Jump to content

Russia, the Osman Dreadnought and trench techs in CtA


Recommended Posts

Hi there,

the last few months i had two intensive Call to Arms matches against Rafal Sokulski (who is in this forum too). First one with the central powers, second one I played the Entente. Both matches had more or less the same result: Germany was stopped at some Point in Belgium/northern France, which is the normal outcome. But Germany was in both matches even stopped by Russia nearly at the border itself. Germany was in both matches very far from reaching Warschau or gainig much territory in Courland or at other places. Both matches where ended in Autumn 1915 in a nearly hopeless Situation for the German Player with western Entente gaining more and more forces to cause losses in the west and an unbroken Russia in the east.

Rafal is definitively a very good Player and i belive, i am not so bad too, so it is not because of our skills as central power Player.

Two main reasons for this game outcome (which will be repeatable in many matches):

- The British decided in both games not to seize the Osman Dreadnought: The consequence is, that OE will join the war much later (somewhen in Spring 1915). That means, the Russians have their Dardanelles-Trade much longer and don't loose MPP for fighting against OE in this time, too.

- These "Bonus-MPP" are used by Russia by investing heavilly in trench tech (5 Chits as soon as possible). The result is, that Russia has trench tech 1 after maybe 4 turns and 2 at the end of 1914 or early beginning of 1915, with higher Levels to come. That means, each Russian unit has entrenchment Level 3 (in cities even more) before (!) Germany is able to launch a great offensive against Russia. Every German Offensive in these conditions must end with a failure. Without Artillery German corpses are nearly not able to cause any damage against the entrenched Russians and Germany will not have a gas/shell tech level higher than (max.!) 1 at this time, so even with the two artillery pieces, they have in beginning 1915, there is no much land gain possible.

If Russia plays like this, it is nearly inevitable, that Germany has not only the historical stalemate-line in the west, but also another stalemate-line close to his borders in the east, which means no extra MPP by conquered russian cities, no NM-Gains by them too, etc....

I don't know, wether another patch is planned for Breakthrough, but if you do so, you should think over this points. Two suggestions to solve the Problems:

- You should implement bad consequences, if Britain doesn't seize the Osman Battleship. At the moment OE does get this Ship, but that is it with bad consequences. OE can't do very much with this Ship. Against the western Entente, it's fleet is clearly outnumbered even with this additional Dreadnought, in the Black Sea there is not much, OE can do with it's fleet end even there, Russia can become a dangerous opponent by putting their two Dreadnoughts, that are in the building Queue and another submarine (even already in the bulding Queue) into the black sea.

Historically Russia would be badly angered, if Britain delivered this ship to OE. The main aim of Russia was to gain controll over the Dardanelles (even if OE was not in the war, as it began) and that would have been endangered by another heavy Ship for the Ottomans. And the British public opinion, which feared the German fleet wouldn't have accepted either to handout a valuable ship to a potential Opponent. My Suggestion: Implement a noticeable NM-Penaltie for both (Russia and Britain) when deciding in this way.

- Trench tech research should be more expensive for Russia. With the last patch yo raised the costs for OE ( to reflect the disproportionate cost to their limited war economy of constructing the sort of defensive positions that were built on the Western Front), but I think this should be the same for Russia, which didn't build trench Systems on the same Level as the other Nations for the whole war.

Another idea would be to limit the number of chits for trench tech research (maybe for every Nation) down to 2 or max 3 chits...

What do you think?

Furchtlosundtrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Furchtlosundtrew

 

Thanks for this, it is interesting and a few thoughts immediately spring to mind.

 

It was posted on here recently that the Austro-Hungarians were too strong at the start of the campaign. If that is the case then are they not able to help their German ally to drive the Russians back? What do you think about Austro-Hungarian strength?

 

Secondly, if Germany invested a few diplomatic chits in the Ottomans early in the game then they could deprive the Ottomans of the Dardanelles trade even earlier. This could be a way round the problem perhaps.

 

I use diplomacy heavily when I play and it frequently works. Maybe that's because opponents do not expect it as they are focusing more on the military side, but even so it might be worth a try.

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bill,

 

thanks for your answer.

 

I don't think, that Austria is too strong, they are in the right strength (historically) I think. But they are far from being able to help Germany. They have two fronts to cover (Serbia and the carpates) and even if they only hold the line against Serbis they have to leave many units here. In the carpates, they are strong enough to hold and to defend Lemberg an the oil fields, but never to go to offensive against the Russians there. Russians will entrench here and even without any trench techs, this is enough to cause bad combat predictions for Austria (remember the attack values are on the same Level with the russians, not as good, as the German troops are). The only Thing, Austria can do is, to cover Silesia for the Germans, that is not enough to real help. Another point is, that Austria even has to prepare for Italy, which absorbes some MPP, too.

 

To invest in Diplomacy to get OE earlier to war is a bad Idea in my eyes. It is much more expensive than other nations (because OE is a Major). Costs are at 150/chit i belive? You have to spent so much MPP in other things in the Beginning as the German Player: Research (Inf. warfare, two or three steps trench, gas/Shell and maybe industrial is imperative to invest early!), rebuild lost units (and you will lose some of them, if your opponent plays well) and rebuild losses in units not lost, but badly damaged. If you have in mind, that the first few turns Germany has some imperative MPP to spent (building Hindenburg costs 50 MPP/4 Turns, building Liman von Sanders as well) you will be able (maybe, if thinks go well) to invest two chits in OE, before December, not more. It can happen that you are lucky and have a hit with it, but this is a question of luck, there is even a significant Chance, that you have not a single hit before OE is entering the war anyhow. I wouldn't spent 300 MPP for just a Chance of things going better. As CP you have to be shure, that your plans are working, at least in the beginning...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Furchtlosundtrew :) ,

 

From what you say I think the problem is you/CP are too agressive in the West in 1914.

There are several moves possible in the east with german deployable units at start:

*

EASTERN MOVES

1)

You can wipe out two russian corps in the Baltic States and capture the empty city in the rear with a cavalry raid.

That usually forces Russians to burn MPPs operating units to cover vital areas in the back and/or to retreat.

It's a deadly move but has one weakness: it extends german front and leaves Russians free to organize in Poland.

2)

You can also attack in western Poland to capture Lodz (the city west of Warsaw) and protect Silesia while anchoring AH flank.

That will shorten the front and make a later assault on Warsaw easier while even allowing AH to attack a bit south of german forces.

*

SERBIAN MOVES

At the same time you can focus on depriving Russia of some serbian MPPs:

1)

It's possible to take Belgrade in 2 turns if you deploy 2nd AH army against Serbia (quite certain if you also send german starting artillery there).

That will make it easier for AH to manage that front and go for serbian mines and 2nd capital.

2)

You can also target Montenegro as starting two AH corps in the south are where they need to be.

With forcemarch you can isolate MNT capital then operate 1 german HQ and 2 corps there to finish the job next turn.

3)

Here you have to know MNT is a bit special as you can collapse it if MNT hasnt 2 of its own units inside its borders when/after you take Cetinje (the capital).

That usually means EN player has to give the russian event HQ to MNT to avoid that early collapse.

4)

The collapse of MNT also forces Albania to remain neutral meaning AH navy has far better chances to defend Otrante straits in the Adriatic.

That leads to completely different strategies including vs Italy later on. you can still DoW on Albania but there is a diplo cost (losing some OE mobilization around 15% I think).

*

All in all you capture no NM location in Serbia but between MNT capital and serbian mines alone Russia loses 10+15=25 MPPs/turn vs Dardanelles trade of 30 MPPs.

Plus AH gets 8 more MPPs/turn from Belgrade (Russia loses nothing there since serbian 2nd capital generates 16 MPPs again).

*

WEST

All those moves need you to weaken the push in the West but in my opinion you only need one of the 2 deployable cavalry there to grab Lille and nearby french mines in turn 1.

Don't advance too much, concentrate on taking Belgium and MPPs locations (Lille and mines) then entrench to avoid french counters.

Isolating and destroying belgian units should be your goal as once they're out they won't come back as long as you control belgian territory.

*

RESEARCH & PRODUCTION

With that you also need to plan your tech/unit spending.

Usually a good early combination for german tech is:

1x125 infantry (as soon as possible = turn 1)

4x50 trench

(5 is possible but you'll have to wait for a hit to buy a third chit in shell production because you'll be at 950/1000 max research)

3x125 industry 

3x100 shell production

(total 1000 for max research)

Then disregard buying back lost infantry corps (if any) for now and concentrate on producing all remaining german artillery.

That way you'll have enough MPPs and shells to upgrade units and sustain your offensive in 1915. 

*

To help AH you can take a turn of german income to produce detachments: entrench them on italian border and it should be enough to buy time.

As Bill said diplomacy can be dangerous so keep an eye on Entente activity there (MPPs stats screens) especially for Holland/Norway/Sweden in that order.

Other options with spare MPPs include upgrading starting german lvl5 HQs to 7/8. 

*

OE

It isn't that bad to have a delayed OE entry though it gives more time to UK.

Because it will also delay caucasian entry for Russia including a good HQ and an artillery plus a 2 corps redeployment event.

Plus it will give CP more time to get Bulgaria in and clear the serbian railroad to OE.

And while at peace OE don't have to worry about defending  weak points to they're free to stockpile MPPs to produce detachments or invest a bit earlier in tech.

*

Well SC WWI campaign has a lot of possible outcomes and tricks, that's what makes it great.

I can't cover everything so you'll have to adapt and try things to keep your foe out of balance.

 

Just remember that as CP WWI is usually yours to lose (though Rafal is a very good player) ^^ .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Strategiclayabout,thanks for your comment ;o)

at some Points I agree, but it doesn't solve my main Problem.

Let's start with your last Statement: I don't think CP should lose WW1 usually. In history it was close enough. OK, this is counterfactual history, but what would have happened, if Germany didn't move two Corps to the east in August 1914 (which were not needed there because of tannenberg) or if Germany didn't go for Verdun in 1916 (stupid move!) but for the Ukraine with an earlier collapse of russia following...? No one knows, but I think CtA should have equal chances for both sides.

- Eastern moves: Both games started with an direct Attack on the Corps around Kovno and the occupation of Vilna by a German cavallery unit in the first turn. I agree with your Statement. Maybe I will choose to gor for Lodz instead in the future, which is the slighty better move in my eyes. But russia gets an enormous mass of troops after the first turns, that will stop you at some Point. I belive you can shorten the line here (capture Lodz and capture Kutno) and that will help, but even with that strategy Russia will have trench tech 3 after the Winter 14/15 and than you have a stalemete and not the sort of maneuvre warfare, Germany proceeded in summer 1915 in history.

- Serbia: Yes, it is possible, to capture Belgrad in the 2nd or 3d turn. I did in my games as cp, Rafal did not. I pushed forward after that, but if the serbian player doesn't do everything wrong I don't see any (!) possibility, to get Nish and the serbian mines before the summer of 1915 (and even that would be early)! Belive my, i tried a lot of things against enemy opponents and the AI to capture both places earlier. Against the AI, it leaves sometimes the mines uncovered and you can make a lightning move with an austrian cavallery to capture it, but not against a human Player ;o( And i don't see, how it could help my in the crucial game period in end 1914, beginning 1915 to prevent Russia from heavily researching trench techs, if they lose the mines in summer 1915 and there is no direct conjunction with the dardanelles trades.

Montenegro is a good move, too, I try it sometimes. I like this move because of it's consequences for Albania, but it doesn't stop russia, too. And: It should be not possible to go for Montenegro and (!) Serbia at the same time (in the first three turns).

One big disadvantage in these plans: Both plans (Montenegro and early run for Belgrad) need some german help. For Montenegro you should transfer some German units and for Belgrad you can operate (it is much easier, if you do so) the German artillery. This absorbs MPP and troops, and both is short in the first few turns.

-West: What you write is what we both did. I was stopped by Rafal in front of Ypern (i did some stupid moves here!) but was able to capture it in early 1915 and to push Belgium out of the war. Rafal was stopped by me as well in front of Ypern and I was able to defend it until the ending of the game and hold Belgium in the game! Again the trick is trench techs (this time for the Britains). Rafal made a good move here with French troops (and I copied it in my game as entente): He fastmoved most of it to the west. He left some (not too mutch)gaps (1 Corps broad) in his lines in alsace-Lorraine and used these troops for fighting around Lille and Ypern, which stopped the German aggressors. In my eyes the French can do so with less risk. They are standing strong in alsace-lorraine. Two fortresses cover the flanks, good supply and they have the opportunity, to be able to entrench, before the Germans can attack here. If Germany attacks here in the first turn, it will lose two or three corpses (just playing a game, where this happened), so this is not really a good plane. But if Germany reacts to the gaps later, it walks on to entrenched French lines (and will lose two or three corpses aswell. That means France has more troops to stop the Germans, as it seems to be and they can make the Western front very bloody for Germany from the beginning. France is able to stand some losses. And if they trade units with Germany in a ratio 1:1 or even with a ratio, a little bit worser for France, Germany can't stand this forever. So even to reach the line you adviced to do in the west ist not as simple, as it seems against a good entente Player and can cost some troops and MPP.

- With your Research plan I totally agree! But it needs some turns, to make all these investments, to rebuild combat losses (doesn't matter wether a Corps is just damaged or you have to buy it back completely, both is expensive) and in 1914 you will (!) have some losses to restrength. I don't think I made it completely wrong, but i was never able (like it sounds in your comment) to do all that in late '14, beginning '15 and additionally buy some Diplo-Chits and additionalyl buy more than max. one additional artillery unit with Germany. If your Opponent doesn't completely wrong, you will just not have the MPP, to have done all that until (ca.) summer 1915...

- OE: Yeah, it has advantages for OE too, if they go to war delayed, but even disadvantages (see below). But Entnte has just advantges (except for the Dreadnought itself) and additinal in my eyes OE is the less important nation for the outcome of the war. They must not die, but if they do not, they don't have a high worth for CPs. They will never (Ok, never say never, but almost never) be able to build forces enough to defeat the britains in the middle east (except against the AI) or to play a significant role against the Russians. They can defend and absorb some enemy troops, but not more.

If OE goes delayed to war, it has more timre to prepare, that's true, but the Britains have this time to prepare in the middle east, too. And the Britains have their full MPP at this time, while OE has much fewer MPP, as they would have, if they were already in the war. The war readiness Level is below 100 %, so the MPP income is aswell and (even more important) the vasalle states in the middle east (syria etc), which deliver a lot of MPP to OE don't deliver any MPP before mobilizing after war entry of OE. To say it clear: because of these Facts OE is for a longer time not in danger, as long, until they go to war (which will be in early 1915, when the Sultan Osman Dreadnought is not seized). But when they go to war, they are weaker as in a normal game (with seized Osman Dreadnought) at the same date, because they can't get so mutch MPP like when they were in the war earlier ;o( And with the MPPincome of OE there can be no talk of stockpiling MPP ;o)

Of course there are many ways to play the game (that's one Point why i like this game so mutch) and I wouldn't have written to that point if i hadn't the feeling, that there is a point, that is a big Problem for the game balance in total. And I think this is the fact with gaining Bonus MPP by not seizing the Osman Dreadnought and investing it completely in Russian trench tech (and maybe it would in a certain way still be a problem without Bonus MPP but investing the remaining MPP completely in trench techs).

Kind regards

Furchtlosundtrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're welcome :) ,

 

My bad as I thought your main problem was OE late entry instead of russian trench tech but there are still ways around.

 

LAST STATEMENT

I do think chances are more or less equal in CtA. My comment about CP was more like: "you're the attacker so you have the initiative" (to decide where the game will go).

*

EAST

After the Lodz move it's true Russians receive many corps and can stall CP on the Warsaw line or a bit ahead. However Russians can't cover the whole front despite their numbers.

You can have some kind of mobile warfare in 1915 but you need to create it by forcing Russians to leave their trenches and redeploy.

1) always keep at least one artillery in the east and try to destroy 1 russian corps per turn by concentrating attacks

(at that point you should have shell production 1 so 2 shells per turn meaning even trench lvl 3 won't last long on a clear tile vs german better stats)

2) use a second artillery to reduce important targets in range (fortress/city) and/or rotate it with the other one when needed

(the idea is to have constant pressure to keep the initiative and manage russian numbers)

3) then use your strategic mobility to attack where russian lines are thinner

(usually Russians can cover the whole polish front but there will be holes in the Baltic States)

4) amphib on russian ports can also help to stretch lines a bit

*

SERBIA

In my opinion it is worth it to spend those MPPs early on operating german units because they will get good results and even experience.

You only need one german HQ and two infantry corps to capture Cetinje then you can move them to main serbian front and to Italia or OE in the future.

German artillery can help not only for Belgrade but also for the mines and second serbian capital and it can mix with german units from Montenegro.

At that point you will have one HQ two corps and one artillery meaning you can even have two more german units around if needed.

I see those units as some kind of a "shock force" that will move a lot so it's like making necessary efforts to create a strategic reserve early. 

(it's possible to operate all those units on turn 2 without hindering your efforts on other fronts by planning moves a bit on turn 1)

Yes it won't stop Russia by itself but it will make CP life easier in the long run.

*

WEST

Haha yes made some bad somes there too in some games and that ù^$* summer mud doesn't help when it happens !

Usually moving units adjacent to Belgians and occupying Messines ridge is enough to avoid trouble at Ypern.

But there are other possibilities including a clean cut to Calais port on turn 1 with a chain of forcemarch units.

(however you need the 2 deployable cavalry at start plus 1 corps already on the map)

*

Add a blocus of Oostende/Anvers ports by german fleet on turn 1 to block naval transport.

(sure you'll take 1 or 2 naval losses but nothing big if you retreat on turn 2 after bombing Oostende) 

That will force ENT to make difficult choices as it will block french units from forcemarching to Ypern on turn 1.

(and the wall of ZoCs will create trouble for both belgian and french units)

If Belgians try to defend they risk being completely destroyed and if they fall back to french lines Belgium will fall faster.

*

Another thing to consider is where to defend/entrench for Germans and I think the line between Sedan and Calais is good because:

1) there are a lot of hills (forcemarch a line of corps on turn 1 then entrench) 

2) all tiles are on railroads (meaning high strategic mobility)

3) close to high supply centers

4) the front is straight with no salient to defend and even one more tile than EN line

5) the coastal tile is a town reducing effect of naval bombing for Germans

The bad side is french northern mines are on the frontlines.

*

About the gap thing in Alsace-Lorraine at start it's all about balance between tiles you need to occupy (usually in front of Verdun) and keeping some space to allow easy unit upgrading later.

*

RESEARCH PRODUCTION DIPLOMACY

Well diplomacy chits are mostly if EN threatens Holland, at worst you can even take the NM hit for Norway.

I agree research plan can be hard to follow but you can delay a bit to reduce early cost below 500 MPPs.

(invest usual 1 chit in infantry but only 1 in shell production plus 5 in trench and you already have 1 in industry)

That will save 450 MPPs or more than enough for a new heavy artillery unit plus some spare change.

The goal is to start the research so you benefit from it each turn in critical areas even if you're not at full capacity.

Germans receive a lot of reserve corps early so don't burn MPPs to reinforce badly damaged ones (5 and below): just move them to the back in good supply and replenish them later.

*

OE

As you say but as OE will always be in trouble whatever you do some turns won't make a big change.

True the Sultan Osman is more a liability than anything else because of its cost and possible NM hit if sunk.

That said with some air recon having a BB around can help set up an amphib operation vs Odessa or Sevastopol.

Other than that you can shield OE troops with some Germans the time to invest in tech and some units (need bulgarian railroad of course).

It's also possible to consider refusing the Von Sanders event to speed up german investments but you better be ready to support OE later on.

*

Stockpiling MPPs was a funny way to say it I agree but that's the only way to invest 125 MPPs in infantry when OE is at peace haha.

I suppose investing in industry instead or detachment to cover vulnerable spots are also possible and even trench despite the 75 vs 50 MPPs cost.

 

Regards (of the same) Kind :lol:

 

Strategiclayabout

 

Well I suppose we can try a CtA game at some point with you on the shovelling side ^^ .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Lots of good overall info in this thread.  Not just about the title subject however; seams that there is just a overwhelming interest in every early tech.   Seams great if both players do it (neutralizes each other) but if some is coming all that MMPs to early tech.. at a time when the game is a mobile one... doesn't the other side get a huge head start.. if played right?

 

 

Could be my preference for low tech games.. back to SC1.   Back then you would always see people way over commit to tech, and the games would end quickly based more off random rolls then anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eastern Front Trenches were more like level 1, at-most of level 2 and this should be a cap across Eastern, Serbian and Ottoman theatres, except the Western front, no front saw the expensive trench building taking place.

This will automatically result in Russia getting 1-normal and 2-city trench and at most 3-very bad terrain, thus easy to destroy.

This is very historical.

 

Second, Russian mobilisation in 1914 is too fast, they couldn't mobilise so fast.

Also Russia, Ottomans, all Minors and Italy should be somehow forbidden even level 1 infantry- it represents helmets, mortars etc, these nations couldn't afford.

 

Third. Austria to not get level 3 trenches nor level 2 infantry or level 1 motorisation - no industrial strength for the same. 

 

Also Countries not in combat must not have forces on map. Italy really exploits it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sapare,

thanks for your comments to this older thread of mine ;o)

Some Points: I had a very short but instructive game against strategiclayabout (as you can read above) since i made my statemenats. It changed my mind in some Points. Germany has possibilities in the beginning, i didn't know, as i opened this thread in March '15. If they avoid a greater number of losses against France/Great Britain in '14 in the West (which is possible with a forced march opening), they will keep initiative and can go all in against russia in 1915.

But still i belive, that it is to easy for russia, to gain high trench tech early and make it hard and slow for Germany to advance into russia. In my actual game against another good Opponent, we had a broad no mans land in the west in 1915, he was not able to manage to get art-tech early with France or great britain (i think he had no luck with researching in our game), so i could start my run for warcshau with a great nummber of german corpses. I had three Art Units at this Point and gas Shell Level 1, later level two. But the huge number of russian corpses and the trench Level made it very hard (too hard in my opinion) to advance. At the end of 1915 i had Warschau, Brest and Kovno. If (and this was the mistake of my Opponent in my eyes) he had managed, to step into the no man's land at the western front in winter 1914/15, he would have been a permanent threat and i would have been not able to invest in the east the same way i did in this game. The consequnece would have probably been, that it wouldn't have come further than Warschau (max.)

The greatest Advantage of Germany is his great industrial potential. With investing in the tech, Germany gets the number of Mpps needed for a victory. Unfortunately russia's Industrie can grow to strength aswell.

Summarizing: I still belive, russia shouldn't be able to tech trenches to fast and to far, this makes them relatively to strong. But Germany is not as weak, as i thought before and they have their possibilites too, at least, if western Entente doesn't hinder Germany...

Regarding the Osman Dreadnought sitiation i didn't change my mind. Maybe it are just 5 turns more dardanelles trade (never counted them), but they make the difference. The additional 150 MPP means three steps trench tech (or an early additional industrial chit) and this will sale back to the russians in the Long term with compound interest.

And i still have the opinion, that the ship is worthless for the osmans. They have a starting NM of 18.000 Points, so the loss of the ship would mean almost 3 Points of NM-loss! So the risk to lose it is very high. Even in Addition with the other ships the Ottoman fleet is not strong enough to rival the russian black sea fleet in the Long term. Russians have to many naval Units in their production Queue (and unfortunately and unhistorically they are free to place them in the Baltic sea or the black sea as they like). Russians will at least get 2 U-Boats which can't be defeated by 1 Ottoman destroyer. And even worser, the other Ottoman ships have to be restrengthed, before they are able to fight and this is much to costy for the weak Ottoman Industrie ;o(

Not to talk about the fleet of the western Entente in the mediterranean, which is much to strong for an Ottoman adventure there.

On a final note, it is pure Nonsense, that in this game russians show no reaction at all when britains give this ship to the Ottomans. I read the book "The russian origins of the first world war" by sean mcmeekin in my summer Holidays and after reading it is shure for me, that this ship (and another one, which would have been ready for delivery a little later) would have been the end of all russian imperial dreams in the black sea area for the next ten years! A truly possible reaction of russian leaders in this Situation would have been, to make a seperate peace treaty with Germany in 1914 or early 1915. In the game it has completely no consequences... ;o(

Link to post
Share on other sites

On a final note, it is pure Nonsense, that in this game russians show no reaction at all when britains give this ship to the Ottomans. I read the book "The russian origins of the first world war" by sean mcmeekin in my summer Holidays and after reading it is shure for me, that this ship (and another one, which would have been ready for delivery a little later) would have been the end of all russian imperial dreams in the black sea area for the next ten years! A truly possible reaction of russian leaders in this Situation would have been, to make a seperate peace treaty with Germany in 1914 or early 1915. In the game it has completely no consequences... ;o(

 

Thanks, I've seen the book but not read it, and it's good to know this. :)

 

Interesting discussion all round too!

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Gents!

 

New to the game and Found this thread extremely interesting especially about Russian entrenchment.  I'm about to embark on my first Grand campaign (SP) in the hope of gaining enough experience to participate in MP matches.  I am  a veteran CTGW MP player, but have not seen nothing there on the scale of what SCWWI has to offer, especially on the diplomatic front, although I can say there are some other game similarities.  One of the issues early on in CTGW was "entrenchment", especially in the east, where it should have been a more fluid campaign than a static one.  One of the solutions patched in:  Was to reduce the effectiveness of entrenchment or at the very least drawing out the time for  entrenchment techs to take effect.  Yes, I have found in some of the lessor scenarios here that once entrenchment levels get up there, that a hex or rather a tile in this game is harder to overrun with out combined arms attacks, mainly with artillery and recon bombers.  With an area that Russia encompasses, it would seem a very slow go for CP.    Again I am a newbie here..

 

Bob    

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing I would have to agree on with Furchtlosundtrew: Is the stingy MMP for Germany at the beginning of the game? Soooo much to do, with so few points! Even Russia had a (approx.) hundred more points or less than Germany.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing I would have to agree on with Furchtlosundtrew: Is the stingy MMP for Germany at the beginning of the game? Soooo much to do, with so few points! Even Russia had a (approx.) hundred more points or less than Germany.

<Edit>

Sorry! I was wrong about the Russian MMP, it appears the Russians might of had gotten less MMP than the Germans at the opening turns. I don't see an edit feature for comments here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are all low at the start, and it works both ways as lots more MPPs would favour the defender more, e.g. France could reinforce damaged units better if it started with more money. It also means that more thought has to be given to research and diplomacy, versus new units.

 

All the nations were so busy mobilizing that they had little room for effectively expanding their armed forces in August 1914 beyond their pre-determined Orders of Battle. The low MPPs therefore also help to reflect the slow but steady switchover from civilian to military economic production, and after a while Germany will find herself with a lot of MPPs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...