken until very late, if at all.

    It's no surprise the first set is taken, as every ability in it is strong; whereas most of the other categories have at least one weak tech. categories 5/6 techs trend to be weaker, and it's compounded by the central powers just not being well-positioned to aim for naval dominance.

    I'm also reminded of another tech note: working women reduces regular fighter cost, but not late fighter cost. I guess there's no good way to handle that. so once you have both techs regular fighters are 7 while late fighters are still 10.



  • Actually rolling economy first is not always good.

    -As Germany, Innovation is more important for getting Late Fighter-Industry.

    -As Austria, you can rush to Russia or Italy with researching offense first,

    -As Turkey there are huge benefits getting bunker tech or late fighter immiadetaly.

    -As UK naval techs can cause serious troubles for Germany to keep its navy.

    Also I agree that there are only 2 really weak techs which are mobile warfare and merchant marine.



  • @Schulz said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

    Actually rolling economy first is not always good.

    -As Germany, Innovation is more important for getting Late Fighter-Industry.

    -As Austria, you can rush to Russia or Italy with researching offense first,

    -As Turkey there are huge benefits getting bunker tech or late fighter immiadetaly.

    -As UK naval techs can cause serious troubles for Germany to keep its navy.

    Also I agree that there are only 2 really weak techs which are mobile warfare and merchant marine.

    I agree with all of the above, except the part about mobile warfare being weak. I've seen that tech used to devastating effect. Granted, that was in games which had a gass limit. Now that redrum wants us to play without house rules, you could argue that the effect of that giant cavalry stack (movement 3) could be replicated with a giant stack of gass instead.

    But . . . there are still some circumstances where cavalry would be significantly better than gass. To give one example: suppose Russia has deployed a massive conscript stack. Sure, you could gass the stack. But, each gass costs 3.5 - 4, and kills slightly less than one conscript (cost of 2). Better to use creeping barrage + mobile warfare against a force like that. Mobile warfare allows cavalry units placed in Vienna the opportunity to attack Belarus the very next turn.



  • I have some questions about tactics, wanting to learn your opinions;

    1. As Germany is it better to strafe to Galicia in r1 although Russia can retake Belarus with correct purchasings in r2.

    2. As France should you move your western Med. fleet to Atlantic to help uk to keep the channel if Germany ignores to hit Russian fleet?

    3. As Turkey when should you take Arabia? Is taking it in r3 bad?

    4. As Russia totally ignoring Commies is good startegy and which territory is the best for additional Russian factory.


  • Moderators

    @Schulz

    I personally really like having french ships in the Atlantic ocean, including transports. You can threaten capture land for the UK to move through or land fighters on, it creates a huge headache for Germany.

    I like crushing Arabia on round 3, but it does slow down you in other parts of the world.

    I mostly ignore commies and instead pour everything towards Belarus. If it holds for a single round longer than it should, it screws Germany.



  • What are your experiences of the game with the latest updates? Some people found Centrals a bit favour.

    I think without any rule game is now alot more balanced than it used to be. But making Mexico guarantee for Germany isn't good. It makes games just predictable. Taking as USA is also huge pain. I think USA infantries should be replaced with cavalries again. I've seen some complains in the lobby too about this issue.


  • Admin

    @Schulz I'd love to see some save games of high level play showing some of those things.


  • Admin

    BUG: Gases can sink ships once deployed transports and they don't disappear after battle.



  • @Schulz said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

    What are your experiences of the game with the latest updates? Some people found Centrals a bit favour.

    I think without any rule game is now alot more balanced than it used to be. But making Mexico guarantee for Germany isn't good. It makes games just predictable. Taking as USA is also huge pain. I think USA infantries should be replaced with cavalries again. I've seen some complains in the lobby too about this issue.

    I agree that the Mexico factory is both predictable and a pain in America's neck. But, neither of those things are necessarily bad. If the Mexican factory is a significant component of German strategy, perhaps it's best not to leave it up to random chance. It's also historical, because the U.S. and Mexico fought a war against each other during the early portion of WWI.

    As for game balance: with the new map, the majority of games I've played have been Entente wins. That doesn't mean the map favors Entente, but it's a point worth considering. Personally I feel we need more data before further balance changes are made.


  • Moderators

    Feels weird to have a key strategic component be a move that would be non-obvious to people picking up the game without knowing existing plays (e.g. offline).



  • @zlefin said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:

    Feels weird to have a key strategic component be a move that would be non-obvious to people picking up the game without knowing existing plays (e.g. offline).

    You think it's bad now? 🙂 Consider the way things were before Redrum began making his changes.

    1. There was the opportunity for Germany to take Mexico City on its third turn, with the non-obvious method being discussed.

    2. Britain could block the above by doing the following. On its first turn Britain could use its Caribbean transport to ship an infantry to Florida. Also on its first turn, it could use another transport to ship a field gun and a Colonial from Canada to Florida. On its second turn, it uses the Caribbean transport to ship the field gun and Colonial from Florida to Guadalahara, thus (with reasonable dice) killing the Germans before they can get to Mexico City.

    3. Germany could block the British move in 2, either by sinking the British transport in the Caribbean, or else by sinking all four British transports off the coast of Canada.

    4. If Germany did the stuff in 3), the Entente had some other tricks up their sleeve. I'm a little hazy on the details, but I remember a factory in San Francisco on U.S. 1, along with a need for zeppelins or gass or something on U.S. 2.

    At least this way you only have to learn one thing (that Germany can capture Mexico City with soldiers from the Pacific), instead of having to learn all that! 😮


Log in to reply