Sapare

It is playable without operation movement.(What I did was move the airplanes to India and fly over from there) But it is slightly weird/annoying to be standing on the Chinese coast and being unable to operate the units further inward to help the Chinese fighting there. I mean, walking is fine.. but it takes a long time.(Russia is doing an invasion by Yumen and it takes quite some time to get there.. if China prefers doing this on its own I guess that is their problem.. lol) Not being able to use operation in Japan wouldnt be nearly as much of a problem as they don't have much land anyway. BTW, that supply fix. is there any easy way to do it manually or would that require quite some work?(I just have some units which are stuck in Korea because the port always drops to 0 (siege event) and they all have 0 supply) Other then that, while I am at it might as well report other things I noticed while playing this very imbalanced map.(Which is good, this 1 sided war is actully fun) Germany seems to outright refuse to use subs in the Irish sea. They literarly have like 5 or so subs just standing around doing nothing much(maybe on other parts of the supply line) while the british fleet is pretty much non existant. Why they are not destroying the industries is beyond me. Germany also seems not to do Sea Lion(or at least yet) no matter the conditions.(Britian is pretty open to him. Like I said earlier, no fleet and nowhere near enough troops with Russia on on his side.) Instead he seems to take pleasure in capturing every possible minor country.(I think he has now pretty much captured all neutral countries(Not counting in Asia/South America) Which brings me to Vichy France... I find it strange that after the colonies swear loyality to Vichy france they are still leaning toward Axist even though Axis attacked and captured Vichy France. Are their loyalities to Germany or Vichy France now?(This one is debatable and there is a slight effect on their mobalization rate, just seemed strange) As a last (and more general) note: While the AI is really good for most parts it even now tends to do some weird quirky things. I know this is pretty much impossible to avoid in a game as complecated as this, but maybe some of these things could still be fixed somehow?(For example, I had Russia try to invade India through the mountains just below Kashgar(China) and after beating them back(supply obviously being near non existant) I found out he had TWO HQ's in those mountains.. at the same time he had other forces fight in China(at Yumen) where he had no HQ's at all. I honestly don't know how to prevent that.. but it was weird to say the least. As a side note, great respect to you and everyone ells who works on these games. I know I tend to be one of the most outspoken people when it comes to problems I find. But I actully do like these games, I just always think there are things which can be improved on. (Sorry for the long post.. to much to say and to much time on my hands)

(at least I think that was the name of that campaign) There is a bug in the German/USSR alliance map where Japan does not offer an Supply to the US.(and Britian I think) I am also unable to operate airplanes into China/Japan and it might even be that China does not give me a any supply either.(edit: Chinda does give supply, still cant operate planes to it though and Japan is still dead territory for me) This is seriously gamebreaking as China/japan is not really in a position to fight off the USSR and I had just reached Japan with 3 units Paratroopers and an HQ and countless tanks/other army units. (double edit: cant use any of the chinese tracks to move units which are already on chinese territory)

I hate to be a hater, but overall the NM(from the one game of this I played) seems pretty much non existant in this game. Which I found really sad as it is pretty awesome feature. I hope the next game takes the NM thing in and balances it on the countries like WW1 did(where it seems just perfectly balanced, not OP but still something to keep in mind as the war carries on) Feel free to correct me if I am wrong btw

While I am here I might as well ask. What do we do if we don't get the games done in the given timeframe.(I can't say for sure if we will or not, but I think at the rate we are going we MIGHT not(we are like 20 turns into it, normally a game averages at bout 100 turns but it might be shorter with the CP being such a beast in TA(seriously, with that extra fleet and no good ports in entente control, also with france having yet another open side.. CP is such a beast)

To be honest, this whole exploid has been really obvious to me the whole time. The start you listed is just one of many ways you can exploid the whole reload feature.(personally I thought you could easily do it by just making a 2nd copy of the save file) Obviously I do not exploid it,(and I am pretty certain my enemy isn't either, both of us have done some mistakes which neither would do in a perfect game) and I know no way to fix it. I did not really consider it a problem as i just assume people would play by the rules, but let's hear from Bill/Kommandant. I still hope the final game will be played as a direct match though, just to make this less possible and anyone who relies on such tricks woul pretty quickly lose to someone who actully knows how to use gut feeling.

I am far from an expert in either of those two question and I won't even try to answere the 2nd one as I plain don't know, but on your first question. I believe both games run on the same engine and with that on the same limitations. Again, I don't know for sure but having played both of them back to back I felt not much of a difference.(the only real impact I noticed is the fact that the GC map is very scalled down to be able to support the whole world as a map.(things are a lot smaller)) But honestly, if you are just interested in WW2 and not WW1, obviously it would be smarter to buy the game which was build to support WW2 rather then the game which is centered on WW1 and just has some WW2 mods.(at least that is my opinion, so yea, go with GC would be my vote)

Personally I own WW1 and GC gold and I only played one game of GC gold and uncountable matches of WW1... I just think the setup of the war leads itself to playing way better.(You can try SO many tactics and moves because it is rather well balanced, anything from early serbian invasion to strong attack on french frontlines(with some practice) is possible) In WW2 you are pretty much always going to come down to the same basic strat, take poland, then overrun france and have a giant duke out war with Russia. It just feels a lot more "guided" to me, but maybe I am just not as well practiced in it.(but fleetwhise too, I have seen the German fleet defeat the British one in WW1 quite a few times before, but I don't think it is possible to do that in WW2 just because the german fleet is near non existant)

I just wanted to make a quick note here. The email I am using for the tournament(I am Lukas Stoll) is nwssbronies@gmail.com. All emails can still be send to my old email due to them bein forwarded, I am just stating it here to clear up an confusion.

Sorry for double post but as this is totally unrealted to my previous post I thought it was fair to do so. Anyway, what is currently going on with the tournement, wasnt the cutoff date 15th? I have not yet heard any news since then and am kinda itching to play against whoever is my next opponent.

ALright, that explains it. I had never played Tipple Alliance,(well, once against AI but that was a long time ago) so I was unsure exaclty what was changed.

I am pretty sure Tripple Alliance won't be very balanced... at least it shouldnt be unless there is more changed then just Itally going to German side instead of entente(which should make it possible for Germany to win rather easily)

Why would anyone play Tripple Alliance? Just asking btw.

I wish to point out here though that there is a VERY strong stratigical importance to the Ottoman land. That is why just accepting their neutrality(or being forced to) is really not that great. In the game I am talking about all of Greece has been captured, what do you propose the 10 or so units in Afrika to do?(The obvious plan is to make them invade bulgaria through the Ottoman land, but you can't becuase all your units are magicaly pushed back to egypt. Also, even more importantly: Your fleet is traped in red sea,(is it? Refering to the sea Russia and Ottoman share) this is undebatably glitchy. Then there is also the cases that Ottoman ships can still be used to "scout" the ocean even if they can't attack.(glitchy too) The whole withdrawing from war just throws up a lot of problems in my opinion. (Edit: I do not mean to sound ungreatful or disrespectful in the above post btw, just tired and has been a long day.

"In the context of the times, having an opponent sue for peace was normally enough for their wish to be granted, provided they didn't ask for lots of unacceptable terms. Therefore I'm not sure how realistic a decision is for one side to decide whether or not to accept peace when it's offered. Certainly the British and Russian governments would have welcomed an early Ottoman surrender above all, and the National Morale penalty to Germany and Austria-Hungary is a good bonus from this." Just to mention, I do believe that Germany wanted to start peace debates sometime 1916 and Britian had set way to high demands for it to be accaptable. What stops Britian from doing the same here? Personally(if possible) I would REALLY love to see a peace treaty system in he style of "Victoria 2" where victory and defeats(and loss and gain of land) are calculated into a warscore and based on the warscore each countries has they can place demands to the table and as long as those demands are reasonable the country has to agree to it.(or will face internal consequences) The warscore could in his case be bound with the NM(If a country has very low NM then the people should probably accept worse terms of peace) and maybe the land you already captured.(I think NM would be best to bind with it, unless you captured the whole country ofcourse, but that would offer anexation) I know that such a system is way to much work for a patch but I just wanted to have brought it up for consideration in a later game.(This would allow real player involvment when it comes to peace treaties)

I don't really like that "spare" typo, just saying. ;p Also, funny in what way? And well, the Russia/Ottoman thing I guess makes sense? But to be honest... it isn't common in European history for acountry to compleetly anex another (major) country like that... it feels odd for Russia to just take the Ottoman empire. 2nd point, Ottoman surrendered while fighting on German side, are you telling me Germany would not demand the returning of freedom to the Ottoman empire after forcing Russia to its knees? That would be really strange..

I don't really need much to be changed for a 3rd game as i am compleetly enjoying this one, but I did have a few ideas which would be nice to see added. My main advice is to add some more scripts which come into affect if the war does not go as it went historically. If Russia for example destroys the Ottoman empire they should gain lands in the caucasus. If Ottoman capture a lot of Russian land consider giving them more then those 3 or 4 tiles worth of land.(I had once gone all the way up to the oil fields just for my uints to be scattered everywhere) Same with Austria and Russia.(and Itally and Austria but I have not had total victory with one over the other so I can't really say anything yet) In general what I am getting at is, if possible have multiple "peace" scrips which take into consideration who actully did all the work. It feels weird to have Germany gain Polish territory if Austria marched all the way to the far right industries. There are some other things alike this which would be nice to see, stuff like the Greece thing I mentioned in an earlier topic(which I know you said is not possible in the current game, which is why I added it here. But I also would find it nice if Greece would NOT force a coup(and ruin deplomacy) when the country is at 80% toward Entente. In general, some more reactions from the game toward what the player does should help give the player even more options to try out new things.

That explains the logic behind it, but I do ask you to consider rethinking that skript. While I do get the idea of it there are quite some logic problem with owning half ot the Ottoman empire(captured by England and Russia) and then suddenly the Ottoman's being like "We are back to statues quo guys! all land goes back to ours") I do not mean this disrespectfully but just consider it an easily abusable flaw in game balance. I think you should consider giving the Etente a decisions skript where they decide if they want to accep a statues quo withdraw from war or continue the war(in which case Ottoman regain about 50% moral and contiune to fight till they are utterly destroyed) And other note, I have seen Ottoman compleetly surrender after moral droped to 0 before.(twice in fact, once against AI and once against human player)(without capital being capture that is) Also, just out of curiousity, what happens to the land if Russia surrenders after gaining Ottoman territory? And what happens to the land if Ottoman surrenders after Russia has given up?(does england get the land?)

Curious thing here...(yes, I am same guy with the Itally bug.. don't blame me!) What is the difference/chance between the Ottoman surrendering and them just withdrawing from the war? Because normally all their land is giving to Russia but my brother had a case of them just plain withdrawing and the land going back to neutral.(then in the same turn the Ottoman joining the war on CP side again, with 50% moral but that did not repeat when he replayed the same turn.) Any explanation for those events?

Well, I checked,(or my brother checked as the game was started on his computer(we are playing over email))all the related scripts are on. I don't know... I guess it is just a weird glitch. But as this is the first time I had it happen I guess it is not that important. To the Greece thing, I know that the coop is more efficent then normal deplomacy.. but just in the even that one would use deplomacy to get Greece to join, would we get the related armies mobalized?(Because honestly, Gallopoli is pretty useless if it gains us nothing at all) I must admit that I am no history buff but even if the King was reluctant to join,(and had the army under his rule) doesnt a depolomatic entry assume that he was cofinced to join the Entente afterall?(with all the money one is throwing at them) And on another question: What exactly is the gain of giving Itally the Austrian territories? I have never done it before but I am considering how useful it would be. Would it cause itally to stay out of the war for good or does it just prospone their entry?

Ok here is the thing. I have done quit a few 1914 games now(maybe 8 or so?) and this game i am currently having i the most weirdest I have ever seen. First, Ottomon empire joins two turns into the game,(all events done so they gain mobolazation and both turns the deplomacy suceeded) which obviously totally destroyed britian in Afrika because I never got the "land in Basra" option(which honestly is kinda OP but at the same time really needed) and non of my units had been ready. But that isnt really the focus here. Later Itally joined(like always) and Austria refused to give up the land. The weird thing is, Itally spawned non of the important units it normally has.(aka, it has no HQ's and it spawned no detachments in Afrika) I feel confident that I gave them the Britian support(I don't even know if they join if you don't) but just going by the assumption that I did not, what would they normally spawn if you don't give them british support? Becuase honestly... how Itally is supposed to do ANYTHING without HQ's and no units in afrika I don't quite know.(most of all considering the script was for 200 british MPP points but each HQ is near to 300. Point being.. is this just a glitch or supposed to be that way? While I am at it, another question: If Greece is convinced to join the war (on Entente side) by natural means(aka deplomacy/Gallapoli) instead of the whole coop thing, do their armies mobolize normally like with all other countries or are they still defensively spawned?

I noticed that too. In this case I would call on unlucky rather then lucky(I would like to say that I would have won both matches with maybe even major victory anyway. That made the games quite fun actully.) Don't think I can't play just becuase people forfeit all the time.. lol

I wanted to ask if it was possible to get another copy of the current game rooster(just to see how many people are still in play and how many matches one would need to play(without losing) till the tournamentis over? Just asking out of curosity.(My current matchup is over as my enemy had to forfeit due to operation, or so I was told. Did he ever contact you?)

I had a question(mainly caused by my misplacing of an email) Till when do we have to finish our whole(mirrored included) match?(Atm I am playing over email with about one turn a day, but I fear that it might be to slow)

I lost all of France in a Triple Alliance game against AI before, then beat the Ottoman's and all of their original land went to Russia. Russia was gaining some 1 or 2 NM each turn while Germany was gaining some 1 or maybe 2 NM too. This was sometime at 1916 and my match ended up going to 1921 because NM was just not kill able. Capitals are worth 100NM each turn. I am just saying that it is possible to greatly increase your NM by stalling in some cases. I still don't know what you guys are planing to use the NM for at any rate. How is there ever going to be a tie?(unless you plan to end the game at 1918. But I see no reason not to give it the extra 5 years to play out.) All of these examples are based on the 1914-1918 maps mind you, never played the smaller campaigns before.

I just want to say that NM is not a 'perfect' way to decide winner. Toward the end of the game the player of the winning side can easily stale to make his NM go up as he holds more ground then his enemy. This would effectively raise his NM. (And we are talking large % numbers here, so much as 2% per turn) To be honest I have not kept tab on this topic for way to long and don't know exactly what you guys plan to use the NM thing for, just wanted to point out the possibility to abuse the NM counter by stalling an almost won game.