Bill101

I think with Gallipoli the trick here is to hope that you can lull your opponent into a false sense of security, so that hopefully late in the game when the Ottomans aren't doing well (here's hoping!) you might be able to land at Gallipoli and find that he's evacuated the garrison. Alternatively, the threat of a landing here should keep some Ottoman units in the area, even if they are only Detachments, and as a result it should be worthwhile making the enemy think that a landing could occur. Obviously this applies more to playing other humans than against the AI.

The settings in WWI campaigns are different from WWII campaigns, in the sense that in WWI the % increment per turn is slightly higher. As a result you may notice a difference between the WWI campaigns and 1939 Storm over Europe? Also, as the increments decrease in both wars the higher the tech level you are researching, it should be the case that the results will get less predictable the higher the tech. Luck will play a slightly more significant role the higher you go, due to the chance of a breakthrough every turn once you've passed the 25% threshold. Therefore hopefully the predictability should reduce as the game goes on.

Ivanov your image seems to have disappeared.

Thanks, it's great to hear this!

This might sound silly but you didn't accidentally press the H key on entering the game? Only this would hide the units. Pressing it again would show them again.

I must admit that in my experience the forts the Soviet engineers can construct are already enough of a pain to my Operation Barbarossa, especially when backed up by artillery, that I would hesitate to increase the USSR's defensive abilities. However, this may say more about my Axis strategies and the skill of my opponents than it does about the value of Soviet forts!

Please do, as it's always good to see how other's strategies work out.

Hi Keano16 Both Toulouse and the mine near Metz will mobilize as soon as Poland has fallen, to represent France's gradual mobilization for war. Bill

Historians still discuss today whether or not the Schlieffen Plan was really thought to be a plan that could capture Paris very quickly, or just the means to establish a very good position within France. Plus there's the discussion as to whether or not the plan could even work as a means to get to Paris. Martin van Creveld in his book Supplying War contains a very good chapter on the logistical aspects of the Schlieffen Plan, and he argues that it wasn't possible. The Germans knew that the French army they would be facing would be a much tougher proposition than the one they fought in 1870, and the French had continued to fight on even after Paris was surrounded and besieged. I do tend to follow the plan pretty closely, but generally just to smash as many French, Belgian and British units as possible, and to establish a front line as close to Paris as possible. Sometimes this will be very close indeed to the French capital, and then it may be possible to develop the position better once your heavy artillery start deploying.

Control of the land-sea area southeast of Gallipoli does indeed govern the passage of ships to or from the Sea of Marmara. However, if the Entente have captured that tile but not Gallipoli itself, or a resource on the southern side of the straits, then the Ottomans have an opportunity to mop up and destroy the enemy unit that landed, and if they're quick enough they may be able to bottle up some of the Entente's fleet too! I think that the issue Iron Ranger reported is a different one, as it revolved around units not being able to move in situations where they should have been able to.

There's no penalty except that the whole turn is spent doing so.

Hi Kommandant If you do test it, be sure to post your progress here on the forum. I'm sure I won't be the only one interested to see how it goes. Bill

Good point Ludi, I wasn't taking the diving into account and I will have to check on that.

Good point, I'll take a look at this.

Thanks, it's a real pleasure to read this and I'm very happy to see you're enjoying the game!

Hi, and sorry, I forgot to answer your question about railways as I was too busy thinking about strategy in Mesopotamia! It isn't possible to construct new railways in the game, and what happens with Basra is that the city, port, and surrounding area is transferred to the UK when the event fires. It's not really a work around to create a railway though. I guess that a mod of the main campaign based on the premise that the Berlin-Baghdad railway was completed before the war could lead to some interesting strategical options in the area, because at the moment it's hard for the Ottomans to reinforce this area. That could make the Entente's occupation of Basra rather precarious indeed... Bill

Hi It's on page 70 of the WWI manual, though allowing them a 50% chance of passing through Destroyers is something we only introduced in patch 1.02. Using silent mode is the key to getting your U-Boats out to the west coast of the British Isles and back, especially to get them through the blockade lines.

Hi Rabelesius It would require a HQ and some infantry. Better still some cavalry and artillery too. Airships and Bombers would also help in reducing the Ottomans' already low supply levels, and could be sufficient support to a good force to take Baghdad, even if it lacks artillery. There is a Decision Event for the British to deploy a HQ in this area: DE 126 - UK: Deploy General Maude in Mesopotamia? · Event fires: On the 1st July 1916 when Basra is in Entente hands, the UK is aligned with the Entente and fully mobilized, and the Ottoman Empire is aligned with the Central Powers and fully mobilized. · Cost of accepting: 200 MPPs (at 50 MPPs a turn for 4 turns). · Yes: Maude deploys as a British HQ at Basra on the 10th July 1916, along with the Tigris Corps. · No: Nothing. This is in the 1914 Call to Arms Strategy Guide, but as in those days Iraq was called Mesopotamia you may have missed it. I hope this helps, and it can certainly be worthwhile advancing in this area, but be careful not to repeat the mistakes the British made in 1915 which led to the surrender of their force at Kut-al-Amara! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Kut Bill

Hi Ivanov Here's an explanation of silent mode in a nutshell! The silent mode enables subs to sail undetected and without being stopped, through Battleships, Cruisers, Carriers, Transports and Amphibious Transports. It also gives them a 50% chance of passing through Destroyers. The penalty is that the submarine will move slower as a result, at about 2/3 speed. Bill

Hi Gorgin The new demo is showcasing the most up to date version of the game which is the latest patch, 1.03, i.e. the patch and demo are separate entities. Bill

That might be a good idea!

It is possible to have the game installed in different places, so I have 1.02 in one folder and 1.03 in another.

Hi I like this discussion and just wanted to posit a few thoughts. Firstly, with patch 1.02 we did introduce a new sub ambush mode in the sense that a submarine that attacks before moving will inflict about twice as much damage as one that moves then attacks. I'd be interested to know whether this new mechanism has affected your thoughts at all. Secondly, in the example of the Carrier and Battleship helping to surround a U-Boat, my initial thought was that the Royal Navy can't be that afraid of the U-Boat if it's deliberately sending surface vessels to help fence it in. Xwormwood's comments to form a pack of Destroyers to go sub hunting is very wise advice, because even if they don't immediately sink an enemy sub on attacking it, every attack they launch will reduce the sub's supply value. The lower this goes, the slower the sub will move and the lower its effectiveness in both commerce raiding and in attacking your surface fleet. So even unsuccessful attacks will help to send that submarine back to port, hopefully in need of some repairs as well as to refuel. One note of caution regarding reducing the effectiveness of subs in attacking surface vessels, is that if their effectiveness is reduced too much then players will quite happily use Battleships and Cruisers not only to help defend their convoy routes, but also to block submarines' approach and withdrawal routes. There is a fine balance to be struck here.

I'm glad it's worked in your test, and you are right in that the results aren't predetermined. Hopefully the Bulgarians will join in time to help you cement your victory!

I generally deploy the Austro-Hungarian 2nd Army against Serbia rather than to face the Russians so as to capture Belgrade early on. This does leave you at a disadvantage against the Russians, so it is a hard choice to make but because it will reduce the power of Serbia and also encourage the Bulgarians, on balance I think it is worth doing more often than not.