'Nations in Arms' - Napoleon's Invasion of Russia - Part 2

[@thegeneralsretreat1645]

Also, for initiative draws, you can't have two sides use consecutive Land chits in a row, ignoring Neutral or Naval chits drawn. So you would have to ignore the 2nd Empire Land chit you drew and draw until you get a Coalition Land chit. You could draw an Empire Land, Empire Naval, Coalition Land all in a row. You couldn't have an Empire Land, Coalition Naval, Neutral Land, Empire Land in a row. I like this rule because it doesn't make the chit draw so randomly out of whack (where you could have three Land chits in a row and blitz the enemy without them reacting.) The chit draw mainly seems for limiting the commander possibilities each phase--with strong commanders having several possible choices and weaker commanders limited to one or two choices on when they can move. Another note: Doublecheck the victory conditions. If Empire can't fulfill their victory conditions (Warsaw, Vilna, Riga AND St Petersburg or Moscow) the Russians have to keep Moscow, St. Petersburg, Riga, Smolensk and Kiev free of supplied Empire units, otherwise it's a draw. It's a good game, just hard to Grok the first few times. Thanks for giving me incentive to keep going.

[@XLEGION1]

Yes, I caught that later after I had edited the video. As it turns out, I don't think it would have made too much difference. The Russians were out of position.

[@thegeneralsretreat1645]

I am trying this scenario and I agree that the "Replenishment" rule is unclear. It refers to a non-existent rule number (even in the "Banana" rules revision that i got on BGG). But I read it that you can put the replenishments in either "(existing) Armies, Moscow, and/or St. Petersburg." Not that you have to give it to an army that is in Moscow, per se. That makes more sense to me. It just means you can't randomly put it with a leader somewhere, I think. Also, this is one of those classic "trading space for time" scenarios that makes Napoleon push past his supply lines in order to reach his goals, even though it means losing personnel. Much as it happened in history.

[@XLEGION1]

You are probably correct with respect to the replacements. He probably did not mean 'army' in the literal sense but probably 'force'

[@thegeneralsretreat1645]

@@XLEGION1 Well, I think that he meant "Army" but the Army doesn't have to be in Moscow or St. Petersburg. So you could put them with existing Armies (anywhere that they exist) or Moscow and St. Petersburg, regardless of whether there was an army in those cities. But maybe we should message the designer...😊

[@XLEGION1]

@@thegeneralsretreat1645 I don't think the designer is 'active' anymore in answering questions on this one. But, it wouldn't hurt to try.

[@e-4airman124]

thank you again

[@przemekbozek]

Congrats for the little man - prevailed against the rules 😀

[@Jubilo1]

It seemed you didn't like chit-pull games !

[@XLEGION1]

No, they are not really my bag! I find they work better for Strategic games, like in the Ancient world, but I think it is over used system and not indicative of anything. Armies are not activated nor moved by 'chit pull' but by leaders who work to a military standard of long practice. It is more a ' game thing ' than having anything to do with history.

[@vgovger4373]

Your volume is way too low in most of your videos

[@XLEGION1]

And yet, I get complaints that the sound is too blaring. I'm pretty sure it has something to do with people's 'settings' on devices what ever they are.

[@texigander5]

@@XLEGION1 volume is fine on my device

[@colincampbell2418]

@@texigander5 Yes I can hear perfectly.