Sapare

Once more back to the front with me. Still the same email of Nwssbronies@gmail.com , I can play pretty much any campaign from any of the SC2 games, so just send me an email and we can arrange a match.

Ports with an enemy ship adjectent do not give off supply. The port still counts as having a value of 10(which is why you can restock your ship) but the ship itself is getting non of that supply each turn, which is why you can wear it down to 0. This rule was implemented sometime down the line(might have been with Breakthrough) so it might not be documented in the manual.(I have not checked) This is most relevant to land units who will also gain no supply from ports that are "blocked" by an enemy ship. This is to allow you to use your ships to hinder ports without having to bomb them down(which is extremely costly and time consuming).

I really wish to play another game as CP and try a strong OE fleet approach before promising you can, but I do feel confident in my earlier statment that OE can overcome the russian fleet if handeld correctly and they are given the Osman. If germany does a Russia first stragey and the Ottomans break free when the war starts(maybe 3 or 4 turns to get their fleet repaired and ready first), at which point they should have a more powerful fleet then the russian. They should be hard to contain after that point and for every turn the Ottoman mines make money that is extra MPP left over they could spend on keeping their fleet ahead the russian. As for he NM lost of the Osman, I don't really consider NM a big factor in an overal game strategy, they only become relevant late in the war when things start breaking away. Not to mention that the same applies to every Russian ship damaged, and if you sink one you even get NM back. Yes Russia can build more ships then the Ottoman, they have more MPP, but if Germany and Austria is keeping them busy I don't see them investing their money into this area.

I will admit that I don't have much constructive to add to this conversation(most of all in my very tired state), but I have been lurking in the topic and I really want to express this opinion becuase it surprised me so. I always thought that it was considered the obviously WORSE choice to give the OE the Dreadnaught, so if now the meta has shifted into people thinking it is the obviously better choice to give them the ship(without any balances changes to the topic), I think that speaks for a good fine balance. Same for Germany, in my mind the game keeps shifting between being German favored and then Entente favored. I believe it is German favored if the players are high skill but Entente when they are newer. I do not intent it to be snobish, but playing Entente is much easier and straight forward. Playing CP is all about pacing, you start with the weight of units and Entente has to react, if you can keep deciding where the fights happen and when, you can keep the Entete player off balance, but if you have any mayor screw up you fall on the defensive and will be crushed. If both players play a near perfect game the Entente won't be able to overtake Germany and the whole game will always be controlled by CP. As for OE being always useless, they have gotten some nerfes in the last few patches so my experience on them might be a little oudated(though the nerves are rather minor), but I have indeed seen them take Egypt in a game before, and the Russian Caucasus(though never as far as Basra, normally you take the port town and push up into the oil across the coast because without railway its awkward to defend for a Russian). Obviously they can not do a lot, but their presence alone is the value, they tie down enemy units. OE is the CP version of Itally, but while Itally can suceed at more they are also much more dangerous to have. Itally is fragile and Rome close to the border,(I have lost it to an enemy in 15 once, though that was an extremely unexpected early attack) pushing up the middle east and all the way till Ottoman NM falls apart takes at least till 17 in most cases, and Constantinople way too long if you can't come over Romania. If I had to complain about OE, it is the fact that pushing through the rest of North Afrika atfer taking Egypt seems to take way too long. I am not sure about the historical aspect of it, but I find it strange that it can take about a year to walk across Lybia alone.(the only option really is using boats for your HQ's because they walk so slow, but then your troops are screwed if he defends the important port towns with a detachment) Not sure if there is a way to fix this, or it ever should be fixed, but it does make the OE seem somewhat useless after Russia surrenders and Egypt has fallen, they are too weak to fight at a Western front but too slow to keep going in Afrika. On a note of why I always considered the Osman event a no brainer was this. Ottoman navi has potential against the Russian navi, but by the time you get it stocked up for battle(the other battleship needs to be upgraded and you probably want at least 1 sub) the Russians get too many other ships and you can't ever out arm him. If you start with an extra upgraded battleship you should have more weight then the Russian in that sea and can push out, stock up your destroyer and put in the port close to the mine, denying submarines from screwing with it. If you are careful and can avoid hitting submarines you should be able to keep the Russian on his side of the sea, keeping your mine intact and denying landing ships(making you feel a lot more secure about coastal towns) Alternatively you can stock up the Austrian fleet and force the french/british ships to be tied down against them, allowing the Ottomans to break free and either combine with Austria or simply be one of those things the Entente needs to be careful off, they have to ship a lot of corp and hq through that ocean afterall. In short, that one battleship gives the Ottoman's a whole new dimension to fight on(and even if you do not use it, the entente needs to be weary of it), and hey, their ships somehow are just as good as any other nation's ships, so at least you are not rellying on those rubish 3/3 corp. Lastly, it delays entry by 5 turns ish? The trade route is only 30 mpp(correct me if wrong) per turn, thats 150 russian MPP, I don't see it as such a big deal.(defending Caucasus is not really affected by this, the starting units there are enough.) The ship is worth about 500 mpp and Ottoman's have a much smaller MPP pool. Sorry, I ranted afteral, too tired for this.

I am interested in some stratigic command. I am game for any longer scenario really.(SoE,WW1,WW2,AoC, East Africa, and so on) Most of my experience is in WW1 and some in AoD but I am also interested in trying out new scenarios in multiplayer. Contact me at Nwssbronies@gmail.com

Not sure if this is the reason, but if the system works how I think it does, then the Turkey war entry indeed will have a big impact, as with its entry a lot of other nations 'surrender' to the Central Powers.(all those nations that are part of the Ottoman empire)

Just a quick note that if Austria Hungeria agrees to give up Trieste(and the other territories) to Italy while NOT being in possession of Vienna, then it won't have the NM affect on them. They will still have the desertion and supply scrips hit them, but he NM damage will not happen till they retake their capital, at which point it will trigger.

I don"t know if you guys still plan to change anything on this game, but for the record, any chance you could change it so it always increases the readiness(as long as you hold Belgrade), not just if a CP unit is inside Belgrade? It seems needlessly specific and the game never informs you of this. I (who has played over 20 games probably, though most before the changes to Bulgarian war entry) never knew this was a requirement. It also seems counter intuitive as you would push further down into Serbia after taking Belgrade, possibly leaving it behind. If a partisan detachment spawns every time you dont have a unit in Belgrade, then ignore this, I had not really considered if that was the reason it didn't increase.

Due to the silence that is going on in the WW1 side of things, I'll join you guys in WW2. My email adress is nwssbronies@gmail.com

Cities, ports, oil wells,mines,fortresses. You were correct in your assumption, but Sweden has a fortress in Lulea, where it has its mines.(border to Finland/Russia) Russia has 1 just northwest of Warsaw and one in Brest-litvosk. And besides the ones you have already mentioned, that is all of the fortresses. So yea, yay.

Interesting, I'll be keeping my eyes on this. I have always considered it a honor rule that Germany had to DOW on Belgium, but of course that is not a given for everyone. Now for some self indulgent guessing, feel free to ignore if you want to: From my expectations, I think this game will come to big part down to the war in Serbia. Why? Because England will have a field day marching into the Ottoman's now(most of all with the changes the Ottoman's got in that last patch, though I have only read them, not tested them). The German's most certainly will need to send reinforcements down there, and they can't till Nish is captured and Bulgeria has joined. My warning with Russia first strategy is this: Russia tends to stick around longer then you expect it to. And unlike France it at some point becomes very inefficient to throw more troops at the front. Their important cities are simply too far away for you to reach them in a reasonable time frame, St.Petersburg is borderline impossible to capture in WW1. And while you will destroy a lot of troops and NM early on, the Russian's would lose them in due time anyway, like this you do a lot of damage early and then Russia can just avoid fights and stall for a long time. Loss of NM just is not that strong from lost cities because of how spread apart they are. As such, the question will arise, do you stop your push after taking the important border territories(Warsaw, Riga) or do you go WW2 on them and try for St.Petersburg,Moscow and whatever Stalingrad was named back then? I don't know which is better, but I always been a Western front man(or Ottoman), so of course I hold my biases. As for France, I have seen them become OP if they are avoided for too long, because you can just invest a whole year in teching Production and industry and then be an early America. Otherwise they can focus on Greece(which could screw the whole Railway to Ottoman's thing) or Help in Ottoman Territories directly. Or(though I have not done this so idk the outcome) they can take Spain and make the game extremely weird. So yea, I be curious to see how this goes, I have seen Russia first, but never a no Belgium 'Russia First' invasion.

After a very prolonged break from this game I want to try my hand at it. I have a good amount of experience, so I should be a strong challenge to anyone. 1914 Call to Arms – Breakthrough Edition 1.05(is the newest, right?) I normally play mirror matches, so I would prefer doing that. (Victory being to whoever ever achieves major victory first, or based on who surrenders first) I normally use Skype to send the files, its easy and fast, but if you prefer email I can do that too. My email adress is nwssbronies@gmail.com

That was the key I was looking for, my bad for not finding them in the manual. (though, this list is good to have sitting in this topic anyway, some people(cough cough) just dont know how to look up manuals and find what they are looking for.) Thankyou.

That video makes me embarrassed to watch... but we never stop learning and improving, or that is the hope at least. Wanted to say thank you for posting this here, I am glad if it helped anyone with the basics of the game. I have recently picked up assault on democracy and came here trying to figure out what the 'show turn summary' key was? I skimmed the topic but never saw this mentioned, and I consider it about as important as the 'S' key

Just a quick note that 'The Last Democracy' campaign has a bug where Russian units can not be restocked/operated/anything like that, on Chinese territory.

I just wanted to add for point 1/2 that, if you play the game a lot you will find that shelling units is actually extremely unefficient and probably something you want to refrain from unless you plan to start an offensive at that area.(You will give the unit you are bombing more experience then you are doing damage, and experience is very powerful) If you shell towns and ports too much your ships will quickly start taking noteable amount of damage, and ships are really freaking expansive, i think it is balanced. Keep in mind, when your ship is attacking a corps, it is not just some day worth of shelling, technically this equal to a week(or whatever the time-frame is) worth of supporting fire. Generally, I dont think point 1 or 2 (or 3 for that matter) should be changed as they serve the gameplay well. making ships useless against ground land targets would mean that there be no reason to even invest in your fleet.(and making ships be able to easily destroy other ships in ports would make AH/Germany get fleet rushed every single game)

(For the record, these forums are extremely buggy, but that is unrelated to this post) I see, sorry that I kinda misunderstood this. but as an outsider view on the whole loop thing. Why exactly is having to send units by transport a bad thing? Why does that force the existence of loops?

I believe this already exists. The UK to Russia convoy does exactly that in WW1, and the US to UK too. But what does that have to to with loops?(obviously, these work by sending money from one nation to the other, rather then outright buying units for the other nation, so if you want that, yea that doesn't exist yet)

I am sorry if this was answered in some AAR or updated post, I actually had no played this since release and only picked it up again a week ago: I noticed that in the Barbarossa to Berlin map the Western Allies do not start with a NM bar or a flag, or any of the normal stats. I was really surprised by the fact that they show up about a year into the game and I did not know the engine can actually do that because I have not seen any other cases in the SC (at least this gen of it) games where this happens. Point of this topic is to ask if this was actually a new feature put in for AoC or if there simple has never been a reason before to use this. And because I like to ramble and this forum is dead: Now that we have a map all the way to Berlin, wouldn't it be cool to add France and make us actually manually fight the 2nd front later in the game, rather then just telling us about how it is happening? I admittedly haven't played Barbarossa to Berlin far enough to know what the Western Allies will start doing, I only played the original Barbarossa campaign when the game first came out And 3rdly(and lastly), kinda important: The map has a glitch where you cant use the trains into and out of Italy(there is a train line there and I am pretty sure it is supposed to work , but it doesn't): You can't even get out of Italy by land, the tiles are too close at the edge of the map and you cant walk over them.

I want to add to this that you do need to keep the Italian ability to move the units as, while not viable from AH to surprise invade Italy, the German's can do it very efficiently if Italy does not move its units into position. At least that is from my experience in the tournament,(which is now two years old I think? Will there ever be another?) where in both the semi finals and the finals this was used by a player(forgot his name), by not having moved the Italian units into position I lost Venice and northern Italy quickly and with it the whole war. If you remove the ability to move Italy units pre war/till a certain mobilization, you would have to force the units to spawn at the AH border when the war starts, which in turn would remove a lot of player options, as now Italy will always start with its troops at the border(removing surprise attack completely) and Italy can't do some fancy over sea invasion as their troops are bound to the border. Generally, I think in this case more freedom is good.

I will add to that, pretty sure it isn't supposed to do that. Ambushes are supposed to work like fleet interceptions(or so I always assumed it did), aka, it stops the units movement for that turn. If it retreats it retreats, which is fine. But I think the thing causing the problem is this: You give movement order, it has 3 ap, moves 2 fields(only on the 3rd field will it take away all 3 ap), is intercepted, which normally would make it stop moving and take away all AP,BUT it retreats, which doesn't have a 'remove AP' trigger set to it(because to retreat you need to be attacked, which means it isn't your turn) and as such it moves 1 field back(or to wherever) and still has the starting 3 AP. I have obviously no idea how the game is coded and this is just a laymans best guess on what would cause this bug, but hey, no harm in voicing it.

Just to add my opinion(though I don't have anything to add as it is a straightforward one) I agree with Bill101 original post in the logical reasoning and I feel that it makes enough sense that it never felt like 'this is gamey'(what is gamey is using ships after a withdraw from war and all that, but we already had that topic and I 'think' that was fixed). And really, WW1(this game) is at such near perfect balance that I don't think a major overhaul in game mechanics and the way things work should be done for a historical change that I could actually make the counter argument for. If major neutrals(but alligned) nations did not spot units then I would question why they were such a useless sag of potatos and completely oblivious to the world around them just before joining a war. A follow up post did state the 'at 30% mobilization' and that sounds reasonable, but really, was Italy ever considering joining the Germans/AUstria/hungeria in the war? Even at the time when they did not want to join, their interest would generally be toward Austria/Hungeria losing, so I don't see why they would not let such simple information as fleet locations be passed on. (unrelated note, I need to play this game again.. been about a year since I last played a match of it..)

I have not actually played AOD yet but reading this discussion I wanted to add my bit to loops. I think loops should be taken out as I don't really see the reason they exist in the first place. The reason seems to be that we don't want to increase the AP because then that would ruin the DD's on sub hunt works?(The micromanagment argument seems silly when in WW1 you have countless ships you have to move as the British and I don't see anyone complaining about that) Subs have a silence system where they only move half distance, why can't we give DD's(and other ships) a 'counter silence' where they can only move half distance or they will not uncover/attack a sub. Or you can give ships 'forced march' and if they run into a unit while using it they take massive damage(akin to an ambush 2x). Generally, unless we are bending the scale of the world there should be some way to make this system work. Also, I don't know too much about fleet movement but I can assume part of it is the fact that you can move faster on an open ocean than in the Mediterranean. You could simulate that the same way you do roads on land(maybe in SC3 if the 2 engine can't handle it) where movement takes 2 AP in some kind of waters and only 1 in others. All of these are ideas to work around the inconsistency of fleet movement systems without having to teleport units around the map. I am sure given enough thoughts a combination of minor changes and new features could fix the problem. If you wonder why I even have an opinion on Loops if I havn't played AOD, they exist in WW1 as well and even in an europe/east USA only map they seemed annoying to deal with. IF we keep loops, there should be added conditions to when a loop can or can not be used, such as America only being able to use the 'to Japan' loop if it controls certain islands between Japan and USA.

Lose your setup file for WW1 and don't have the original email with the download key, what do you do? I have the bitmap problem of the other topic in this forum and I can't reinstall the game, as such I can't start Breakthrough. I still got the Breakthrough file. Over the years I am pretty sure I switched accounts for the battlefront webside(not the forum) and I can't find my License Key/Download key.(It does not seem to be stored in my emails anymore) I will continue digging to see if I can find my setup exe somewhere but I am wonder if there is any course of action I can take if I don't end up finding either of the two. I might just end up rebuying the game as I have installed and played it countless times as it is, but I first wanted to inquire about this so I know if I have to.

I have heard this argument before and I will make the same statment I did when this last came up. Airplanes/baloons need to be able to block hexes/cities. They are the only types of units you can mobilize just about anywhere and at reasonable cost, which stops the whole 'lone horse unit running all around France(or more commonly Russia) caping towns' syndrome that sometimes happens (in lower skill matches). Air units stats are already so bad in ground combat that you can't ever efficiently use them on a front line basis and I think that is fair.