Crossing the Somme in 1914

[ev]

I am still getting acquainted with this game. I would appreciate some advise.

It strikes me that the German player needs to cross in force the Somme River (?) somewhere near Amiens during the first three turns of the Campaign. However, I am having the most difficult time achieving this (against the AI).

Can this be done? Is this the right path?

[Hyazinth von Strachwitz]

Hello ev!

Basically there are two things to mention. At first: it is not really necessary to advance across the Somme river in summer 1914. A total victory can be achieved without it. I suggest to read my AI report, there is a lot of detail information in it.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99176

But to be a bit more precise: You can advance to Amiens in the second turn by avoiding to fight the Belgian strongholds (elimininate these later). Usually I don`t take Amiens (but you can take Abbeville in the second turn, it is undefended), but this can be achieved in the third turn if you want that. An english unit garrisons it.

[ev]

You can advance to Amiens in the second turn by avoiding to fight the Belgian strongholds (elimininate these later). Usually I don`t take Amiens (but you can take Abbeville in the second turn, it is undefended), but this can be achieved in the third turn if you want that. An english unit garrisons it.

Amiens in the second turn! I will give it a try.

Abbeville does not help me to achieve what I want. Amiens is good if your goal is to achieve a defensive line along the Somme River. Reading your strategy guide, this seems to be your objective. You are looking for a strong defensive possition in the West, so you can shift a good chunk of your force to the eastern front.

I really like your strategy. Your thought is absolutely right, France is a tough nut, and quite risky. So, don't burn yourself in France, set up a good defensive perimeter and operate as many forces as possible into Russia.

However, if that is your strategy, I would ask you one question: why invade Belgium at all? The easiest front to defend is the narrow stretch of land between Switzerland and Belgium. --- Remember Thermopylae. If you do not invade Belgium, you can defend the Franco-German border with 10 armies and 2 HQ's. You can operate all the reminder of your forces to the eastern front, on the second turn! Now, that would be something!

On the other hand, there is another way to go about the whole thing: go all out against France. Turn their flank, force them to strech their line so much they cannot possible defend every entry point. The only way to do this is to push beyond the Somme before the Allies can set a defense. If a player wants to follow this plan, then Abbeville comes short on two counts. First, it is on the wrong side of the river. If you want to keep pushing forward, you want to reach the far side of the Somme before the French units entrench. Second, the Abbeville rail lines runs through Dunkirk, which is defended and will take more time to clear. If you want to push far inland, you must open a supply line a.s.a.p.

Napoleon had a remarkable history of having to fight against multiple oponents and getting away with it. Somewhere, long time ago, I read that Napoleon would advise to tackle your strongest enemy first, and then turn around to face the rest. Who is your biggest threat here? Come to think about it, maybe you are right... France seems quite strong, but, it need not as big a threat if you can set up a strong defensive possition.

Have you tried leaving Belgium neutral?

[aesopo]

This is the way to play against the AI but you will need an extra HQ and 5 corps as the AI usually goes into Belgium and you need to butress the Belgian hole with the extra forces. With the new quick march feature - do not waste operating forces back east. Keep your defensive line in the west as short as possible and get art/rail units as soon as possible. Everything else as Hyazinth recommends - set a killing zone in the west and east as Russia tends to expose units that are easy to kill - AI needs to take a defensive role back in Russia but it does poorly.

With this, even on expert level, Germany always wins against the AI.

Hubert,

I would recommend to have random scripts to increase variability and also for the AI tweaking for Russia to give priority to get art pieces for attack and be cautious in advancing, using calvary/air (fighters/bombers/recon should be all capable of this) for scouting, and forming mutually supporting and cohesive lines (which it tries to do to some extent), taking into account supply, morale, and readiness. Units in a poor condition in these areas, would exhibit poor command and control and unwilling to expose itself to battle. But that is not the case currently. Is there someway that the AI can be tweaked to take this into account?

[Thomas Hoellering]

The game is somewhat hampered by the lack of retreating units, and the ability to "instantly" upgrade a unit to level 10. One must throw a huge amount of forces to ensure a single unit is utterly destroyed. Without artillery and the occasional bomber, and 3 full strength level 10 units attacking its near impossible.

It also seems that the attacker receives a defensive bonus for the level of entrenchment they occupy when attacking, which seems rather bizzare. When you attack, the level of entrenchment your own units occupy should not matter very much at all. (Its actually a hinderance, as your own reserves are slowed by your own defensive network...). Almost all trench to trench attacks succeeded in one fashion or another. The problem back then was, that the attacking units were so exhausted or depleted, that they could not continue the attack and new fresh enemy reserves just bumped them back out - once the attacker looted and destroyed a few key positions, they were more than delighted to return to their own trenches. Its the holding, not the taking that made WW1 such a disaster. I often have plenty of units behind my lines, to make sure I can cycle fresh new units in and out as fast as possible. I never build AA units (waste of a good space) and asside from the HQ, some bombers (for fun) and some Fighters (once again for fun), my lines pretty much just have units.

I always defend against Russia, until late 1915. By they the AI has bled Mother Russia's sons white and to the bone...then AH attacks and retreats as often as necessary to keep the Russians from gaining the upper hand again. Heck, I dont even try for Warsaw. They are content with sitting there, and the AI never makes any sense in that region. The north is easy to defend with the cost and the lakes keeping the Russians from flanking Prussia. The Ottomans can launch pretty successful Amphib attacks against southern Russia, soaking more units away.

I find that one has to pile up the attrition rate whenever one can by all means possible. Make them repair units left and right, or better yet, waste them on train rides, sink ships, take towns and give them back (they are useless for a while anyway) etc. I'm about to try making more bombing runs against harbors, and see how that pans out. Might help with the AI repairing all their Ant ships...perhaps the AI will then start building AA defenses in Harbors. Double whammy...

Cavalry charges should be a bit more usefull...especially against artillery units and planes, and other Cavalry units. I read about a British Cav unit where the english took away their Carabiner and gave them all sabers and lances, and it was thought that their attack power was increased...some unit in the middle east in 1917 I think. Ohh..the Cammel Jockeys should be a bit faster than what they are...Lawrence of Arabia and all that? And they should not have to rely on supply, or be able to use Oasis for Supply..that be cool.

TH

[Hyazinth von Strachwitz]

Ev,

I haven`t tried not to take Belgium.. and I won`t try it. I play these games in an almost "historical" mode, that means I try to stick to the historic facts as long as possible. Fighting in Belgium belongs to WWI.. that`s it. But you are right: fortifying the german border in the west would be a very good option.. France will not get through it. But that is a road I wouldn`t go down.. coz I don`t like it. Of course I do not play 100% as in history, but I simply don`t like that option.

So the answer to your question "why invade Belgium" is: because it is there.. and it brings me into a better position for later stages of the war. And it has a few producing cities that bring MPPs.. and you can plunder a bit. Belgium is easy to conquer.. a must-do in my eyes. And if Germany doesn`t take Belgium, someone else might..

Coming back on Napoleon: I´m not quite sure if the strategy to attack the strongest enemy first is the best way. Usually you start with what you can achieve easy and quick... that works pretty well if you can handle the threat of getting attacked..

After reading all of your posts carefully I think the main problem is the AI. And I´m pretty sure this will improve when Hubert has implemented a few changes. A big step to make a AI better is to reduce Arty from 3 to 2 (Tech Level 2)... because range 3 was devastating. In 1.01 defensive fire of my own Arty killed a lot of Entente Arty units.. strange. And you see: already fixed :-)

[ev]

Hyazinth,

I see your point, and it is quite solid.

Aside from narrowing the French front to +/- 10 tiles, the other benefit of leaving Belgium neutral is to delay England's entry into the war, which, in turn delays their blokade of German shipping.

How do you deal with the blockade?

[aesopo]

Unfortunately, UK does not delay even if Belgium is not attacked.