I have just started a CP game with the latest beta patch, and since it started interesting, I think I will cover it here.
I deliberately went historical plans. France however opted for Plan 16, which is something like an immediate full-blown assault on Alsace, more radical than Plan 17 (you event get a chance to change it back to 17 after seeing the CP plans, for a penalty of course, for which the AI did not opt), and Russia went with attacking A-H first, not Germany. Both Allieds went with the option of strengthening their respective minor allies, so Belgium and Serbia is free to deploy all reinforcements at start.
And not only the UK joined the war immediately in the August diplomacy phase, but so did Italy, against me. Japan did as well.
The turks weren't pro-Centrals enough for the Goeben to go Istanbul-way, so it was sent to the Adriatic. It joined the small A-H task force which was originally meant to blockade Montenegro. With that in mind, I decided to try and send out the Austrian fleet. Too bad I played an event to reduce likelihood of naval operations, before the diplo phase....
But at least, the Italian treason convinced the Turks to join my cause.
BTW I will probably not bother with screenshots unless the AAR goes along long enough. If you don't know the general picture of the European map on the opening of WW1, you should not be on Languish. :P
EARLY AUGUST
All the moves I did was a somewhat historic opening for Schlieffen, and sent out the main AH fleet to patrol the Adriatic, while the other Austrian task force, with the Goeben and being commanded by Souchon, raided (successfully) the Italian coast. No enemy contact was made.
The other option Russia choosed (beside making Serbs stronger) was extra artillery which is a good move. So the first battle, taking place at Ravka Russia, Russian 3rd Army vs. AH 4th, saw heavy artillery on both sides.
But still, the Russian units weren't fully mobilized, and Russia had less ammo than A-H (I went with the extra ammo option) so I decided to make a stand, and it worked out: after a bloody battle, with all Russian arty ammo spent, the Russian 3rd retreated.
Brusilov, though, swept through the lone slavic AH corps guarding the border in front of him and reached south of Tarnopol.
The Belgian Army, free of restrictions, deployed some forces to Namur, where they were pushed back by my 3rd Germany Army. Liege also fell.
The French attack was repulsed from Luxembourg down to Mourhange.
AUGUST
A successful month, apart from the German 1st Army somehow getting tied up in Antwerp. King Leopold made a determined stand in Bruxelles, but 2nd Army emerged victorious. By the end of August everything east of Bruxelles was controlled by Germany. The French came close to capturing Metz, but got almost totally depleted of manpower in trying there and elsewhere, so altoug barely, but I held the city.
The Russians were also kept in bay both in East Prussia and Gallicia, but A-H's manpower and arty reserves plumetted. Especially since she was forced on the defensive against Serbia, who crossed the river Sava in force, and had to be intercepted by the 5th Army, and pushed back in desperate fighting.
In other news, Horthy's Austrian fleet (its a mistake also in the original boardgame to have him as admiral from the start) surprised and defeated the tiny force of an Italian cruiser and a destroyer, sinking the former. But two old AH battleships received considerable damage. That, together with the huge cost of keeping these fleets on the sea, made me decide to only leave the Goeben task force raiding, the main fleet shall rest.
Speaking of fleets, Schanhorst, trying to make its way to Africa encountered the Japanese fleet but managed to escape before any shots fired.
The Japs did land on Qin Tao and started a siege, while the British 6th Army landed in Mesopotamia. The italians had been passive, but they do start the war with a rather dispersed army, so it was as expected.
SEPTEMBER
A big naval battle took place in the Gulf of Venice, Jutland-style. The Goeben task force was intercepted by something I suspected to be the main Italian task force, with some BBs and Bs. Retreat attempts by me repeatedly failed, but only light losses were suffered, then Horthy's fleet managed to reinforce the battle, while an other Italian task force also joined in.
Eventually, an Erzherzog Karl type old battleship and a Budapest type AC was lost on my side. The Italians lost two ACs, IIRC.
The Russians flanked A-H in two crucial spaces: finally giving up on taking Rawka Russia with a head-on charge, the Russian 3rd Army just flanked that city and took Lemberg, altough that did cause a national resurgence in A-H giving them some National Will. The other flanking came in Austrian Poland, where the Russians captured Gorlice, and thus it became absolutely urgent to withdraw the AH 1st Army and seal off the Carpathian passes.
The BEF stopped my 2nd Army at Mons, so all that remained at that point was the race to the sea, my chances for Western victory were gone by and large. I suck at enacting von Schlieffen's plan. :(
OCTOBER
Some interesting happenings: Strikes in Germany, national rebellion in Russian Poland. And Bulgaria joined the Centrals, and luckily the Entente failed its diplo-check on Romania because even so, the pesky hair-feeted scum got very near to joining them due to Bulgaria's choice of side.
And quite the indecisivness in battles: The Belgians tried to take back Bruxelles, it was a pretty bad idea. Russian advance was halted, some minor advances against Serbia which saw Belgrade being taken. Antwerp also fell thanks to the Austian siege guns moved there. The French started a major battle in Metz, but were again repulsed.
I decided on taking the Goeben TF back to port. With some luck I could get something out of a naval battle with Italy but I want to wait with that until I finish off Serbia and concentrate AH forces against Italy, so hopefully getting the combined negative NW effect of losing land battles and ships pushing the shaky Italians into some kind of revolution.
NOVEMBER-DECEMBER
God damn Croats started an uprising in Trieste, while I activated the Senussi in Lybia.
Austrian diplomats made the goatfuckers in Afghanistan stearing up trouble for GB, and Belgium surrendered to Germany!
No major action took place against the Russians, only minor battles here and there, and an annoying and dangerous war of manouver persisted against the Serbs, altough with the Bulgarian army crossing their borders, their defeat had become assured.
German 1st Army managed to gain good ground after the Belgian surrender, reaching Dunkerque, Hazebrouck, and Lille, with the British 2nd Army blocking further advance.
The Italians tried to cross the Isonzo but were defeated.
During the interphase the Croatian rebellion was put down successfully, and some standard building and war economy raising took place.
The Brits and French tried a coup in Greece but failed, pushing the Greeks to declare war on them and thus joining my side. Neutrals blockade, and limited submarine warfare had been started, as war escalated.
JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1915
The Greeks were closely followed by the Romanians joining the Entente, so by early 1915 all major diplomatically activable countries joined the war, except for the United States.
Technology research was very successful: Austrian researched trench mortars while Germans invented the chlorine gas. Now I need to decide where to try it first.
QuoteBelgium surrendered to Germany!
But...the Brits stopped you at Mons! Cowardly Belgians. I bet this was all the Flems doing, as they are a craven and treacherous people.
Quote from: Valmy on May 15, 2009, 12:56:28 PM
I bet this was all the Flems doing, as they are a craven and treacherous people.
Actually, those are the Walloon traits. Flems are just Nazis.
Quote from: Norgy on May 15, 2009, 01:18:29 PM
Actually, those are the Walloon traits. Flems are just Nazis.
I read a book written by an American who served in the Canadian Army in Flanders and he remarked at what a huge security risk the Flems were for the British Army. They would keep the Germans informed at whatever the British were doing. Then you consider how many joined up with the SS in the Second World War....well you can see the Flems were natural Quislings.
The moral is never trust a Belgian!
Quote from: Norgy on May 15, 2009, 01:41:05 PM
The moral is never trust a Belgian!
Aside from their beer. Mmm... :mmm:
They also have: Chocolate.
Downside: Poirot, Tin-tin.
Sooo.... to continue January-February:
I got to spy on the Western Front and saw that cowardly British AI ran back behind Calais, so I moved in and captured it, the frontline becoming roughly a line between Calais and Mons (Mons becoming mine). The French National Will plumetted to 6 by this time, due to starting a bit lower than usual because of Plan 16, then suffering horrendous losses, and then losing precious cities recently. But their parlaiment was still strong so all they had to do is survive until the next Interphase to name a new government.
Rape of Serbia started with the Austro-Hungarian forces, deployed to a stable frontline north of Belgrade during the winter, launched their offensive, with the Bulgarians and Greeks pouring in on Southern Serbia, but the clock was ticking as not only the Romanians started their (slow) advance, but a force of the 3rd Italian Army, using the passivity of my fleets, landed in Trieste and put the fort under siege!
MARCH-APRIL 1915
Altough by March two Austro-Hungarian corps of slav origin were recruited, which were initially meant to face Italians, only one of them could be deployed in Laichbach to face the Italian threat, because the other had to be used to block the way of one of the several Romanian units advancing on Transylvania.
At least the Persians were convinced to send an expeditionary force to help the Turks. Which came just in time, as the British AI just discovered it needs the port of Basra to continue the advance with the 6th Army.
The trench tech discovered by the Austrians kicked in this month, helping the Western Front, where the French desperately tried to break through in the Ardennes, pushing their Marines and Arabs forward, but were easily massacred. (here, and in the boardgame, 1915 can be very very very bloody for the attacker because of trench levels starting to rise, but offensive techs to counter it usually missing, and more importantly, not yet enough number of arty support and/or munition for a major offensive preliminary bombardment. this particual attack was just a minor one though).
A more successful attack by the French was the recapture of Dunkerque. Being overstretched in that sector, I had to rush in cavalry reserves but they did not prove enough. Garrison of Calais suddenly had the task to fight its way back to own lines.
The Brits tried, and failed, to utilize nerve gas against the Turks in the Sinai, as their ANZAC corps launched an offensive through the Egyptian-Turkish border.
The Turks, on the other hand, made some good progress into Armenia, but supply started to become a problem.
Oh and regarding Trieste: My lone corps which was rushed to repel the invasion was driven back before my other reserves could arrive. The fort did not surrender though.
Interesting AAR. Please continue, bitte.
Tamas, how is the interface? Any improvement?
MAY 1915
Here is the northern part of the Western Front, after the bit of confusion caused by the French breakthrough:
[img=http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/2549/ww1a.th.jpg] (http://img33.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ww1a.jpg)
Despite all that, I decided to try and break French will. The only army having the numbers and artilleries to try with hope of success was the 2nd Army. So, I planned a Major Offensive for June, with the aim of capturing Maubegue.
Also, Lemberg appeared to be lightly defended, so an A-H Major Offensive on it had been scheduled for June as well. The Germans planned to test combat gas, the Austrians to do the same with massive bombardment.
The breakout from Calais was not successful, altough the corps there were still in supply, thanks to Calais itself being enough of a supply source for them.
On the East, apparently Brusilov was transferred to the 12th Army, which attacked the Prussian city of Thorn, and was repulsed in heavy fighting.
A British incursion in southern Sinai held ground against a Turkish counter-attack, while the now Persian-Turkish 5th Ottoman Army dared to move out of Baghdad and took defensive positions along the anticipated future advance line of the 6th British Army. Speaking of which, Afghanistan recently openly declared war on the UK, making the Brits keeping two corps in India or face National Will penalties.
The Italians landed in force in Trieste it would seem, as apparently by May the entire 3rd Army was besieging Trieste, which did hold due to lack of Italian heavy artillery, but my rag-tag counterattack force could not push them to the sea. With the Serbs making me pay for every province I push them out of, I was facing the hard task of drawing my 5th or 6th Army ouf of Serbia to crush the Italians ASAP, without letting the Serb army out of the giant encirclement I had been developing.
But luckily, as it turned out, I could cheat and use the May Interphase's Redeployment Phase, which should not be there (Redeployment is only during Winter Interphase), to move the 6th Army next to Trieste. <_<
In the interphase, Germany invested heavily in several mountaineer corps, which were planned to form the backbone of the upcomging 16th Army, which in turn was planned to be Bane of Italy, putting that nation out of action.
As a note of interest, the French, being desperate, approached A-H with an offer of separate peace. I had to decide: attend the conference or not. If you attend and it turns out to be a bluff, you lose NW. If you do not attend, but it is a sincere proposal, you receive penalty for the dice roll which could, ultimately, result in A-H (or Russia) singing separate peace! But considering my good position, I did not attend, and indeed the negotiatons had no effect, altough being a sincere offer.
Quote from: Berkut on May 15, 2009, 03:18:11 PM
Tamas, how is the interface? Any improvement?
Well there are improvements in terms of it is being much less jerky, but it is still the same interface. Speaking of jerkiness, the momentary freezes at music track changes are completely gone, luckily.
For the AI, note that I am using default agressivness and FOW settings.
JUNE 1915
What a turn.
Erevan, the town in Armenia recently conquered by Turkey, got reconquered by the 10th Russian Army personally commanded by... the Czar himself!
Then there was a major battle between defending Romanians and the Bulgarian Army crossing the Danube. The attackers won, but it was a close call.
Chronogically following this was a half-assed Italian attempt to link up with their force in Trieste by direct land connection.
Then the major German offensive against Meubeuge was started, which by the time of attack got defended by Brits. The Germans, beside using gas for the very first time in war, opted for "attack in jumps" to keep moral as high as possible, which was a good call because the Brits went with scattered defense and counter-attacks, which reduce enemy morale.
But, as it turned out, it was only the Canadian corps which defended the town, and despite their heroic resistance they were forced to retreat, with the fort put under siege.
Next in line was the AH 6th Army massing to relieve the fort of Trieste. The attempt was a complete and utter failure. And a major battle.
A-H fared much better with their major offensive against Lemberg, held by a weak Russian force, further damaged by heavy preliminary bombardment. This success gave a huge, and much needed boost to Austro-Hungarian National Will.
I love World War I AAR's. Keep it coming Tamas! :thumbsup:
JULY 1915
Germans developed light machine guns for airplanes, a tech which were available for the Entente for some time, and Austrians developed improved aircraft engines, so it was time to dare doing some air recons.
Despite being able to cheat my 6th Army next to Trieste some months ago, their departure from Serbia did help some Serb units to keep causing trouble. But the end result there could not be in doubt.
The Czar's great victory at Erevan put the main line of Turkish advance into great threat, which was going north at the town of Kumany, just about to cross river Arpa. With the Czar's way to the Turkish lifeline (railroad) was wide open, Enver Pasha had no choice but to abandon the offensive which just a month ago promised the conquest of Armenia, and had to retreat to Kars.
Kitchener once again tried to take El Arish on the Egyptian border, but again failed.
The Italians continued their lackluster attempts at capturing Gorizia to establish a land connection with their 3rd Army at Trieste. The heroic fort kept up the resistence.
Apart from the Adriatic coast, A-H's war was going well. Following up on the success at Lemberg, they kept pushing the Russians back, despite not being able to successfully implement the heavy bombardment doctrine. By the end of this month, most of Galicia was again Austrian.
AUGUST
The Great War still raged on all around Europe.
In an attempt to cut supply to the Italian 3rd, Horthy attempted to take control of the Adriatic Sea, hoping for the continued passivity of the other mediterranean navies. The Italian navy accepted the challenge, and the two forces met in the Gulf of Venice once again.
The Goeben task force managed to reinforce rather fast, and Horthy managed to hold tactical advantage for most of the battle. Superior numbers did win the day (well, two days) however. The Italians lost a BB a B, and few destroyers, but Erz. Friedrich, and the Erz. Karl old battleships were sunk, and above all, the name-giving ship of the Viribus Unitis class BBs was lost as well, so at the end of the battle, AH clearly lost it.
The continued relief attempts of Trieste also proved bloody and pointless.
But the success in Galicia had turned into a general advance against Russians, altough by the end of the month, and crossing into Russian territory, the defenders' strength grew stronger.
In Armenia, the Czar remained passive, so Enver renewed the offensive, with mixed results.
More importantly however, fort of Maubegel still held, depriving Germany from her successful Grand Offensive for this year, while the French launched their own, against Neufchatel in the Ardennes. The understrength German defenders managed to hold out this month by applying Point Defense tactics.
How does this model the Russian Revolution and American entry?
Quote from: ehrie on May 15, 2009, 05:37:49 PM
How does this model the Russian Revolution and American entry?
for revolutions there is a general system tied to National Will, altough Russia has several events pushing it into one way or other once it becomes unstable. USA's involvement is part of the diplomatic process: the more pro-Entente the USA becomes, the more industrial help it gives ot Allieds, then it becomes so pro-entente that it becomes more pro-entente each turn until joining fully. Stuff can set it back of cousre, most notably german diplomatic efforts, and british decision on blockade, plus random events of brits seizing US ships.
How would you say the war is going for you?
Quote from: ehrie on May 15, 2009, 05:43:37 PM
How would you say the war is going for you?
Quite well I think, in light of the odds I started out with. If I can hold out against the French Grand Offensive and finish my German one until the end of 1915, the French could be in serious National Will trouble, might even brake with a bit of luck, depending on mostly wether the AI will be sane enough to opt for a new government this coming interphase at the end of August. (they have 11 NW now, naming a new government puts it back to 27 at the price of parlaiment mood [measured in about 4 or 5 steps]. Real NW trouble starts from around and below zero, most notably mutiny which can potentially erase a massive amount of the nation's army off the map, and revolution, which is highly random, and can end up as anything from a simple change of government to a communist takeover)
Need to give us casualty counts. Good so far, have my interest.
I like this AAR. Keep it coming. :)
Quote from: Tamas on May 15, 2009, 10:31:20 AM
A successful month, apart from the German 1st Army somehow getting tied up in Antwerp. King Leopold made a determined stand in Bruxelles
zombie king Leopold?
Albert I was king of Belgium during that period.
Quote from: Valmy on May 15, 2009, 01:33:40 PM
Quote from: Norgy on May 15, 2009, 01:18:29 PM
Actually, those are the Walloon traits. Flems are just Nazis.
I read a book written by an American who served in the Canadian Army in Flanders and he remarked at what a huge security risk the Flems were for the British Army. They would keep the Germans informed at whatever the British were doing. Then you consider how many joined up with the SS in the Second World War....well you can see the Flems were natural Quislings.
probably because the british were fighting on the side of the opressors (i.e. walloons)
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on May 16, 2009, 03:11:00 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 15, 2009, 10:31:20 AM
A successful month, apart from the German 1st Army somehow getting tied up in Antwerp. King Leopold made a determined stand in Bruxelles
zombie king Leopold?
Albert I was king of Belgium during that period.
Ooops of course I meant Albert. :Embarrass:
SEPTEMBER 1915
After the August Interphase, France has a somewhat better NW situation (17) but no new government, they opted to strengthen parlaiment instead.
I will have to check if naval battle NW effects are correctly calculated with this beta patch because the last Veneto battle was considered a draw by the public (no NW gained/lost either side) which actually should be about true (one more old battleship lost for AH, but several destroyers / mabbe a cruiser lost for Italy), but my memories from the boardgame sense something is not right. Will see.
Speaking of ships, I ordered the completition of dreadnought Szent István, to cover the loss of Viribus Unitis. I was highly tempted to order the build of 'Budapest', member of a new BB class 'Monarch', but it was pretty expensive, and could only be done by August 1916, at which point I want to have Italy dealt with anyway. So I crancked up infantry unit production for AH instead.
Austria-Hungary suffered some considerable losses this spring BTW. 5 points of NW lost, which is, to put into perspective is 1/8th of max NW ever achivable (40), and IIRC, the loss tolerance of A-H is 1 NW lost for each 3 losses, which means about 15 points of manpower got burned away in Trieste and Galicia. Nominally, a corps (basic unit) is made out of 2 or 3 points of manpower, you can just, barring a catastrophic morale check result, keep pumping manpower points into a reduced unit to keep it on the map, until your reserves are empty.
Germany and Turkey ordered some more artillery. Well, Turkey ordered the two arty units it can ever have.
Much more interesting, however, was the state of Russia: losing to the Austrian Major Offensive, having big losses, pushed them below the stability zone of 20+ NW, and being unlucky it triggered a strike in Petrograd, which further pushed it down, then a random event created a revolt in Azerbaijan, so after the interphase, the Russians stood at 6 NW. Unlucky for me, Germany was in no position to make any major pushes against Russia, and A-H had to carefully weight the situation: losing Trieste, especially if it meant losing Gorizia and thus linking Trieste to Italy meant a very important city lost with an Italian front much longened, and an advance into Russia could even trigger a national revival for them.
Plus, as I mentioned, A-H was pretty much exhausted. So the several returning out of combat reduced units (kinda' failed morale check in last turn battles, put the unit off-map until next turn's reinforcement phase) were mostly sent (back) to the 6th Army facing Trieste, only a couple went to Gallicia mainly to plug holes which were starting to appear on the flanks.
You know what. You will face several strikes right now unless you bring us more screenies. :mad:
And damn whatever you said in the beginning. :mad:
Ok, screenies will come later. :P
To continue September:
Interesting stuff happened. It seems the French choice of new governments only kicked in now, so they received a new government, an NW of 28, and most hardline parlaiment (which means I was wrong in the negative effect of government change on parlaiment. maybe it was raise of civilian production? Tooltip is not accessible right now).
Anyway, The Austro-Hungarians did a cautious advance at the East, and the SE corner of Gallicia (Ruthenia, actually) was still on Russian hands.
The German supporting limited attack in Poland yielded much better results than expected, and reserve units which were pushed into the breakthrough reached and captured Lodz.
Another relief attempt of Trieste failed, and the exhaustion of A-H neares a complete level. And at the end of the turn, fort of Trieste finally surrendered. :( The province linking it to Italy, Gorizia, was barely held by a depleted unit of conscripted Slavs against yet another Italian attack.
Interestingly it seems Italy planned a Grand Offensive against Villach, but decided to take the penalty in abandoning it.
And to finish Italian news off, the French 7th Army had been spotted debarking (sp?) in the port of Venice! Their role was as of yet uncertain, but north of the Alps, the German 16th Army was also forming.
The Turks conquered Erevan, at this moment their success seemed complete, altough overstretching was a real danger in case the Russian decided on a counter-offensive. But the goal at that moment was Tbilisi and entire Georgia by the end of 1915.
The French did no really continue their Great Offensive this turn, apart from a British cavalry trying to break through. They (frenchies) did attack my line in northern France, west of Ypres, and being understrength and no near reserves, they nearly broke through. A weakness in the German position was thus discovered.
Lets see the situation at the start of October:
This is Galicia, as you can see the A-H victory at Lemberg did not exactly reach RL Gorlice proportions, mostly due to the slaughtering house Trieste had become:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F8748%2F47155727.th.jpg&hash=d01ed89e70ab08511cad79c12c69ee7767416389) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=47155727.jpg)
Here is the Polish sector, advance is better here, and could actually end up decisive, if you take a look you see the entire Russian salient is protected (or rather, unprotected) by the Russian 4th Army. Unless Russia manages some reinforcements, I can have Christmas in Warsaw.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F5319%2F84853930.th.jpg&hash=dcac27642f08fc02c8457f6b3ed14fcd98148b0e) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=84853930.jpg)
East Prussia is less interesting altough the Russians keep harassing me there:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F959%2F50842726.th.jpg&hash=5f686156ac6dca34a72bc5a098c4e3741ccf91cb) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=50842726.jpg)
Here is the Western Front overview, I guess you are more familiar with geography here so it needs no explanation:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F2920%2F94527408.th.jpg&hash=11b2435e094706304ce30cb5b139b13caf26fee0) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=94527408.jpg)
The following image shows the important part of West, where actual fighting is taking place. West of Ypres is where the French almost broke through last month. Maubeuge was the original target of my Great Offensive, which I captured. The rightmost province on this pic is where the French GO target is supposed to be.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F8188%2F70812801.th.jpg&hash=2c906d34165b77901fca3853bf920a6518b3544f) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=70812801.jpg)
Here is the Italian Front. That minefield next to Fiume, I forgot to report: I bought it in August. ^_^
You can see the German 16th on its way, but I think I will bump into stacking problems.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F4770%2F82280236.th.jpg&hash=1e9668cbb785f7e62c2dd6c25ff7f5f40f05865c) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=82280236.jpg)
Serbia is basically gone, only Montenegro remains (not for long) so rather than that, here is Romania, you can see the combined Bulgarian-Austro-Hungarian offensive rather nicely. Note the "()" mark on two Romanian stacks (one of them is the army hq) showing they are isolated from supply, and should get eliminated pretty soon unless they can brake out.
The big Romanian flag is Bucharest, just so you can orientate yourself. Also do note that Russian stack on the right edge: its some cavalry force the Russians sent down, and now the 2nd Turkish army I moved to the theatre, is busy chasing it down.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F7775%2F31522287.th.jpg&hash=d7e4f8c62484bba194e18b459317905e0afb257c) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=31522287.jpg)
And this is the Caucasus Front. As you can see, at this moment it seems to be a complete overrun:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F96%2F91760310.th.jpg&hash=016f2bdf39809f850fc12df68556ae4ac0dcdca4) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=91760310.jpg)
Mesopotamia, not exactly thrilling:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F2474%2F20746459.th.jpg&hash=f4493cfa6bf6a32c5c8c4569ce505e0fa68aa7ba) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=20746459.jpg)
And the Sinai. The god damn Arabs in Hejaz just revolted at the start of this turn.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg36.imageshack.us%2Fimg36%2F3103%2F51973943.th.jpg&hash=6c7a4cdcafd622b99ecc5a79349810e9af491b92) (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=51973943.jpg)
OCTOBER 1915
It seems the Russian AI realized the position it was in. One of the two corps keeping the Azerbaijan revolt in check was sent to block the Turkis advance on Tbilisi, and in general my all-along-the-front-except-east-prussia eastern offensive encountered stiffer resistance than expected, altough it did achieve some minor gains.
The isolated Romanians did try to brake out and got eliminated. Half-assed Entente efforts at the West.
Again, barely holding Gorizia. Some reorganization would be needed as the troops there apparently belonged to no HQ.
Seeing the AI's taste for naval landings, I railroaded a couple of Greek corps back to Salonika, since their job was done anyway.
And the French 7th Army did not land in Venice, they landed in Trieste :bleeding: This can be a problem. The German 16th would be probably sent there instead of the high Alps, because those two Allied armies had to be eliminated before they could brake out to clear terrain.
At the end of the turn, A-H stood with a total of two points of manpower in reserve. Winter was coming however, with the chance to call in conscripts as a political action. But it seemed, a big chance to finish Russia off was lost due to Italy's determined effort at getting and keeping Trieste.
Sometimes, the EUIII map looks great. You just need to compare it to something like AEGOD's map in this game.
Quote from: Norgy on May 16, 2009, 11:15:04 AM
Sometimes, the EUIII map looks great. You just need to compare it to something like AEGOD's map in this game.
:yes: This one makes my eyes hurt.
Thats better. But whats with the maps tendency to avoid the North = up and South = down. Confuses the hell out of me. <_<
Casualty counts dammit!
Well, we all know the first casualty of war is innocence, so you can cross that one off. :huh:
Man, this game looks like a case study in a developer/designer shooting themselves in the foot by making a great game with an impenetrable interface.
I just read the Matrix Forums on this - not good. I think the guy who wrote the game wrote all the interface code himself - I mean at the base levels. So you ahve stuff like you ahve to click and drag a unit to place it at some points in the game, while in others you can click to select, then drag. What a nightmare.
And the real problem is that things like that tend to be incredibly hard to fix properly.
Great AAR though Tamas. Keep it coming, please.
Ran into a crash the developer could not reproduce (he could continue the savegame which was crashing for me), but me reinstalling the latest beta patch worked, got through in the save game. Meh. Well, its been on my computer since early alpha so maybe a complete reinstall is in order.
Anyways, back to business:
NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 1915
First of all, it was the French 8TH, not 7th Army, which landed in Trieste. So yes, the Army of Orient was there. And they were busy. The combined forces of the Orient Army and the Italian 3rd struck out from Trieste in two directions: a combined, bigger force attacked Pola which was heavily defended by Austria, at least by their standards of the time: 3 corps were defending, with artillery being sent from reserves, and it proved to be enough.
The second attack was done by Italian second line units against Fiume, which was defended by a lone active-duty corps of Slavs and a Hungarian artillery unit. In a heroic struggle this lonely unit managed to hold the lines against repeated assaults of the numerically superior enemy.
By the end of the year, the supposedly major portion of the Russian 4th Army were encircled, isolated, and eliminated in Russian Poland. The door seemed to be open for Warsaw, with assumed numerical superiority against the Russians. Yet a Russian force recognized a gap in my line in Galicia and made a desperate bid to reach Lemberg and thus cut supply for basically 2/3rd of the Austro-Hungarian forces on that front, but could not reach it. It still needed to be mopped up and destroyed though.
Armenia was entirely Turkish by the end of 1915, the remnants of the Russian 10th Army were concentrating west of Tbilisi to defend that crucial city of the region. Two corps of Turkish reserves were still crawling northward, wondering if the Russian would care to garrison Sochi up on the Black Sea coast.
In other news, god damn Bosnians rebelled, so 3 corps of the 5th Army, marching like crazy toward Trieste, had to be left behind to keep up order.
Speaking of Trieste, it was clear by the end of the year that the next couple of months would be a race against time. The French and Italians looked determined to finish conquering the ports of that coast, and on the long run only the arrival of the Austro-Hungarian 5th Army could stop them. The German 16th Army took over the frontline east of Trento from the A-H 8th Army, which thus got concentrated around Trento itself. The Germans had good reserves of ammo and manpower, but there seemed little point of a grand offensive if the Austrian could not assist, and they were in no shape to do that until the spring the earliest.
So the obvious question at that time was: where should Germany strike? Unfortunately, the French National Will recovered to 32, so forcing their surrender with a single offensive seemed next to impossible. But Russia was already crumbling, so hastily plans were made to launch a Grand Offensive with the general direction of Warsaw during the first two months of 1916. The plan was that the Austro-Hungarians could still act as the securers of the German right flank while saving strength for the Big Push against Italy which was to come during the Spring.
On a sidenote, with the fighting in Serbia basically finished, I checked and it turned out that during the fighting Greece got Makedonia up until Skopje, with Bulgarian getting almost everything else up until Belgrade which became Austrian.
JANUARY-FEBRUARY 1916
Severe mutinies shocked the Russian army during the holidays. This could be the beginning of the end.
Unfortunately, Turkey on the CP side was a bit shaky as well. Last year the Armenian genocide pulled down Turkish NW, and lack of major battles triggered the Enver's obstinancy event despite the big advances. And since most of that advance through barren territories, conquest of cities could not really offset negative trends either.
Also, looks like the AI does not need to ask the neighbors for some game system abuse, as it appeared, the British Grand Offensive for 1915 was Basra which they conquered sometimes early that year with no resistance. In the boardgame of course, launch of a Grand Offensive makes its target public, here you sort of need to have a battle to realize its part of a grand offensive. So in short, loss of Basra delivered an additional NW hit for Turkey during the end of the year Interphase.
As a result, Turkish NW slided into the instability zone for a while, but strike and mutiny attempts were mercilessly crushed and so the situation stabilized.
For economical news, this was the first Interphase when some of the CP countries received negative blockade effects (basically the blockade system works as such that in first half of the war Germany and A-H actually gains some economic points from the blockade check, simulating some oversea trade still ongoing. It gets nastier in later years). Due to the depleted stockpiles of Austria, no new units were ordered for them, but Germany started the creation of several units including a Polish corps.
Military-wise, the new year started off really quiet, apart from the Bulgarian conquest of Bucharest. The 11th Germany Army was scheduled to start a Grand Offensive in March with the objective of Warsaw.
Finally Calvinus, the developer managed to find what was causing me crashes, this has resulted in a new beta patch. :)
So back to business once again:
MARCH-APRIL 1916
These were busy months, as spring slowly returned to Europe. The Germand Grand Offensive for Warsaw had started, with all armies except the 8th and 12th (both guarding East Prussia) on the East moving to the offensive, and with the leading army (11th) trying to experiment with stosstruppen tactics.
Austro-Hungarian armies also sprung into action all along the Russian front. Advance had been slow but steady, with Lublin being the only noteworthy conquest.
The Turks achieved much better with the conquest of Tbilisi, altough instead of decreasing Russian fighting spirit, the loss of this regional capital triggered a minor national resurgence, so Russia actually gained 2 NW from it.
The earlier Battle of Bucharest was a major battle, but the Romanian army did not care much to resist, with their manpower reserves depleted. This month they again easily gave up a major battle against Bulgaria. [I like the AI logic here for example it never bothered to deploy for the second sub-battle since it retreated as soon as it was allowed to. I like that even if:] Bulgaria itself was also completely out of reserves, so this had been the struggle of two exhausted enemies, altough the end result was in no doubt with the Austrian eastern right flank reaching into northern Romania, and the Turkish 2nd Army, by this month having two units of heavy artillery, pushing northward on the Black Sea coast, driving the understrenght Russian forces in front of it toward Russia.
The Western allies were quite active. The French launched their own Grand Offensive in the Ardennes with a successfully applied heavy bombardment tactics, but they had been repulsed so far by the German defenders applying constant counter-attacks to disrupt the flow of the (non-existant) advance of the Allieds. Also some minor attacks by Brits and French happened along the frontline.
The Italian elite mountain troop corps tried to take Gorizia, but the defenders once again held out.
MAY 1916
Romania surrendered! With free access through the country, the Bulgarian army were ordered to march and take up defensive positions along the western bank of the Prut river, the Romanian-Russian border, linking the Austro-Hungarian flank, and the 2nd Turkish Army on the sea coast.
The Italians launched their own Grand Offensive against Villach, led by Cadorna, but they retreated fast this month.
The German offensive had been a total success. Warsaw and two forts to the Norht-East of it were captured, while Austro-Hungarians took the fort of Ivangorod in assault. Already plans were made for reaching the next target: Brest-Litovsk.
Sporadic fighting on the Western Front continued, and a couple of secondary Italian attacks were quickly repulsed in the Alps.
Very interesting turns. Keep it up, please.
Indeed, very nice.
So what happens in gamey terms if you knock Russia out of the war? Does your supply situation get any better with the blockade and does the borders change around a bit?
Keep up the AAR, it's very interesting!
I tried downloading the demo from AGEOD's website, but apparently the zip file is corrupted. Bleh.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 21, 2009, 04:31:44 AM
Keep up the AAR, it's very interesting!
I tried downloading the demo from AGEOD's website, but apparently the zip file is corrupted. Bleh.
Yesterday I had problems downloading forum attachments from there for a while, so perhaps there was a server error, you should try again.
Quote from: Tamas on May 21, 2009, 04:34:33 AM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 21, 2009, 04:31:44 AM
Keep up the AAR, it's very interesting!
I tried downloading the demo from AGEOD's website, but apparently the zip file is corrupted. Bleh.
Yesterday I had problems downloading forum attachments from there for a while, so perhaps there was a server error, you should try again.
I just did. :P
The file downloads ok, all 200+mb of it, but when I try to use WinRar to unzip it, I get an error.
Use 7zip.
That worked. Dunno why WinRar didn't - it's usually pretty good.
Gonna try out the tutorial tomorrow.
Quote from: Cecil on May 21, 2009, 03:43:43 AM
So what happens in gamey terms if you knock Russia out of the war? Does your supply situation get any better with the blockade and does the borders change around a bit?
My blockade situation should get better due to grain in Ukraine - altough I can't remember if that's implemented TBH, since in the boardgame it had some tricky conditions.
Anyways, IIRC there wont be actual map changes, not that it matter much.
What matters is the way Russia surrenders. The top list, VP-gian wise, from the top of my head:
3. Separate peace
2. Communist revolt
1. "default" surrender due to total pwnage in war (like Romania and Belgium in this game)
You see, when I will push Russia's NW low enough, a revolution will probably occur. The question is if it will be a military dictatorship, a democratic regime, or a communist one. Its ony the latter which stops the war IIRC.
This is a general rule for all major powers BTW, so I may end up turning Italy to communist this game or something.
And the number of communist regimes at the end of the game determines the victory level.
JUNE 1916
In the May Interphase, Turkey attempted and managed to crush the rebellion in the Hedjaz, while Austria launched Szent István, causing some minor hapiness among the public (+1NW). Germany concentrated on ordering nearly all the available siege artillery units, and some fairly modern airplanes (the latter would only be ready mid-1917).
Earlier capture of Warsaw actually helped the leaders of Russia rising patriotic spirits. But June was still not nice to them.
Low NW gives a morale check penalty, and this proved crucial in the fightings in June, and seemed eventually in the fate of Russia itself. They started the month with the NW of around 10, but things went downhill fast.
Actually, the Grand Offensive of Germany was getting slower. They regularly met numerically superior Russian forces. But sooner or later, one of the reserve Russian units would break into Panic (worst possible morale check result) further causing damage to other units in their army, and triggering defeat. Most notable was this at the Russian minor fort of Rozan. (it's a bit SE of Tannenberg, and NE of Warsaw). The AI there made a good call massing about 4 corps there: I could not ignore that province in my advance, and a fort provides artillery support for 3 combat rounds. So it started out as a though battle, but then one of the conscript units was rotated into battle, and panicked, and it seemed some other Russian units also got at least temporarily out of map because it became a major defeat for Russia, further decreasing their NW. They started July with only 1NW, after suffering yet another mutiny following that major defeat.
There was only one battle where Russia showed its older form, and yet it lost it as well: the 12th German Army, moving out of Königsberg toward the East to join the general offensive, met some stiff resistance from the well-rested Russian forces there, but in a bloody battle forced them to retreat.
In the West, France continued the Grand Offensive in the Ardennes, and I had a good call going with in-depth defense, as Joffre, general leading the assault, opted to try Flash Bombardment, but in-depth defense decreased its effect so they could not break through.
JULY
Not only Russia started barely in the positive NW field, I drew the Lenin event! :menace: Still, pushing them to revolution was needed.
The bad news this month was that due to mostly my negligence, the Italians managed to conquer Villach, completing their Grand Offensive!
But Austria-Hungary also did good as well: After winning a major battle west of the city, their breakthrough infantry corps reached and captured Brest-Litovsk.
Other than this, July was unusually quiet.
AUGUST
This month started with a big diplomatic blunder: sinking of the Lusitania! This pushed the USA enough to become Pro-Entente, which did not only mean that they would highly crank up economic support for Entente countries, but that they would begin their turnly slide toward joining the war.
Will continue later.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 21, 2009, 08:08:15 AM
That worked. Dunno why WinRar didn't - it's usually pretty good.
Gonna try out the tutorial tomorrow.
Also, make sure to have the 229 pages long proper manual at hand. :P
I demand screenies!
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 04:17:40 AM
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on May 21, 2009, 08:08:15 AM
That worked. Dunno why WinRar didn't - it's usually pretty good.
Gonna try out the tutorial tomorrow.
Also, make sure to have the 229 pages long proper manual at hand. :P
Originally I was going to dive right in and see which would defeat me first, the enemy or the interface. :D
But since there's a tutorial, I might as well give that a shot.
The biggest problem with the game when it was 1.00, was not just the interface, but that it gave back way too little information about what was happening.
I did not notice that until after release, to be honest, because having played the boardgame, I knew the rules "under the hood", but most players did not.
So I do encourage you to look up stuff in the manual as you go along, particularly combat. Just knowing what exactly each morale check result mean goes a long way in helping understand the game.
And altough with patches the information thing got better a lot, it still has some problems.
I have to say I still don't understand battles and battle reports. I know how they work in theory, but often enough I'm left to wonder, "Why did I win this battle?"
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 06:20:45 AM
I have to say I still don't understand battles and battle reports. I know how they work in theory, but often enough I'm left to wonder, "Why did I win this battle?"
With latest patches the individual round results are displayed much clearer, for longer, so it gets pretty easy to understand where a battle is going. In 95% of times you win/lose because you run out of units (disorganized or worse morale result puts them out of battle) or AI decides to retreat.
Give us more! And om a related note, are you not able to give casualty reports? <_<
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 08:02:15 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 06:20:45 AM
I have to say I still don't understand battles and battle reports. I know how they work in theory, but often enough I'm left to wonder, "Why did I win this battle?"
With latest patches the individual round results are displayed much clearer, for longer, so it gets pretty easy to understand where a battle is going. In 95% of times you win/lose because you run out of units (disorganized or worse morale result puts them out of battle) or AI decides to retreat.
Maybe, but the results float *somewhere* on my screen, and nowhere near the units concerned.
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 08:06:38 AM
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 08:02:15 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 06:20:45 AM
I have to say I still don't understand battles and battle reports. I know how they work in theory, but often enough I'm left to wonder, "Why did I win this battle?"
With latest patches the individual round results are displayed much clearer, for longer, so it gets pretty easy to understand where a battle is going. In 95% of times you win/lose because you run out of units (disorganized or worse morale result puts them out of battle) or AI decides to retreat.
Maybe, but the results float *somewhere* on my screen, and nowhere near the units concerned.
Uhm, not anymore, its clear wether the text concerns your unit (bottom half) or the enemy (upper half).
My results are floating somewhere on the left, the results for the enemy (if displayed at all) obscure the enemy unit. Often enough I have my units shaken, destroyed, with the enemy seemingly intact yet winning the battle. Should it say somewhere that the enemy retreated?
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 08:44:59 AM
My results are floating somewhere on the left, the results for the enemy (if displayed at all) obscure the enemy unit. Often enough I have my units shaken, destroyed, with the enemy seemingly intact yet winning the battle. Should it say somewhere that the enemy retreated?
You obviously have not played with 1.06d or the latest beta.
Great Tamas your AAR made me get the game and I think its sort of sucks :cry:
Ok maybe I can figure out all these rules enough to be able to play if I keep at it.
I keep thinking: if I run Plan XVII historically will I be able to figure out how to detach corps and move them on rails in order to stop the Germans in the north? Probably not. France = doomed.
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 08:46:03 AM
Quote from: Syt on May 22, 2009, 08:44:59 AM
My results are floating somewhere on the left, the results for the enemy (if displayed at all) obscure the enemy unit. Often enough I have my units shaken, destroyed, with the enemy seemingly intact yet winning the battle. Should it say somewhere that the enemy retreated?
You obviously have not played with 1.06d or the latest beta.
Uhm, I do. :huh:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg32.imageshack.us%2Fimg32%2F2387%2Fscreeshot.jpg&hash=e31569c1dc0d1077ec64d98e1842dea6c6718b8e)
Also, despite the horsepower of my new PC the game still bogs down and the interface dodgy from time to time.
I like the gameplay and its concept, but the whole presentation/interface is making it very hard.
Yeah what is up with these strategy games with craptacular graphics running so slowly and poorly on modern PCs? I mean these games look like they were made with state of the art 1994 graphics technology yet it seems you need an array of connected super computers in order to run them well.
Valmy there was a demo :P
Also Valmy get the full manual.
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 09:10:09 AM
Valmy there was a demo :P
I demand things be intuitive!
Anyway sluggish performance and long load times are more of a real concern because that sort of thing will seriously limit my desire to keep playing it.
Quote from: Valmy on May 22, 2009, 09:04:06 AM
Yeah what is up with these strategy games with craptacular graphics running so slowly and poorly on modern PCs? I mean these games look like they were made with state of the art 1994 graphics technology yet it seems you need an array of connected super computers in order to run them well.
Its bad enough when the games have two decades old graphics - what really sucks is when they have decades old grpahics, and even atthat the interface STILL doesn't actually work!
I mean, its not like if this game came out ten years ago, the interface would be fine.
This interface fails not because the graphics are dated, but because it seems to be created for the express purpose of frustrating the player and hiding what appears to be a brilliant design under the hood.
If you have plenty of RAM you can opt to have the whole map loaded at start (in the configurator tool), which will make for a longer scenario start but supposedly more fluid map-scrolling.
Same goes for sounds. You also should turn off AI logging but I think that is off by default.
Quote from: Tamas on May 22, 2009, 09:16:31 AM
If you have plenty of RAM you can opt to have the whole map loaded at start (in the configurator tool), which will make for a longer scenario start but supposedly more fluid map-scrolling.
Same goes for sounds. You also should turn off AI logging but I think that is off by default.
Which I did (have 8 GB). But whenever I get into a new phase (i.e. AI doing their moves), choose an event, or set anything in the "top of screen" menus it becomes sluggy which is probably more a testament to the computations going on the background than anything else.
You won?
No, I went to Munich to check on the new siege guns being built. Will continue when I get home.
So I stopped this because I got annoyed: some chain of events and checks in the turn of the US going pro-Allied skyrocketed the Russian National Will back to 35. After a throughout search of logs and events I concluded this was either a bug, or a failed revolt which also failed to leave a mark in the gamelogs (unlikely, but possible).
I might end up continuing, or starting over when the next patch gets out. There is already a new beta one.
And thats because the developer guy and Thibaut are working on a "gold" version. Among the planned additions I think the most important is a separate stack organizing window, so you can stop with the annoying drag and drop shuffling of units within stacks. Also they will convert the map to a normal north-south allignment altough I hope it will be optional and I hate them for wasting precious time on such a triviality (Calvinus had to code a converter, and Thibaut now has to fix up the result or something like that).
In other words, I made the right decision to wait on the game a la Paradox's offerings. :yeah:
AGEOD...:(
Quote from: Tamas on September 21, 2009, 02:02:42 PM
So I stopped this because I got annoyed: some chain of events and checks in the turn of the US going pro-Allied skyrocketed the Russian National Will back to 35. After a throughout search of logs and events I concluded this was either a bug, or a failed revolt which also failed to leave a mark in the gamelogs (unlikely, but possible).
I might end up continuing, or starting over when the next patch gets out. There is already a new beta one.
And thats because the developer guy and Thibaut are working on a "gold" version. Among the planned additions I think the most important is a separate stack organizing window, so you can stop with the annoying drag and drop shuffling of units within stacks. Also they will convert the map to a normal north-south allignment altough I hope it will be optional and I hate them for wasting precious time on such a triviality (Calvinus had to code a converter, and Thibaut now has to fix up the result or something like that).
Uh-huh. Gold version. Polishing the turd up to a nice shine.
Screenshots and featurelist of the upcoming gold version:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=173124#post173124 (http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=173124#post173124)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg408.imageshack.us%2Fimg408%2F6320%2Fww1newmap.jpg&hash=71dd483a5d3b1b7f9ddeda6c41f39d53114453df)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg684.imageshack.us%2Fimg684%2F6278%2Fww1battlelog.jpg&hash=c2a2076897885b37f906a5768a8b76e51cf11453)
Map doesn't seem to suck anymore.
The Western Front is now in the West.
What about all the interface problems?
Why is France in the midst of summer while Germany is trapped in eternal winter?
Quote from: Razgovory on March 28, 2010, 12:40:03 PM
Why is France in the midst of summer while Germany is trapped in eternal winter?
Play balance.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 28, 2010, 12:40:03 PM
Why is France in the midst of summer while Germany is trapped in eternal winter?
Its January, FFS
But only in Germany?
I never did get any AGEOD games. I was thinking about the civil war one. Is it worth getting. I tried the demo but the fucker wouldn't even start for me.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 28, 2010, 02:42:42 PM
But only in Germany?
I never did get any AGEOD games. I was thinking about the civil war one. Is it worth getting. I tried the demo but the fucker wouldn't even start for me.
there are weather zones, just like in the boardgame
About the new army reorg window which should eliminate the annoying drag and dropping:
QuoteThis new window allows you to manage stacks located in the same area, during the Military phase. During the Redeployment phase, instead, you can also manage forces located everywhere (on the same Front, for instance), in order to redeploy them quickly from one stack (in one place) to another stack (in another place). Also, you will be able to assign leaders command.
During all phase, finally, you can change the army assignment of not-HQ stacks, according to the standard restrictions of course (i.e.: you cannot assign a stack to VI army if it contains a unit that can belong only to III army!).
Can you do WC as Sweden?
Quote from: grumbler on March 28, 2010, 01:26:44 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 28, 2010, 12:40:03 PM
Why is France in the midst of summer while Germany is trapped in eternal winter?
Play balance.
It balances the German Army's heavenly support (manifested by their angelic halos) as opposed to the French, who are constantly enveloped in a dark, noxious cloud (poison gas?)
Looks like pro-Central Powers revisionism gone rampant.
I tried the Demo of the civil war game. The tutorial... Well it's better then the ones in HOI3 but it still needs work. It does remind me a wargame I once played but I can't remember what it is called.
Just play the South and you will find the game is awesome.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 09:57:46 AM
Just play the South and you will find the game is awesome.
Why is that?
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2010, 09:58:45 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 09:57:46 AM
Just play the South and you will find the game is awesome.
Why is that?
It is a ACW game - they all suffer from Southern fanboi-ism, and the South is over-powered so that the game will be "interesting". This one is no different.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2010, 09:58:45 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 09:57:46 AM
Just play the South and you will find the game is awesome.
Why is that?
When I played the South, I was able to build sizable manpower reserves (regiments & brigades not formed into divisions or corps) at Richmond and Atlanta.
While keeping the Union bottled up in DC and Loiusville.
The South pretty much cant win in competitive PBEM. To say you can bottle up the northern AI is not reflective of much other than a bad AI.
If anything, the ratings of generals were preposterous. Grant being even comperable to Lee is absurd, and they were too hard on Halleck, Mcclellan and others.
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 30, 2010, 11:16:57 AM
If anything, the ratings of generals were preposterous. Grant being even comperable to Lee is absurd, and they were too hard on Halleck, Mcclellan and others.
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist and tactician. Lee was alright in moral, though, so maybe the case should be made that he could be closer to Grant.
Quote from: PDH on March 30, 2010, 11:27:11 AM
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist
:contract:
Quote from: PDH on March 30, 2010, 11:27:11 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 30, 2010, 11:16:57 AM
If anything, the ratings of generals were preposterous. Grant being even comperable to Lee is absurd, and they were too hard on Halleck, Mcclellan and others.
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist and tactician. Lee was alright in moral, though, so maybe the case should be made that he could be closer to Grant.
I know that this is a troll, but just want to make sure that you understand that Grant did a "Pickett's Charge" about six times, with the same result every time. With tactics like that, who needs Lee?
Soviet swarm tactics ftw.
Send in the Irish brigade first.
You american history geeks are not really better than balkantards, its just that you drool over different topics. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Tamas on March 30, 2010, 02:00:40 PM
You american history geeks are not really better than balkantards, its just that you drool over different topics. :rolleyes:
Go back in your wagon. We don't need any beets or a car stolen.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 10:00:51 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2010, 09:58:45 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 09:57:46 AM
Just play the South and you will find the game is awesome.
Why is that?
It is a ACW game - they all suffer from Southern fanboi-ism, and the South is over-powered so that the game will be "interesting". This one is no different.
Well it is a French game.
Quote from: grumbler on March 30, 2010, 12:15:09 PM
I know that this is a troll, but just want to make sure that you understand that Grant did a "Pickett's Charge" about six times, with the same result every time. With tactics like that, who needs Lee?
Oh I understand, but then Lee did the same thing over and over too. I believe he lost a higher percentage of troops - he was quite the butcher as well.
And to be fair, one can argue that Grant actually had the troops to expend on frontal assaults - Lee did not.
Indeed, that is what made Grant so different from the other Eastern Union commanders. He didn't run his ass back to Washington every time he lost a fight. He understood what Lincoln said about the Union army after...what was it, Chancellorsville? Paraphrasing, after the Union "lost" a battle, he said something like "Still, if we could "lose" three more fights like this, we will have won the war...".
Quote from: PDH
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist and tactician. Lee was alright in moral, though, so maybe the case should be made that he could be closer to Grant.
I thought that it was actually Sherman who was the better strategist, suggesting his march to the sea. His letters to Grant seem to indicate a very sharp person trying to convice someone he believes to be less able to grasp the whole of the situation.
I played through the tutorial again but for some reason I couldn't complete the instructions. For some reason I couldn't figure out how to form a division this time. So I decided to try a short scenario: Bull Run. The game ended in Stalemate after I (as the confederacy) captured Washington. Not bad considering I had no idea what I was doing.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 04:09:40 PM
And to be fair, one can argue that Grant actually had the troops to expend on frontal assaults - Lee did not.
Indeed, that is what made Grant so different from the other Eastern Union commanders. He didn't run his ass back to Washington every time he lost a fight. He understood what Lincoln said about the Union army after...what was it, Chancellorsville? Paraphrasing, after the Union "lost" a battle, he said something like "Still, if we could "lose" three more fights like this, we will have won the war...".
Agreed that Grant understood the strategic situation and knew he could afford troop losses. No question he was a better strategist than Lee. As a tactician, though, he didn't learn much. Anything less elegant than his approach to tactical problems is hard to imagine.
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 09:03:14 AM
Agreed that Grant understood the strategic situation and knew he could afford troop losses. No question he was a better strategist than Lee. As a tactician, though, he didn't learn much. Anything less elegant than his approach to tactical problems is hard to imagine.
He was pretty Russian in his tactical attacks the last year. Still, grand tactically, he was far and away superior to Lee, even in the last years bludgeoning - his end around at Petersburg, for example...elegance was not his metier, but it was also not called for.
If you want to talk about Russian tactics here, talk about Russian tactics. FFS this is a Great War game thread. Go moist your Grant and Lee pictures elsewhere.
How much of the blame for that can be laid at the feet of Meade? After all, Meade was still nominally in command, and, IIRC, Grant ran his orders through Meade. I've not looked into this, but it seems that at least some of the fault should rest with Meade.
Quote from: Tamas on March 31, 2010, 10:12:52 AM
If you want to talk about Russian tactics here, talk about Russian tactics. FFS this is a Great War game thread. Go moist your Grant and Lee pictures elsewhere.
No.
As of this moment, I am bored with the ACW hijack meme. I will reopen this when my taste for it comes back.
I will reopen it when my taste for annoying people who whine about thread hijacks fires up.
Oh, that is right now.
Quote from: Tamas on March 31, 2010, 10:12:52 AM
If you want to talk about Russian tactics here, talk about Russian tactics.
Fair enough.
So what is your view of the effect of the Russian fleet visit in 1863 on British and French decisions to refrain from pro-confederate intervention?
Is there a new demo for WW1?
Quote from: Berkut on March 31, 2010, 10:58:29 AM
I will reopen it when my taste for annoying people who whine about thread hijacks fires up.
Oh, that is right now.
I so knew you would gallop to the rescue. Had to see though :P
Quote from: Tamas on March 31, 2010, 11:50:17 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 31, 2010, 10:58:29 AM
I will reopen it when my taste for annoying people who whine about thread hijacks fires up.
Oh, that is right now.
I so knew you would gallop to the rescue. Had to see though :P
It doesn't take Nostradamus to figure out that the rest of the forum isn't going to respect your tiny tantrum Tamas.
Quote from: Berkut on March 31, 2010, 11:57:48 AM
Quote from: Tamas on March 31, 2010, 11:50:17 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 31, 2010, 10:58:29 AM
I will reopen it when my taste for annoying people who whine about thread hijacks fires up.
Oh, that is right now.
I so knew you would gallop to the rescue. Had to see though :P
It doesn't take Nostradamus to figure out that the rest of the forum isn't going to respect your tiny tantrum Tamas.
Indeed. The idea that one can lay claim to threads or topics and ban posts one doesn't like has never been realistic on languish.
One can talk through hijacks if one has something to say, and the hijacks generally run out of steam. if one isn't ready to talk through the hijack, the thread deserves to be hijacked because its main topic is over.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on March 31, 2010, 11:14:14 AM
Quote from: Tamas on March 31, 2010, 10:12:52 AM
If you want to talk about Russian tactics here, talk about Russian tactics.
Fair enough.
So what is your view of the effect of the Russian fleet visit in 1863 on British and French decisions to refrain from pro-confederate intervention?
:lol:
I think the expansion should use a mirror-image map of Europe. It's better for playability.
So when it this thing going to be done, anyway?
Quote from: grumbler on March 31, 2010, 09:03:14 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2010, 04:09:40 PM
And to be fair, one can argue that Grant actually had the troops to expend on frontal assaults - Lee did not.
Indeed, that is what made Grant so different from the other Eastern Union commanders. He didn't run his ass back to Washington every time he lost a fight. He understood what Lincoln said about the Union army after...what was it, Chancellorsville? Paraphrasing, after the Union "lost" a battle, he said something like "Still, if we could "lose" three more fights like this, we will have won the war...".
Agreed that Grant understood the strategic situation and knew he could afford troop losses. No question he was a better strategist than Lee. As a tactician, though, he didn't learn much. Anything less elegant than his approach to tactical problems is hard to imagine.
He learned it was a good idea to let good tacticians like Sherman have a fairly free hand.
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 11:40:03 AM
So when it this thing going to be done, anyway?
Should be all over by 1865.
Damnit JR, don't make Tamas lock the thread again!
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2010, 03:37:55 PM
Damnit JR, don't make Tamas lock the thread again!
Aren't you the mod of this board?
Quote from: grumbler on March 30, 2010, 12:15:09 PM
Quote from: PDH on March 30, 2010, 11:27:11 AM
Quote from: Lettow77 on March 30, 2010, 11:16:57 AM
If anything, the ratings of generals were preposterous. Grant being even comperable to Lee is absurd, and they were too hard on Halleck, Mcclellan and others.
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist and tactician. Lee was alright in moral, though, so maybe the case should be made that he could be closer to Grant.
I know that this is a troll, but just want to make sure that you understand that Grant did a "Pickett's Charge" about six times, with the same result every time. With tactics like that, who needs Lee?
Pickett's charge wasn't exactly Lee's first hopeless offensive either. Over the war he lost a higher percentage of his men than Grant.
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 31, 2010, 07:26:58 AM
Quote from: PDH
You are right. Grant should be rated way higher than Lee, as he was a far greater strategist and tactician. Lee was alright in moral, though, so maybe the case should be made that he could be closer to Grant.
I thought that it was actually Sherman who was the better strategist, suggesting his march to the sea. His letters to Grant seem to indicate a very sharp person trying to convice someone he believes to be less able to grasp the whole of the situation.
General William T. Sherman:
"It will be a thousand years before Grant's character is fully appreciated. Grant is the greatest soldier of our time if not all time... he fixes in his mind what is the true objective and abandons all minor ones. He dismisses all possibility of defeat. He believes in himself and in victory. If his plans go wrong he is never disconcerted but promptly devises a new one and is sure to win in the end. Grant more nearly impersonated the American character of 1861-65 than any other living man. Therefore he will stand as the typical hero of the great Civil War in America."
http://www.granthomepage.com/grantgeneral.htm
Well they always said Sherman was insane.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 23, 2010, 02:06:55 AM
General William T. Sherman:
"It will be a thousand years before Grant's character is fully appreciated. Grant is the greatest soldier of our time if not all time... he fixes in his mind what is the true objective and abandons all minor ones. He dismisses all possibility of defeat. He believes in himself and in victory. If his plans go wrong he is never disconcerted but promptly devises a new one and is sure to win in the end. Grant more nearly impersonated the American character of 1861-65 than any other living man. Therefore he will stand as the typical hero of the great Civil War in America."
http://www.granthomepage.com/grantgeneral.htm
No surprise - Grant basically made Sherman. In the early part of the war, Sherman was plagued by self-doubt and bouts of nervous exhaustion and behaved very erratically in early commands. Grant nonetheless placed great confidence in him and his abilities, even after Sherman's negligence at Shiloh (his first subordinate command under Grant IIRC) nearly led to the total rout of union forces in the area. I don't think Sherman would have ever become the Sherman of history were it not for Grant's unwavering support.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 23, 2010, 01:41:29 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 23, 2010, 02:06:55 AM
General William T. Sherman:
"It will be a thousand years before Grant's character is fully appreciated. Grant is the greatest soldier of our time if not all time... he fixes in his mind what is the true objective and abandons all minor ones. He dismisses all possibility of defeat. He believes in himself and in victory. If his plans go wrong he is never disconcerted but promptly devises a new one and is sure to win in the end. Grant more nearly impersonated the American character of 1861-65 than any other living man. Therefore he will stand as the typical hero of the great Civil War in America."
http://www.granthomepage.com/grantgeneral.htm
No surprise - Grant basically made Sherman. In the early part of the war, Sherman was plagued by self-doubt and bouts of nervous exhaustion and behaved very erratically in early commands. Grant nonetheless placed great confidence in him and his abilities, even after Sherman's negligence at Shiloh (his first subordinate command under Grant IIRC) nearly led to the total rout of union forces in the area. I don't think Sherman would have ever become the Sherman of history were it not for Grant's unwavering support.
Sherman performed very well at Shiloh (excepting being caught unaware by Johnston's attack, like every else) as a divisional commander, and was promoted afterward.
While your basic point that Grant made Sherman is likely true, I don't think it is really fair to dismiss his opinion of Grant - I've never heard the man described as being a kiss ass or anything.
Quote from: Berkut on April 23, 2010, 03:28:54 PM
Sherman performed very well at Shiloh (excepting being caught unaware by Johnston's attack, like every else) as a divisional commander, and was promoted afterward.
He perfomed very well after his initial, nearly catastrophic error. A superior could take two views of his performance, particularly in light of his prior rep - either emphasize Sherman's cool thinking and tenacity once caught with his pants down, or harp on the errors that forced him into a heroic performance to save his division's bacon. Grant (and Halleck) chose to focus on the positive and helped set Sherman on the path to future glory. Another superior might have been more narrow-minded.
QuoteWhile your basic point that Grant made Sherman is likely true, I don't think it is really fair to dismiss his opinion of Grant - I've never heard the man described as being a kiss ass or anything.
My intention was entirely the opposite - to point out that Sherman had good reason to make his statement, beyond merely saying nice things about a former colleague. One of the valuable attributes of a commander is the ability to recognize talented subordinates, to use them and relate to them in a way that emphasizes their strengths, and minimizes their weaknesses. Sherman more than any else had good reason to recognize and appreciate Grant's ability in that regard.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on April 23, 2010, 03:57:39 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 23, 2010, 03:28:54 PM
Sherman performed very well at Shiloh (excepting being caught unaware by Johnston's attack, like every else) as a divisional commander, and was promoted afterward.
He perfomed very well after his initial, nearly catastrophic error. A superior could take two views of his performance, particularly in light of his prior rep - either emphasize Sherman's cool thinking and tenacity once caught with his pants down, or harp on the errors that forced him into a heroic performance to save his division's bacon. Grant (and Halleck) chose to focus on the positive and helped set Sherman on the path to future glory. Another superior might have been more narrow-minded.
Well, this "catastrophic" error was one shared by pretty much everyone at Shiloh, including Grant. So I don't think there was much change of him getting singled out for the criticism of it. Perhaps a superior who was looking for a scapegoat might have blamed Sherman, but the good guys won, so no scapegoat was needed.
You make it sound like Sherman had some kind of particular fuck up at Shiloh - while he did not buck the trend of complacency that the army had, it wasn't like he was responsible for it. And he did in fact respond very well once it became clear that they were in serious trouble.
Quote
QuoteWhile your basic point that Grant made Sherman is likely true, I don't think it is really fair to dismiss his opinion of Grant - I've never heard the man described as being a kiss ass or anything.
My intention was entirely the opposite - to point out that Sherman had good reason to make his statement, beyond merely saying nice things about a former colleague. One of the valuable attributes of a commander is the ability to recognize talented subordinates, to use them and relate to them in a way that emphasizes their strengths, and minimizes their weaknesses. Sherman more than any else had good reason to recognize and appreciate Grant's ability in that regard.
Fair enough.
I know I will be dismissed as fanboi, but playing the beta tonight, just had a great Western Front playout as Entente. The AI has been getting some serious improvements compared to its pre-Gold level.
AI Germany was using the Schlieffen Plan, and their 1st Army was pushing hard toward Paris while 2nd and 3rd put pressure on the French left flank.
At the start of September, the leading stack of the German 1st was 2 provinces from Paris and there was previously no force to counter them, as the French 5th was heavily pounded by the other Germans. The BEF just became available at the coast, so I rushed them toward the Germans, but first I had to intercept the Krauts with the French 6th Army, in the forests of Compiegne. The AI pressed on the attack almost until the final round, but I managed to force a retreat, and since the BEF arrived to their departure place, they were pushed back to 3 hexes from Paris.
So as of November, I managed to chase the Germans back toward the Belgian-French border, but I need to abandon most of my positions on the German border south, being in danger of the Germans reaching Verdun and Toul before me, and it would be a real shame to lose those forts to siege before trench warfare kicks in.
Quote from: Tamas on April 23, 2010, 04:57:37 PM
I know I will be dismissed as fanboi, but playing the beta tonight, just had a great Western Front playout as Entente. The AI has been getting some serious improvements compared to its pre-Gold level.
AI Germany was using the Schlieffen Plan, and their 1st Army was pushing hard toward Paris while 2nd and 3rd put pressure on the French left flank.
At the start of September, the leading stack of the German 1st was 2 provinces from Paris and there was previously no force to counter them, as the French 5th was heavily pounded by the other Germans. The BEF just became available at the coast, so I rushed them toward the Germans, but first I had to intercept the Krauts with the French 6th Army, in the forests of Compiegne. The AI pressed on the attack almost until the final round, but I managed to force a retreat, and since the BEF arrived to their departure place, they were pushed back to 3 hexes from Paris.
So as of November, I managed to chase the Germans back toward the Belgian-French border, but I need to abandon most of my positions on the German border south, being in danger of the Germans reaching Verdun and Toul before me, and it would be a real shame to lose those forts to siege before trench warfare kicks in.
Fanboi! :blurgh:
Wake me up when it has PBEM.
Is West still South. I hurt my neck looking at that map.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 23, 2010, 11:46:07 PM
Is West still South. I hurt my neck looking at that map.
No, now it's East.
Quote from: Razgovory on April 23, 2010, 11:46:07 PM
Is West still South. I hurt my neck looking at that map.
:lol:
Everytime I looked at the pre gold map I was in danger of sliding off my chair and hitting the floor.
Quote from: Habbaku on April 23, 2010, 09:39:17 PM
Wake me up when it has PBEM.
Nah. as much as I would love it, PBEM couldn't work, barely works with Cyberboard as well. On average about 6 e-mail exchanges per battle when you have at least 7-8 battles a turn in 1914, and you did not even count the various interception and reaction chances.
Wait, it doesn't do PBEM???
Never mind then. Damn.
Anyone up for a game of PoG?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2010, 08:57:01 AM
Wait, it doesn't do PBEM???
Never mind then. Damn.
It does have TCP/IP MP though...
Speaking of which, altough CB is also pretty slow with this game, due to the fact that you can release ownership and give instructions and shit, it is not entirely hopeless for PBEM, unlike the computer version.
So I raise the question to Habs and Berk: WANNA PBEM THE BOARDGAME?!
I dunno, you performance in our TK game was not encouraging.
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 04:57:08 AM
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
It wasn't fucked up, it was rotated :P The reasoning was that with this normal aligning there is more "dead space" the engine must display and shit without it being actually used for anything.
Quote from: Tamas on April 25, 2010, 05:16:42 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 04:57:08 AM
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
It wasn't fucked up, it was rotated :P The reasoning was that with this normal aligning there is more "dead space" the engine must display and shit without it being actually used for anything.
So basic game design FIAL. At least they realized their mistake.
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 05:28:48 AM
Quote from: Tamas on April 25, 2010, 05:16:42 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 04:57:08 AM
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
It wasn't fucked up, it was rotated :P The reasoning was that with this normal aligning there is more "dead space" the engine must display and shit without it being actually used for anything.
So basic game design FIAL. At least they realized their mistake.
The design of the game was fine. The design of the customers was FIAL. :lol:
Quote from: grumbler on April 25, 2010, 07:10:01 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 05:28:48 AM
Quote from: Tamas on April 25, 2010, 05:16:42 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 04:57:08 AM
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
It wasn't fucked up, it was rotated :P The reasoning was that with this normal aligning there is more "dead space" the engine must display and shit without it being actually used for anything.
So basic game design FIAL. At least they realized their mistake.
The design of the game was fine. The design of the customers was FIAL. :lol:
That's what you get for being against Intelligent Design (TM).
Quote from: grumbler on April 25, 2010, 07:10:01 PM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 05:28:48 AM
Quote from: Tamas on April 25, 2010, 05:16:42 AM
Quote from: The Brain on April 25, 2010, 04:57:08 AM
What was the reasoning behind making the map fucked up at first? Did they think no one would notice?
It wasn't fucked up, it was rotated :P The reasoning was that with this normal aligning there is more "dead space" the engine must display and shit without it being actually used for anything.
So basic game design FIAL. At least they realized their mistake.
The design of the game was fine. The design of the customers was FIAL. :lol:
I find your lack of customer focus disturbing.