Two bugs I wanted to point out:

[Sapare]

First one is, this:

Germany Captured Brussels and then Ypres but not Antwerp(which was empty at this time.) The captial is moved to Antwerp and the Ostend Detachment(belgium unit) moved into Antwerp AFTER it is made a capital. For entrenchment it is now considered a capital rather then a fortress(ability to creat trenches, max entrenchment is 3.) It no longer holds the values of a fortress.(maybe this is supposed to be? But it makes ignoring Antwerp and just walking past it rather effective.

2nd one is this: The ports of Cattaro (Austria-Montegero front) Seem to never give off supply?(half question have statment as I only now noticed it)

[Ancient Demon]

It seems when Antwerp becomes a capital, it gains all the properties of a capital. A bigger problem than the entrenchment issue is the incentive the Entente player has to leave Antwerp empty, and the incentive the CP player has to avoid occpying the empty fortress, until Ypres has fallen. The Germans lose out on a significant amount of income over the course of the game (net 11/turn) if they occupy Antwerp before Ypres.

Such gamey play around Antwerp couldn't have been the intended design, but that's what happens when a country is worth more or less depending on which order the cities are conquered.

[Bill101]

Hi Sapare

I totally agree with you on Antwerp, that isn't an intentional design.

For Cattaro, I've just run a quick test and both ports are giving out supply as they should.

The only thing I can think of is whether the new port supply rule was kicking in, but this should only affect land units:

2) Any port that has an enemy naval unit adjacent to it will no longer provide supply to friendly land units within supply range of this port. Port strength itself will be unaffected, and the only effect of the presence of the enemy naval unit will be to impede supply to land units.

A quick check in game is to send a low on supply naval unit to Cattaro, and look next turn at its supply level. If it's in the port and at 10 supply then everything is fine.

Bill

[Ancient Demon]

A possible solution for Belgium would be to remove Antwerp as an alternate capital, but add a rule that Belgium doesn't surrender as long as there is at least one Belgian unit in Belgium (like what's already in place for Serbia). This I think would lead to a more reasonable situation. Any thoughts?

[Sapare]

A possible solution for Belgium would be to remove Antwerp as an alternate capital, but add a rule that Belgium doesn't surrender as long as there is at least one Belgian unit in Belgium (like what's already in place for Serbia). This I think would lead to a more reasonable situation. Any thoughts?

It isnt actully 1, it is two and counts for all minors.(or that is how it used to be) So it would need a special rule just for that nation, idk if they can do that.

[Bill101]

I don't know off hand if such a rule is possible, but I wonder if removing Antwerp from the capitals list is a solution.

As then, not only will it be worthwhile retaining a unit in Antwerp, but Belgium will not surrender for as long as another Belgian unit is on its soil, i.e. at or around Ypres. Thus giving us the historical situation we are hoping to achieve?

[Sapare]

I don't know off hand if such a rule is possible, but I wonder if removing Antwerp from the capitals list is a solution.

As then, not only will it be worthwhile retaining a unit in Antwerp, but Belgium will not surrender for as long as another Belgian unit is on its soil, i.e. at or around Ypres. Thus giving us the historical situation we are hoping to achieve?

One thing I wish to bring up with the(current) surrender rules for minors. For nations like Sweden/Norway it actully is a huge pain to conquire them because the enemy can just stuff two detachments in some backwatter town and play hide and seek.

Now, I guess you arn't supposed to invade those nations anyway, but I wanted to try it and I ran into the problem that even after Stockholm I got to march all the way north, and for Norway it be impossible because there are not enough towns in the mountain ranges.(the supply just falls to 0 for most part)

[Bill101]

That's a good point Sapare, and there are potential solutions to it by using scripts to force a surrender when the capital has fallen.

Though if both Belgium and Serbia fought on in WWI, the latter when their whole country was lost, on what grounds can we say that other Minor Countries might not have done the same, especially as aid from outside the country would have been quite likely?

Only it might feel a bit tough on Sweden and Norway to penalize them to surrender when their capital falls, when we don't treat those countries which share a land border with their invader in the same way, i.e. as you've seen, it is harder to conquer a far flung country like Norway than it is to conquer Serbia.

Everything did of course change in 1939-45!

[Sapare]

but isnt it hanled that way in WW2? Where you only need to capture Oslo and then events take the rest for you?

It isnt that it is difficult to capture the nation or requires a bunch of settup, that is Persia, it is just simply that the nation spawns a lot of units far away and it takes multiple years worth of march to get anywhere.(I actully think that the northern half of Sweden/noway is under constant ice? I am about to reach the two mines and fortress of Sweden and am kinda worried how the snow will let me fight)

Again, this isnt actully really much of a complaint, I just always had this dream of capturing the northern nations akin to WW2 and I must say, it is outright impossible. I started with it turn 1(all but the Heavy gun from the "free to deploy" units went there(hq, 2 horse, 3 corps) and I invested in ground attack (two levels) and gave them the two recon bombers.

It is now 1916 and Sweden probably won't surrender till late 1916 or early 1917, and Russia send no units to support.

So yea, WW1 world europe germany just aint possible.

[Bill101]

Our WW2 games use different rules triggering Minors to surrender than our WWI games, where we've made them tough fighters.

I guess that we are only really talking about Norway and Sweden, as I think all the other Minors can be more easily invaded and conquered. I'll have a think about this, but I wouldn't want to make it too easy either.

In the meantime, you can always remove a few units via the Editor before starting a game.