Rabelesius

That's a superb answer, thanks. How about the second question: new railroads and the changing of the map? I notice that the Basra event changes some borders on the map, is that also possible for the building of the Berlin-Bagdad railway?

I have not seen any meaningful combat in this theater, yet. How to attack the Ottomans there? Second question, can the game engine handle map changes like the slow building of railroads that happened historically in the Near East (the Bagdad-Berlin railway)?

Hi, is it possible to have multiple activations of the game on the same machine? I am asking because I want to update to 1.03 and have a game to finish on 1.02?

I am also a bit confused. Much effort placed there and no real progress. They enter always very late and then not in the same helpful manner like historically. I guess there is some connection to progress on another front which seems to be overpowered. Maybe something on the Russian front?

I think I know what you mean, the pdf for the decision events. Is there also something for the little events like the worker strikes and such?

Is there an event list and their respective effects somewhere? Thanks.

I can only add that I see that you guys are listening and acting on feedback. Excellent!

Excellent, thanks. The AI gave me a good thumping in my latest game where I tried to simultaneously kick out Russia in 1916 and take Paris as well. Now, the AI is at the Rhine and Russia has not yet collapsed...if it will, it's all for nothing, as I will have lost the war as the Germans anyway... Kudos for the quality of the AI.

Thanks for the swapping tip as well. It's not documented in the manual?

The manual is a bit cryptic with respect to supply calculation. The supply value of towns and such is determined to be between 1 and 10 according to the strength of the town. It seems to me the only way to reduce the strength of towns is to strategically bomb the place with bombers, airships or rail artillery. Is this also accomplished by heavy artillery? I also see that supply values do not diminish from being cut off. Is this correct? There is no link needed for a town to be forever in supply...this feels awkward as supply was a huge consideration in the East and might have be the big factor for the Great Retreat of the Russian army, isn't it? I gather from the rules that HQs draw from a supply source. Is the distance also an issue or does the distance not matter? The game accurately punished the players for attacking to far and going out on a limb. However, given the above there seems to be not enough punishment for allowing yourself to be encircled, if that happens in a town/city etc. What do you think?

I never saw this as a huge problem as you don't have many MPPs to spare for operational movement anyway....but a limit would be nice simulating rail limits. I am not so sure about the loss of readiness. The turns are quite long and troops moving by rail would be disrupted only during travel and not necessarily after when they reach an area where they can regroup.

Ah, you did not attack at all in the West, I see, sorry. I think it's not viable as the Entente can use other methods and you won't succeed knocking out the Russians fast enough I fear. Historically, it never was an option as we know, so it's a nice what-if.

yes, the importance of artillery only dawns on me now...:-) thanks for the tips...I am using them now.

Glabro, I think it's absolutely necessary to attack in the West as the Entente. Otherwise, the shifting becomes too easy as you say. You need to put pressure on the Germans in the West. That was an often discussed topic at the strategic level during the war.

I agree. In my current WWI game, I feel like digging out those Russians from their towns with a spoon even though they are surrounded for months.

I have a suggestion for this. Can't you implement a script whereby the occupation of certain hexes in the East is mandatory to avoid NM loss? This would force Germany and Austria-Hungary to keep forces there.

Yes, I saw that now.Thanks.

Whilst browsing through this board, this excellent thread came up. I must say I concur with most observations of Hyazinth. Was this considered in the upcoming AI changes?

Excellent answers, thanks

Thanks for your answer

Hi Bill, I do not quite understand the answer. Why should Germany be aggressive against the new countries? Historically, the Germans kept large forces in the East. Wouldn't it be possible to force the German to have troops in the Ukraine to keep the grain supplies, i.e. a garrison requirement which, if not met, leads to loss of supplies?

One last question, I hope: The AI difficulty setting affects certain calculations (but not combats I read). How about scripting of purchasing/popping up of units? I noticed that in my games against the AI, the AI seems to have much more troops than expectec. Hubert, can you elaborate a bit on what exactly is changed for the AI? Free corps/detachements? Thanks for your patience with my many questions.

Quick question (another one!): If I place multiple subs on a convoy line, does that also increase the amount of lost MPPs? I seemed to notice it does not? In other words, is every sub calculated for MPP losses?

Does diplomacy work the same as tech advance? I.e. the percentage increases until the country enters?

This is an interesting thread. Was there ever any change in that from 1.0? I think the requirement to garrison the East with large forces as historically is a good suggestion. I think the Central Powers kept over a million soldiers in the East until the eventual end of the war.