Jump to content

Rabelesius

Members
  • Content Count

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rabelesius

  1. I have the same issue and I am really unhappy. Future purchases will not happen as long as this is not resolved.
  2. I do not quite understand you? Which patch to you refer to? Currently, unrestricted warfare is a good morale booster for the Germans, but has the downside with the US entering rather fast. I would say it's depending on the overall situation...if Russia is on her knees in 1916, it does not hurt to start a real strong submarine campaign as it gives you the necessary NM buffer for the Western offensives.
  3. Bill, also have a look again on the historicity. I guess you should not have a total victory for the White (taking Moscow and Petrograd) a real historical win. At least, it should be really improbable. For me, a White win would be a longer holdout than historical. In 1920, the Whites should be on the ropes everywhere and the focus of the game should shift to the Russo-Polish War. So, this is the most difficult game situation to design: the fighting withdrawal and holdout. I am sure you can do this with this engine as the WWI scenarios show.
  4. A nice AAR. It's not the Russian Civil War (not even close), but a nice AAR anyway.
  5. Thanks. That can help a lot. I guess what the game really needs is a harsh victory condition where eliminating the Whites at the historical date is the goal. There is a boardgame called Reds! which simulates that pretty well.
  6. Hi guys, after my experience with the rather ahistorical Balkans War scenario (it just does not work as simulation and I am sure Bill and his team are working on fixes as we speak), it's the Russian Civil War scenario I am looking at: 1) It is not working as historical 2) The Whites are SERIOUSLY overpowered in this one. Kolchak succumbed in mid of 1919. The Southern Whites lost the war also in autumn of 1919. The big Cavalry Army smashed them then. In the game, it takes too long to maneuver the Cavalry Army to the South. I am also not sure about Wrangel's fight in the Crimea. 3) The Bolsheviks have nothing serious to threaten any of the fronts and large scale concentrations are difficult to pull off. 4) SCWWI's combat system does not work that well in the theatre. I believe that high odds attacks of large forces against superior quality should have equal outcomes. However, in the current engine, there are simply not enough troops for the Bolshevik to make his manpower superiority apparent. All in all, so far, this scenario needs LOTS of tightening and changes. On the plus side, the historical events and the Allied intervention are depicted very accurately so far. You can see from the AAR posted above the mentioned problems.
  7. Yes. But now I am out of activations. The saga continues... :-)
  8. Hi, thanks so much. I contacted Tech support. They told me it could be also because of the recent upgrade of my PC. I am today uninstalling everything and installing it again (both SCWWI and WWI BT). Here is what I did in my first try: 1) I upgraded my PC to a new mainboard and CPU (and a fantastic MSI7970 graphics card), so basically almost all is new 2) I downloaded the BT expansion and activated it. Upon starting, BT required me to do the basic installation of the basic game as BT only runs with it installed. Major DOH! moment for me, so I went back to my old emails and found the download link of the basic game 3) I tried to download the basic game and the link had expired 4) I contacted tech support and they graciously expanded my link for 7 days. 5) In the meantime, I had found another setup.exe file of the basic game on an old HD. 6) I installed the setup.exe file on the new computer, but never started SCWWI one single time as basic game. I just installed it. I did not use the download link. 7) Breakthrough now did not complain about a lack of the basic game and started one time. 8) Next day, I wanted to start BT, I get the error message. Here I am. Sounds complicated but I think I screwed up the process with the intermediate installation and non-activation of the basic game. Now, I have tried the basic game and it works. BT still gives me the error message. Hope that helps.
  9. Hi Hubert, team, I get an error message always when I want to start up Breakthrough. The funny activation screen pops up and it just says: Error: errorCode errorMessage Please contact your vendor for assistance. I had a previous installation and copied the old exe files. I installed the BT normally. Then I entered my BT code and yesterday it worked. Today, nothing. Weird. What shall I do?
  10. Ok, I played the scenario on Beginner against the Turkish AI. My recommendations to make this scenario more like the historical one are: 1) The First Balkans War went until May 1913. Mid 1913 should be the time limit. 2) If we look at the historical positioning of the Bulgarians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bulgarian_Army_FBW.JPG), they are understrength in front of Adrianople. This is also, why no real siege of Adrianople happens I believe (at least, I could not do this). 3) Saloniki surrendered in November 1912. Impossible in the current game. My first recommendations: Make the Turks much weaker and add Bulgarian artillery in front of Adrianople. Introduce a Turkish fortified line in front of Istanbul, so no overrun there is possible. What do you think?
  11. I think that Balkans War is too easy on the Turks, especially against the Bulgarians. I think the Turks need more fortresses in front of Istanbul, however. For the Verdun scenario, I only played against the AI. Against human players, it might look completely different.
  12. I volunteer to test out the Balkans War one as I know a lot about it. I would play as AI first and then human vs human. Let me try to schedule that in this week.
  13. What a neat package....lots of interesting scenarios and lots to play through. Due to some travel I can make some first comments on the scenarios: 1) Balkans War: I guess the Bulgarians are underrated in this one. It is very tough to emulate their progress, I also see some trouble with the Greeks. Maybe needs some tweaking for balance, but let's wait a bit first. 2) Verdun: Unfortunately, so far the only ahistorical scenario. Germans have it way too difficult in the first days and then way too easy. Maybe better human vs. human. AI is not very clever in this one. 3) Russian Civil War: So far, brilliant. 4) Call to Arms new: A fantastic scenario made even better. 5) 1914 Divisional West: Another hit. I only played three turns, but it showed the potential. This one will be definitely played human vs human. Excellent. So far, only one miss, but 4 straight hits. Well done!
  14. >That is one of the weaknesses of the NM concept: even if Russia doesn┬┤t not loose ground or troops, its NM will decrease.. and this forces the EC player to do something. Actually, the NM system is brilliant as it brings war weariness to bear. I would not dare to think what gamey players would do without it. It would not be WWI for sure.
  15. I guess 1.06 is included when you buy Breakthrough, right? I just ask when to start a new campaign
  16. Again, without having the actual calculation models (e.g. how much NM is deducted and so on), we can only speculate.
  17. I think we need the calculation model behind this to understand it correctly.
  18. I think also the effect on the British morale of the submarine campaign is pretty strong. However, the early entry of the US nullifies that effect. Should be kept that way for the time being.
  19. Well, your opponent knows that he could also just simply give up, eh? I mean, the Swiss are not going to save him in this position :-).
  20. I think the tank is trenches, but you are right, these things are never properly explained.
  21. I must say so far the balance seems to be good. I am in the midst of a full force submarine campaign against Great Britain and the effects are dramatic. With just 7 u-boats, the British are under heavy stress and almost completely have to drop out as fighting power on the Western Front. The downside is an entry of the US December 1915 already! I will update you on the further development of the campaign.
  22. Hi guys, I would like to start a discussion about the changes in 1.04. The first ones I can comment on are the Belgium changes, the mountains and the changes to the U-boat war. 1) Belgium. My initial impression is reinforced. Capturing Belgium still is possible, but at a much higher cost in time and resources. The Germans usually can achieve the same gains as in 1.03, but they need approximately two turns more to achieve them. Now, this gives us the meaningful option of a) attacking and conquering Belgium or doing the historical advance. However, this historical advance puts the CP into the risk of being flanked. 2) The U-Boats. They are now really important. In my currrent game against Sharkman, my U-boats wage an aggressive war against England and German morale and British NM are really affected greatly. Britain stands at way below 90 in mid 1915, whereas the Germans still have about 90 and gain app. 1 NM per turn. 3) The mountain changes: excellent, simply excellent. The formerly impregnable mountains now can be challenged. The Serbian front finally works as historical. The Caucasus as well. All in all, exciting stuff which needs to be explored further. I hope others can comment.
  23. Was the Belgian corps always that strong in Brussels? It certainly is much more difficult to dislodge than before. This makes the Blitzkrieg in Belgium which happened before much harder! Well done!
  24. Great job on listening to the community with 1.04. Now, I will start a new campaign and see where the changes lead to! Thanks again!
×
×
  • Create New...