Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Rabelesius

Thanks for the feedback! :)

1) Originally we did have it end sooner, but the problem was that if the war hasn't been resolved with a clear winner by the spring of 1913 then it felt a bit odd, as there wasn't really a reason for it to end if one side or the other hadn't been defeated.

It was also the case that if a good battle is going on then it can be a let down to have it end without good reason. So we extended it a bit further.

2) It's true that the initial deployment does require some relocation to commence a siege of Adrianople, but the current set up does ensure that Sofia cannot be taken by an Ottoman assault at the start, and these forces can be marched to Adrianople within a turn or two if the situation is felt to be secure at Adrianople.

Or are you thinking that the Bulgarians lack the force to besiege Adrianople even later in the war?

3) There already is a fortified line in front of Constantinople. Are you thinking of something which is much tougher to assault?

As to the overall game balance, it can be changed if we have a consensus that the Turks are too strong. I'll be very interested to hear more on this issue.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I played against AI, I had the same impression, that the Ottos are a little bit too powerful. I doubt the Balkan League can win playing against human opponent.

In reality Turkish armies during I Balkan War were numerous, however their morale was much weaker in comparison with the armies of Balkan nations. It was coming from the fact that after hundreds of years of Turkish domination, they hated the Ottos and regarded this war something more than just another common conflict- finally they could pay them back for years of misery and slavery. These negative feelings towards Turkey are still very strong nowadays, for instance in Serbia or Croatia :).

The other issue I found is the scale of the map. It makes all the forces visible from the very beginning. Due to this, it is impossible to surprise the Ottomans. One of the biggest Bulgarian victories, the 2-days encounter battle of Kirk-Kilisse originated from two factors: the Ottomans didn't know about Bulgarian 3rd Army and their morale was much lower. So Bulgarians' frontal assualt was successful and it caused panic retreat of Sultan's army.

In terms of the timeline, I agree with Rabelesius, the game should be shorter, as London Peace Treaty was signed on 30th May 1913. I would make the turns shorter, i.e. couple of days or a week, so that the number of turns would stay the same.

EDIT: I forgot to add that I really enjoyed this scenario, again someone (not sure who, cause I don't read credit list- sorry guys:)) did a good job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...


Just wanted to bump this thread as Rabelesius mentioned it in his post about the Russian Civil War.

One thing that does change this campaign from being a purely historical refight is that the Ottomans get to purchase some units right at the start, and deploy them where they wish.

The aim of this is to increase the replayability and give the Ottomans a chance to catch out their opponents. So, it might mean that some Ottoman objectives are harder to capture early in the war than historically, but it shouldn't change the overall balance. Which may be too much in the Ottoman favour, and that can be changed.

I also want to revisit the campaign's end date, as my understanding is that the war ended when it did because the Ottomans felt beaten.

This is really the reason for having the campaign end later, so that there is a chance for a clear winner to arise, as having a game end before such a point can cause frustration and disappointment.

Having the turns slightly shorter might be an answer, but I'm still inclined to keep to the same ultimate end date.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Create New...