Game suggestions

[Ludi1867]

With a handle like ‘lettowvorbeck’ I was pretty sure you were not focused on the western front – more of an east African guy would have been my guess! Your example of yet another initiative in the Middle East – the German call for a Jihad against the Allies – is an excellent demonstration of how broad this war ended up being. The results of the German initiative in this case were pretty minimal during the war, but arguably the disturbances resulting from the First World War are still being worked out – Iraq and Kuwait, along with many other countries in that region, simply did not exist before the war started as anything but imperial provinces. The manner in which the debris of the Ottoman Empire was re-packaged has been an ongoing problem for the world for almost a century now…pretty impressive for a mostly ‘slow and boring’ war!

However, I would not want to make it seem that I am focused only on the eastern areas. I was simply trying to build on the points already made, most of which used western examples, to point out that there was quite a big war beyond the western front, and one that had some very important diplomatic aspects. I have spent an enormous amount of time grappling with the western front. While things tended to happen slowly there, arguably the changes in warfare that occurred from 1914 to 1918 were much more revolutionary than that which occurred from 1939 to 1944 (deliberately leaving out 1945, as nukes start then). The problem with simulating a lot of the changes on the western front in this period is that most of the changes were doctrinal and mildly technological (a lot of the technology had already existed in 1914, but the ways to use it optimally was NOT known), so the changes happened comparatively slowly. This meant that a lot of the combat was simply close engagements (often with a siege warfare aspect as a result of entrenchments, etc) prolonged over long periods, and the consequence of such fighting was high casualties. What should be remembered is that long duration close engagements in World War II had casualty rates quite comparable to most WW I battles – casualties in the Battle of Normandy before the breakout is a good example. The difference, of course, is that there were comparatively few prolonged engagements on the western front in the Second War – things are a little different on the eastern front, where casualties were actually far worse than in the First War, but that experience does not resonate as much for most people living in the west.

Anyway, suffice it to say that I really do think the First World War was anything but mostly slow and boring, and that I am really hoping that SC does the conflict justice (and I will probably buy it in any, as I have purchased every single one of these games, because the general engine provides the best overall look at these periods of any engine I have found, and ALSO because the engine gets better every time. But I always keep hoping for more!).

Xwormwood added his comment as I prepared the above, and I am glad to have his reassurance!

[Bill101]

Ludi1867,

I am an eastern/middle east/balkans guy, too. I just finished a new book about the Berlin to Bagdad railway and the German plans to launch an anti-Entente Jihad in Libya, Sudan, Arabia, Afghanistan, Persia, etc. They invested a huge amount of money for little historical result, but I hope the option is in the game. The Sussumi tribesmen actually launched a fairly serious attack on Egypt from the west.

There are already some options for Germany and the Ottomans in this area that we've implemented, as it is an interesting area.

I'm currently reading Peter Hopkirk's On Secret Service East of Constantinople: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. Is that the book or is it a different one?

[SeaMonkey]

Bill, eventually oil as a major coveted resource is going to have to be addressed. Anyone that believes that war does not revolve around this one asset is surely "missing the boat". As food, shelter, and ammunition are represented by the supply aspects of SC, the ability to move air, naval and motorized assets around the map without a reference to energy allocations is a gross step in the wrong direction.

I know the fossil fuel parameter is not totally ignored by the engine, but unfortunately the implimentation of the fuel characteristics to drive the war engine are approached in a way that just seems comical in retrospect to the enormity of the historical consequences.

Are we looking for a solution, a further complication of the SC engine to track "fuel" as the units are pushed around the map? What are some suggestions?

[lettowvorbeck]

There are already some options for Germany and the Ottomans in this area that we've implemented, as it is an interesting area.

I'm currently reading Peter Hopkirk's On Secret Service East of Constantinople: The Plot to Bring Down the British Empire. Is that the book or is it a different one?

A different one: "The Berlin-Baghdad Express: The Ottoman Empire and Germany's Bid for World Power" by Sean McMeekin (Belknap, 2010).

[Bill101]

A different one: "The Berlin-Baghdad Express: The Ottoman Empire and Germany's Bid for World Power" by Sean McMeekin (Belknap, 2010).

Ah, I'd not seen that one. I'll have to check it out, thanks!

[pacifffick]

Is it possible to add your own cell of new units in addition to the already existing? If yes, how?

[Bill101]

Hi

I'm not sure what you mean by "cell" but the existing unit types can be renamed and have their Combat Target Values amended.

[pacifffick]

Я хотел спросить, можно ли добавить дополнительный блок, в дополнение ко всем и доступно? например, морской блок?

[Bill101]

Understood. You cannot add any more, but you can modify those in the game.

[pacifffick]

So - I can from the land to make the sea?

[Bill101]

The units cannot change type, so land units cannot be modified into naval units, but all land units can be modified to varying degrees.

[pacifffick]

Sorry, but nothing can be done, I'll get out the fact that there is)
Thanks for the info)