Ataman Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Call to arms is excellent in terms of pbem and solo play so I'm glad I purchased Breakthrough while waiting for Strategic command 3. Any of the other scenarios or campaigns popular for pbem play? Russian civil war, Africa campaign and ww2 scenario specifically. Does smaller scale (division) campaigns offer good pbem play? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted July 14, 2015 Share Posted July 14, 2015 (edited) Hi Ataman When designing the campaigns I played them all in PBEM, and endeavoured to get all working properly for Multiplayer. My favourites for that are: East Africa Russian Civil War Franco-Prussian War The Siege of Kut The Somme Not forgetting the 1914 March on Paris and 1918 Ludendorff Offensive campaigns, which are more playable than one might think at first glance. If I had more free time I would definitely play all of these some more times! Bill Edited July 14, 2015 by Bill101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furchtlosundtrew Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Some comment regarding the March on Paris Scenario, you named, BillI tried this one in a pbem with each side some weeks before. On the first sight i liked it really. But with the time I am convinced, that Germany is unable to win this Scenario, if the Entente Player doesn't make serious mistakes. The biggest Problem is the supply in western Belgium, which slows down every german advance effectively. Every rail line leads at some Point through a belgium fortress. These are very strong here (Counter fire by the fortresses to enemy Units nearby at the end of the turns). Germany has just 1 Artillery Piece in the beginning and this one is far away. So the fortresses take time to be taken. Even if it succeeds very fast (and than surely with high losses), the supply in the fortress goes to 0 and therefore the supply of towns/cities behind These fortresses will be max. 5 (and therefore HQs at max 8, which is not enough for further fights) as long, as the fortresses grows up to 5. This will take the time of 5 (!) own turns and as the first (lets say 10 turns) are crucial before it becomes a static warfare, you are hindered to reach decisive positions. There is (i belive) no alternative to go through belgium, as the French are able to move their eastern mobilizing Units within the lines and trenches to the Luxemburg/Maubeuge area very fast. Is anyone here, who has a working winning strategy for this Scenario with Germany?Otherwise it would be advisable (in my eyes) to make it a bit easier for Germans. Some suggestions:- Adding another artillery-Piece for germany or at least make the only one deployable in the Deployment-Turn, so it can be placed at the Belgium Border.- Gas/Shell Tech Level 1 for Germany or at least give the starting artillery 10 Shots in the beginning.- remove the artillery fire by fortress guns at nearby units from all or maybe some of the fortresses or (if it's possible) imit it down to max. 2 Shots/Turn. It can be frustrating to encircle a fortress with 4 or more corpses and every one gets a hit after and before my turn... ;o(- Leave the fortress of liege (maybe not the nearby fort) empty in the beginning to model the coup de main by Ludendorffs 14th Infanterie Brigade on the citadelle and the City of Liege itself on the 7th August '14.What du you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel32 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 All I can say is I highly disagree. Germany has the initiative and you need to learn how to play it. It is all the Entente can do in the beginning just to survive depending on how the Germans play. Belgium is broken in 2 turns if there is no mud, and even at that can be done if determined. But in the end Belgium is a stepping stone. The war is always won in the east! Give the Germans what you want and it is war over if I am playing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furchtlosundtrew Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 Hi Steel32, thanks for your comment, but i belive we are not talking (or writing) about the same Scenario. I belive you are writing about the call to arms Scenario, as you write about winning the war in the east and defeating belgium in 2 turns. I agree (if you are really talking about CtA). But i was writing about the Scenario "march on Paris" which covers only the western Front in '14... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel32 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Hello Furchtlosundtrew, Such a long name:) I would agree with your comments for the most, as I should not send messages when I drink. However I still mostly stand by my comments from most of response. I believe that the team for Strategic Command Battlefront games mostly do a good job in reflecting the real war. These are real problems that the Germans encountered. No different than any modern war going back to the US civil war where RR heads are key along with supply. These are problems the Germans encountered along the way where it just was not strategy, nor supply or wear and tear but a lot of factors. Try cutting the supply to these points or other. Been so long that I played but also played PBEM and won as the Central Powers and believe possible. Open to game if you like? Regards, Steel32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted August 3, 2015 Share Posted August 3, 2015 Thanks for the feedback Furchtlosundtrew. Like Steel32 it's been a while since I played this in PBEM. You are right about the Belgian fortresses, but then in real life the German forces didn't reach Mons until the 22nd August, so if I recall correctly the time taken in game is roughly correct. I would certainly be interested to hear how you both get on in PBEM if you do have a chance to play it. Incidentally, I do still have one PBEM game of Breakthrough on the go, and I have to disagree about winning or losing the war in the east. The Germans are suffering very heavily in the west and it is preventing them from delivering the killing blow against the Russians. I have always had the impression that Entente players don't invest in diplomacy as much as they should, for I have cut Germany's income down by more than 100 MPPs a turn by cutting off their imports from Norway, Sweden and Holland. The latter is reducing Germany's National Morale nicely every turn too, and all of this achieved without the death of a single British or French soldier! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel32 Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Bill Hard to argue with an immortal in SC, and perhaps I should clarify my remark on the east. I still believe the war is for the most part won in the east if the Germans play correct. That is they must take the initiative from the Russians as soon as possible or almost no matter what they do in the west they can and usually will lose the overall war. If left to their own the Russians become a 3 headed monster that can reach out in so many directions. Also per your points if given time the western entente will either by force or diplomacy start to bring down Germany as you state, however I must admit I rarely play diplomacy the 1st 2 years. I did play a game against the computer with March on Paris and find that an aggressive fast march surrounding the fortress' although will cost the Germans men due to the artillery will eliminate the fortress somewhat quickly. The northern one need to take that division out 1st before you surround. However I do also notice that the fortress' over time do not lose value. Is there a reason for this? My personal preference for my artillery is to send to Verdun ASAP and take the French on in the center rather than Belgium but I guess to each their own. Steel32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Hi Steel32 I'd recommend trying the diplomacy asap in the game as the Entente. That's often what I have done, providing I've got the MPPs, and this is especially true if Germany heads east. Your clarification about Russia becoming a monster is true, and that does make sense. For the 1914 March on Paris campaign, in fact for all, Fortresses do not lose value if surrounded unlike other resources, as this is to reflect their ability to withstand sieges. Working on the assumption that they will have stocks of food and munitions that towns and cities wouldn't necessarily have. This means that artillery, or brute force, are generally required to take them. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furchtlosundtrew Posted August 4, 2015 Share Posted August 4, 2015 Hi there,thanks for your comments. Id like to test march on Paris against you, Steel32. Unfortunately I have three hard Pbems at the Moment and a hard time at work. Maybe in two weeks the situation will be a bit better an we could start. If this is OK, I will send you my email-adress per PM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel32 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 Hello Furchtlosundtrew, After playing the computer some more I do agree with you more that it is very hard to take out those fortress in Belgium without artillery support and now it is coming back to me that I do not attack Belgium but hit France direct with everything. However for the sake of argument when we do play I will try something different and attack Belgium to see if it can be done. And I remember the not losing supply thing for surrounded areas was to represent the strength of fortified positions in the war. steelman3250@hotmail.com whenever you get a chance let me know. Regards, Steel32 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts