Call to Arms resumé after my first game

[Dragon99]

Hi,

now have a game as far as playing the Central Powers surrendered the Entente (Summer 1917).

Would like to writing my resumé and suggestions.

This is capitulated after Russia after some Eastern European countries (Ukraine, Estonia ....) can attack again to have no drawbacks is not good. Either this should go at all, or the Russians should then have a greatly increased military readiness. The same problem is there and even with Austria if they have left the war .....

Also, the one with the railway guns can easily pass through enemy territory and can take tons of free cities is not good ... I have been made, but I think this unit should be allowed to drive only on occupied territory.

What I like is the case with morality. But if this is where certain cities are conquered, then it should also rise again if these cities are retaken.

And the U.S. factor should be much stronger. Thus, in entering the war immediately 10 - 15 Corps and 3 -4 HQ. This Air Force ...... Otherwise, the easy-to-weak and come too late to Europe.

The end date should could go to 1920 as this war a little too fast to finish his. GC is indeed until 47 ....

All in all a great game. Congratulations to the developers.

Sorry for my English .... Google has helped ....:-))

[Hubert Cater]

Hi Dragon99,

Thanks for the feedback and one item I can confirm having been adjusted is the Rail Gun, it can no longer enter enemy territory and capture cities.

Hubert

[xwormwood]

Hi,

And the U.S. factor should be much stronger. Thus, in entering the war immediately 10 - 15 Corps and 3 -4 HQ. This Air Force ...... Otherwise, the easy-to-weak and come too late to Europe.

Hallo Dragon99.

Das die Amerikaner spät, sehr spät erscheinen ist historisch korrekt.

Frankreich war sogar aus Verägerung drauf und dran mit den Deutschen einen Separatfrieden zu schließen, nachdem die Amerikaner über lange, lange Monate hinaus keinerlei Truppen gesendet hatten (und dazu darauf bestanden, dass die eigenen Truppen in Amerika ausgebildet und -ausschließlich- von Amerikanern kommandiert werden sollten).

Hi Dragon99.

It is historical correct that the Americans arrive late, indeed very late in France. The French were already discussing about a separate peace with the Central Powers - they were extremly disappointed and angry about the american descission not to send their soldiers into the fights without a proper (american) training and leadership.

[Bill101]

Hi Dragon99

Thanks for the feedback and it's great to hear that you love the game!

Bill

[Omegaman1]

Bill, I wonder if perhaps the Entente player might be offered a decision event for the US when it joins the war, similar to the one offered to the United Kingdom for the Canadians -- namely, either rush troops to Europe with minimal experience levels, or wait (as was done historically) until they have trained and gained more experience. This way, if the Entente player is in really dire straits at the time the US enters the war, more troops might be rushed to the front. (And after all it would be nice if the US got a decision event or two in the campaign game LOL!)

Dave

[xwormwood]

Omegaman1:

Nice idea. But i think a rushed usage of american troops (in the english or french army) should be punished with a heavy national morale loss for the USA.

[Dragon99]

@ xwormwood

Historical facts are one, fun otherwise .....:-) U.S. needs too long to still act effectively in the war can be. And if it's just about the end game is the 1918th That was in reality not to see advance. In the game, but this is Sun So a deliberate and tactically sophisticated approach with the Americans is not possible because one's time is running out.

Therefore be it, both the end date set high, the U.S. supply automatically when entering the war with troops (rich course so 6-8 Corps + HQ and some other units) and what I've been in my current game again see moral loss should also be increased again be important if cities are retaken. Oh, and this needs to be revised with the new declaration of war against opponents capitulated.

[Bill101]

I've been thinking about this and one problem here is that if we were to give the US a large army to start with, then this would severely penalize the Central Powers player who would now face a huge influx of US troops into Europe not only much quicker than was historically possible but also much quicker than they would be expecting. Could we be upsetting the Central Powers player to please the Entente player?

[lettowvorbeck]

Yes, one of the worst things you can do in a wargame is introduce some exceedingly ahistorical feature just to make it more "fun" for one side. If anything the US should arrive even later in most games, because the human TA player is far less likely to irritate the US with unrestricted sub warfare, the Zimmerman Telegram, etc.

[lettowvorbeck]

I would be firmly against any kind of speeding up of US mobilization, but I agree that the game scenario should really be the end of 1919 rather than 1918. I would guess that few games would reach that point, but that is the historical period when it was expected by the Allies that US would be the deciding factor.

@ xwormwood

Historical facts are one, fun otherwise .....:-) U.S. needs too long to still act effectively in the war can be. And if it's just about the end game is the 1918th That was in reality not to see advance. In the game, but this is Sun So a deliberate and tactically sophisticated approach with the Americans is not possible because one's time is running out.

Therefore be it, both the end date set high, the U.S. supply automatically when entering the war with troops (rich course so 6-8 Corps + HQ and some other units) and what I've been in my current game again see moral loss should also be increased again be important if cities are retaken. Oh, and this needs to be revised with the new declaration of war against opponents capitulated.