Icarus Mod, Version 6 in Preliminary Release

[mdsmall]

The following is a complete log of change to the mod Version 6.4, compared to Version 6.3 (which was last updated on July 22, 2024). See previous posts in this thread for the changes made in Version 6.2 and 6.3. A complete Explanation of Modifications for the mod can be downloaded from my DropBox folder (see link above).

Information for Players:

- A lot of "under the hood" cosmetic work has been done in this version to revise the text and the timing of information pop-ups to more closely correspond to what is happening in the game. Players should no longer receive pop-ups at the end of their turn informing them when new units have deployed for the other side. The explanations of each tech in the Research Menu now exactly reflect all of the changes made in this mod.

Unit Capabilities and Upgrades:

- The approach to German stormtroopers has been substantially revised. A completely new tech called Combined Arms, which can only be researched by Germany, is used to manage their build limits and their capacities for attack, evading combat and demoralization. While they can be built as early as 1916, they will not achieve their full capacity until level 4 in Combined Arms is reached, which will not be until sometime in 1917 or later (if Germany decides to research this tech at all). See the revised Guide to Version 6.4 posted in my Dropbox for details.

Comment: creating a dedicated tech for stormtroopers is a cleaner way to manage their development than trying to add factors for them onto other techs. Using research progression rates for this tech to determine when they appear is also a more elegant solution than imposing arbitrary build dates or using special Decision Events.

Tech Chit Maximums:

- Spying and Intelligence has a maximum of 2.

Comment: in early iterations of the mod, I raised this maximum to 3 for the UK and Germany. But for game balance reasons, I have reverted back to 2. Partly this is because Germany now has an additional tech to invest in (Combined Arms) and partly not to give the UK an added opportunity to spot German subs at sea if they can reach Level 3 in intelligence.

Building Units:

- India can build one Corps and one Detachment (rather than two Corps) above number of the Indian units that already appear through Decision Events.

- The UK Corps build limit is now set at 23, correcting for the transfer of the Canadian Corps to the ANZAC Corps build limit and the additional Corps that India can build. The UK can build 2 Marines.

- Serbia can now build one Recon Bomber (but still cannot research any aerial warfare tech).

War Weariness:

- Even though Serbia does not suffer from war weariness, they can invest MPPs to boost their morale following the same formula as other Entente Powers. They can spend 25 MPPs to boost Morale by 50 NM points on the first turn of 1917, if their National Morale is below 50%; and again, on the first turn of 1918, if their national morale is below 40%.

- The thresholds for Russia to invest in boosting National Morale, provided that the First Revolution has happened, is now 30% from February 1917 and 25% from January 1918. Unlike other powers, these scripts for Russia do not have a fixed date on which they fire (since the date of the First Revolution depends on gameplay); they can fire whenever Russian NM falls below those thresholds (i.e. they are a Type 1 event, rather than a Type 3 event).

Comment: it seemed more realist to lower this threshold, but to give the new post-Czarist Russian government more flexibility when to make these investments.

Victory Conditions:

- Warsaw has been added to the list of objectives the Central Powers must hold for a Minor Victory, along with Paris and Verdun. (Holding Warsaw is not a requirement for an Entente Minor Victory).

Comment: this was added to ensure that the Central Powers cannot win by taking a purely defensive posture towards Russia. This should not affect most games, as the Central Powers almost always push at least that far into Russia if they are to have any hope of victory.

Ottoman Empire Modifications:

- Antep has been added as an Industrial Centre for the Ottoman Empire.

Comment: this should make the Ottomans less vulnerable to Entente micro-landings along the Turkish coast to cut the rail line to Constantinople.

- The rail connection over the Bosphorus has been removed, meaning that CP units using operational movement to transfer from Europe to Asia will have to end their move in Constantinople and move the next turn to Scutari (or vice-versa) before resuming operational movement.

Comment: this will significantly slow down the Central Powers ability to "teleport" units from (say) Lithuania to Syria in one turn. Given that a rail bridge was not built over the Bosphorus until the 1960s, it is much more realistic.

- For the 1914 campaign, the chances of the Arab Revolt firing from 6 November 1915 onward are now 25% (up from 20%). For the 1916 campaign, the chances of it firing from 29 January 1916 onward are now 50% (rather than 100%).

Persia:

- The four units of the Persian Gendarmerie are now 5-strength Garrisons (rather than Detachments). If the Entente attacks Persia, there is a 50% chance for each of them to mobilize for Persia; the other 50% of the time, they do not mobilize. (If the Central Powers attack Persia, 50% of the time they mobilize for Persia, the other 50% they defect to the Ottomans). Persian Gendarmerie units only mobilize when a regular unit of either side comes within three hexes of their mobilization points.
Comment: this should make it easier, and more unpredictable, for both sides to invade Persia

Austria-Hungary:

- Austro-Hungarian naval saboteurs can now attack Entente units in the port of Tirana in Albania (giving them a comparable number of chance of a hit per turn as Italy). They can inflict a potential 1- 5 points of damage on Entente ships in the target ports (rather than 3- 5 points).

Denmark:

- If the UK decides to enhance the blockade against neutrals in April 1916 (DE-165), Denmark will also swing 5- 10% to the Central Powers. This happens only once for Denmark (compared to once a year for the Netherlands).

Comment: Denmark was a secondary target of these measures. Adding this small swing for Denmark provides an additional offset benefit to the CP if the UK decides to crush food German food imports from the Netherlands.

France:

The Fusiliers Marins which France can build through a DE now arrives as a regular Division, not as a unit of Marines.

Comment: I did not see why this emergency division should have the special capabilities of Marines. France can still build one Marine division and can receive a second one through the Gallipoli Decision Event.

Germany:

- The NM effects of the Entente blockade will only increase at the start of 1917 (rather than in 1916, 1917 and 1918). From January 1917 onward, each occupied blockade hex on the Northern Line will cost Germany 30 NM points (up from 20) and on the Distant Line 15 NM points (up from 10), for a maximum of 480 NM loss per turn if every blockade hex is covered.

- The NM benefits to Germany of declaring unrestricted naval warfare will also only increase at the start of 1917 (rather than in 1916 and 1917). Starting in 1914, Germany will receive 80 NM points for carrying out unrestricted warfare per zone; starting in 1917, this rises to 120 NM points per zone.

Comment: Play-testing showed that ratcheting up the blockade effects on Germany three times over the course of the war was too much, so I have gone back to my earlier formula. The slight increase in NM benefits to Germany of unrestricted warfare makes it easier to compare the effects of this countermeasure versus the Entente blockade: one German sub in a UK naval zone offsets the NM effects of the blockade on four hexes of the Northern line and eight on the Distant line.

- If the U.K. decides to enhance the blockade against neutrals, Germany will immediately lose the 30 NM points a turn it receives from food imports from the Netherlands. The schedule by which Germany progressively loses MPPs from food imports remains the same over 1916, 1917 and 1918.

Comment: the NM benefits to Germany of Dutch food imports are so small that it seemed simpler to eliminate them entirely if the UK decides to increase the blockade.

- The DE giving Germany the option to create a new HQ for General Falkenhayn now fires if Romania enters the war for the Entente. (German failure to capture Verdun is no longer a condition as well for this DE). Von Falkenhayn's HQ enters with one point of experience (rather than two).

India:

Can now build one corps, rather than two, over the number of units it receives through Decision Events; but it can now build one more Detachment.

Italy:

- Italian frogmen can no longer strike CP units in the port of Cetinje (if the CP captures it) and their overall chances of a strike per turn have been limited to 5%, equivalent to the chances for Austro-Hungarian saboteurs. Similarly, the range of damage they can do is now 1-5 points (rather than 3- 5 points).

Russia:

- The NM value of captured Russian towns is now 10 NM points (up from 0 in Version 6.3, but less than 12 points in the regular game).

Comment: playtesting showed that reducing the NM value of captured Russian towns to zero had too big an impact on Germany's ability to offset the blockade by capturing resources in the East.

- Additional mines have been added to the edge of the map in the Urals so that Russia's overall MPP production will not be affected by the reduction in the maximum supply capacity of Russian towns, fortified towns and cities.

Serbia:

- Can now build one Recon Bomber.

Spain:

- The DE giving the Central Powers the option to gain access to ports in Spanish North Africa will fire if Spain swings to 15% towards the Central Powers (rather than 20%). Spain will now swing 20% towards the Central Powers if Italy withdraws from the war (rather than 30%). The ceiling for Spanish mobilization for either side is now 60% (rather than 50%).

Comment: these small changes were made to encourage the CP to use diplomacy to gain access to Spanish ports, but not to risk carrying Spain over the maximum mobilization threshold if the CP achieved a sudden breakthrough with diplomacy chits already invested.

United Kingdom:

The Royal Naval Division which the U.K. can build through a Decision Event in 1914 is now a Division, not a unit of Marines. The U.K.'s build limit for Marines is now two.

[Morsey]

Hello, and thanks for taking the time to make this mod.

I cannot see the scenarios in the list of availalbe scenarios.

I have followed the directions that were posted above, I even did a re-install of the game.

I do have the DLC that comes with the WWI game.

Any ideas?

Thanks

[Willard]

Hello and thanks for putting this mod together!

Regarding installation, there appears to be some issues with how the files in the DL link are organized and where exactly they are supposed to be installed.

In the Dropbox link, there is the _1914 and _1916 scenarios plus the cgn files.

Additionally there are four folders entitled CP - Diplomatic Advice, CP - Military Advice, Entente - Diplomatic Advice, and Entente - Military Advice.

I am able to install both scenarios and cgn files along with finding and starting the scenarios. However, once i get past the start screen to the initial starting map position I get two separate error messages - in the _1914 there is a splash message dialog box error; and in the _1916 there is a map error.

Any suggestions?

[mdsmall]

Hi - thanks for your interest in the mod. I believe that other players have been able to download the files from my DropBox link and start playing the mod, so these error messages may be temporary. I have occasionally seen issues like this when play-testing the mod on my own PC. You might try starting the mod again a couple of times in hot-seat mode, or reinstalling the mod files and see if the problem recurs. I would be grateful for any insights from the devs or other players who are more familiar with the source of error messages like the ones you report.

In the meantime, anyone who would like me to send them the files directly can just DM me and send me your email address. I will be happy to send them to you directly.

Michael

[Willard]

Uninstalled the non-Steam version and did a clean install and reboot.
Reinstalled with no issues.
Added the mod into the Campaign folder -> scenario does not show up to select.
Added the mod into the Community Pack/Campaigns folder -> able to select scenario but crashes to desktop with previous error message.

Install files for WWI were just DL from Matrix website and the scenario folders were downloaded from your link.
Perhaps you have scenario files uploaded to DropBox? Otherwise there is no reason for an error.

[mdsmall]

Hi - Have you pasted into your Campaigns folder both the folder labelled 1914 Icarus 6.4 and the 1914 Icarus 6.4.cgn file ? (ditto for the 1916 folder and .gcn file) Both the folder and the .gcn file are needed to make each scenario work.

If so, perhaps another reader has some helpful advice. Regret that this kind of tech trouble-shooting is not my area of expertise!

[BillRunacre]

Just to add, the folder the campaigns need to go into is this one:

%HOMEPATH%\Documents\My Games\Strategic Command WWI\Campaigns


(Do not place them in the folder where the game's official campaigns are).

[Willard]

Good morning -

Combined response to the previous two messages.

#1 - Yes, I moved both files -> the folder and the cgn file.

#2 - This "%HOMEPATH%\Documents\My Games\Strategic Command WWI\Campaigns" is exactly where the official campaigns are in my install (both previously and for the reinstall). If I put the folder/file in there it does not show up in the scenario screen.

If I place them in the %HOMEPATH%\Documents\My Games\Strategic Command WWI\Community Pack\Campaigns" along with the 1913 The Great Scenario, the Icarus scenario will show up and load up until an error message pops on the main map screen.

That error message says "FAILED(splash_message_dialog:draw_splash_popup_text_to_buffer): No such file or directory.

[mdsmall]

Hi - You should have two folders labelled Campaigns. If you open the Editor, you will see two little folders on the top left of your screen, both named Campaigns. The yellow one is for the official game scenarios. The blue one is for mods. Paste the mod files there.

Old Crow did a Mod Installation Tutorial which might help.

You can find it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YmZHg0 ... xpgpAz4yQ7

I hope one of these approaches works.

[Willard]

Ok I figured out the proper install path. It was unclear to mean what everyone was saying about two campaign folders. I kept installing everything in the campaign folder located in the game install folder. Morsey sent me a screenshot and I realized there was second game and campaign folder in my windows profile/my documents.

Would recommend that be clarified for morons like me.
Thanks and will get you feedback on the mod.

[mdsmall]

Hi - I have found a couple of small glitches to the 1916 Icarus 6.4 mod. They concern the entrenchments for French units in the Salonika beachhead; and a date glitch for the Ottomans script to spend MPPs to boost national morale in 1917. These have now been corrected in the 1916 Icarus 6.4 campaign files in my dropbox (see the link in the first post of this thread). If you have downloaded the 1916 campaign files, I suggest you downloaded the corrected version dated September 3 2024 (for the .cgn file). These glitches did not affect the 1914 campaign files.

[Willard]

Couple of thoughts now that I have played the mod a few times. Enjoyed the mod and additional/tweaked options. Keep up the great work!

#1 - First and foremost is the issue of American war entry. In all previous games, US war entry was pretty low and not really close to getting into the war when it would have made a difference. In the last game played, Italy got knocked out and US war entry dropped from 68% to 44%. That doesn't make much sense.

Using the April 1917 DOW as the historical bench mark, it seems to me that if the war is going good for the CP (i.e. better than historical benchmark), then US war entry should start increase much earlier. The US was very motivated to protect their investment (significant loans) to the Entente war effort. This is simply not modeled great (in the base game too) as between low US war entry and MP production, the US cannot make even a historical economic contribution to the Entente. To be clear, I am not talking about the US being able to field vast armies immediately upon entry -> that should take about 9-12 months to mobilize. However the economic support the US provided via loans (i.e. MPs) should be much more significant that was happens in game.

Not sure if it is possible to model, but I would consider a baseline increase for US war entry at 1% per Entente turn or perhaps an event driven 5% every 4-6 turns to get the U.S. to about a minimum 35-40% after 30+ Entente turns. This should provide a better benchmark to allow the US to provide meaningful economic support (which would drive the German player to start hitting those Brit convoys) that can be accelerated or slowed down based upon the progress of the war and using the April 17 entry point as a baseline.

I agree that dip spamming the US is not good for the game but I am also not sure if 150MP per dip chit is too high. If the Entente is underperforming, it becomes a quick death spiral as they need all MPs for reinforcements and 150 a pop is way too high. I think a drop to 125 or 100 may be a better sweet spot for the UK and France.

#2 - The other aspect of US war entry is Germany's sub offensive. Right now it is very easy for the Germans to avoid UK shipping, and agitating the US, by focusing on shipments to Russia. That is a much safer approach for Germany and probably not historic. I think this can be fixed a couple of different ways via events.

One option would be to use the existing German sub warfare events but with a negative modifier if the Germans don't fire the event. So for example, choosing the sub warfare event and requiring to have XX # of subs within XX hex marks of Brit convoys increases German morale, decreases UK moral, and increasing US war entry per turn (above the standard rate listed above in #1). Conversely, if the German player chooses not to fire the event, German morale decreases, UK moral increases and US war entry does not increase above the stand rate recommended in #1. In either scenario, there are pluses and minuses to the German player whereas now there are basically no ramifications to hitting Brit convoy shipping lanes.

Adding in increase US economic per turn convoy contributions earlier on also will drive this as well. Right now as the CP, I purposely ignore the US convoys from 1914-1916 as the MP level is so low it isn't worth targeting and driving up US war entry - especially as I want to keep the US out for as long as possible.

[mdsmall]

Hi Willard - I am glad you are enjoying the mod and thank you for the very thoughtful feedback. As it happens, I just finished a game of the 1916 campaign in the mod against Old Crow (you can see the match on his YT channel - he has posted links in the main forum). He has argued for having a close to historical U.S. war entry as well at least for that campaign and I have been thinking about various options. I will consider your suggestions as well - in particular the idea of making the decision to declare unrestricted naval warfare a two-edged sword, with costs to Germany of not doing so. I think all of your ideas are mod-able, except for changing the costs of diplo chits towards majors which is fixed.

As I see it there are two considerations here for any further adjustments to these settings. First, should U.S. entry in April 1917 be regarded as "inevitable" or in effect, the default setting? My understanding is that it was very much driven by the German decision to resume unrestricted naval warfare against neutral shipping in early 1917 (which in turn was driven the stalemate on the Western Front and the Entente blockade starting to seriously bite into German national morale). The decision was controversial within the German leadership and they certainly were not compelled to resume unrestricted naval warfare. So, in game terms, one has to think of what would be a reasonable date for U.S. war entry if Germany decides to postpone unrestricted naval warfare until after the U.S. enters the war, and what are the costs to Germany of foregoing that decision?

A second, even more strategic consideration is how to calibrate the NM effects of the Entente blockade, so that Germany is working against a long-term NM clock: they have to be able to take out both Russia and France by the summer of 1918 at the latest, otherwise, their National Morale will hit 0% by November (which is in game terms is what happened historically). It is tricky to model this, as game engine tends to make succesful attackers stronger over time and defending powers weaker (largely through the effects of gaining experience for generals and units), rather than both attackers and defenders suffering from progressive war-weariness. Thus, it is hard to replicate the historical situation where the Germans are close to winning, while also being very close to losing, right up until the defeat of their last offensive in the West in the summer of 1918. Still - this is what makes WW1 such an interesting strategic situation to try to capture in a mod, compared to WW2 where the tides run all one way for the Axis until sometime in 1942, when they shift and run all the other way for the Allies.

I look forward to other readers comments on these suggestions.

[MoongazerSlitherineSSL]

A second, even more strategic consideration is how to calibrate the NM effects of the Entente blockade, so that Germany is working against a long-term NM clock: they have to be able to take out both Russia and France by the summer of 1918 at the latest, otherwise, their National Morale will hit 0% by November (which is in game terms is what happened historically). It is tricky to model this, as game engine tends to make succesful attackers stronger over time and defending powers weaker (largely through the effects of gaining experience for generals and units), rather than both attackers and defenders suffering from progressive war-weariness. Thus, it is hard to replicate the historical situation where the Germans are close to winning, while also being very close to losing, right up until the defeat of their last offensive in the West in the summer of 1918. Still - this is what makes WW1 such an interesting strategic situation to try to capture in a mod, compared to WW2 where the tides run all one way for the Axis until sometime in 1942, when they shift and run all the other way for the Allies.

I look forward to other readers comments on these suggestions.

Maybe represent it with escalating effect from the blockade by increasing its NM drain as the war goes on? If it is possible to script in such way.

As for the US, I too agree that they should enter the war by autumn 1917 in the latest. United States have never seen much play in the original 1914 scenario and this change would have made an interesting change to the pace.

[shri]

Michael,
I have an ongoing game in ICARUS 6+ version (latest) and would like to point out a major grouse-
SUEZ

Due to immense pressure in France, UK abandoned the ME and had them transported to Europe. Hence, Ottomans did a suicidal charge to SUEZ.
However, UK ships traversed suez despite fall of suez city and blockaded the Ottoman corps in it, slowly they killed it due to lack of supplies.

This is extremely a-historical.

1. Suez was as important as Gibraltar and Malta combined, maybe more.
2. Suez city an Ottoman corps occupying means ~30000 infantry men with guns (maybe more). Ships shouldn't pass by them so easily without massive losses.

[mdsmall]

Michael,
I have an ongoing game in ICARUS 6+ version (latest) and would like to point out a major grouse-
SUEZ

Due to immense pressure in France, UK abandoned the ME and had them transported to Europe. Hence, Ottomans did a suicidal charge to SUEZ.
However, UK ships traversed suez despite fall of suez city and blockaded the Ottoman corps in it, slowly they killed it due to lack of supplies.

Hi shri - glad to hear that you are play-testing the latest version of the mod. However, I don't quite understand the problem you describe. Are you saying that the Ottomans captured Suez (the town, on the west side of the canal) and then UK ships occupied the canal hexes cutting off the occupying Ottoman corps from other sources of supply? If so, the only way the Entente could move ships into the canal hexes is if they were still under Entente control. That sounds more like a game-play issue due to the Ottomans failure to secure their supply lines back to Gaza with other ground units. But please describe the problem as you see it in a bit more detail. (A screen-shot would be ideal).

I can't think of any feature of the mod which would create this vulnerability. But happy to investigate further with you

Michael

[shri]

Michael,
I have an ongoing game in ICARUS 6+ version (latest) and would like to point out a major grouse-
SUEZ

Due to immense pressure in France, UK abandoned the ME and had them transported to Europe. Hence, Ottomans did a suicidal charge to SUEZ.
However, UK ships traversed suez despite fall of suez city and blockaded the Ottoman corps in it, slowly they killed it due to lack of supplies.

Hi shri - glad to hear that you are play-testing the latest version of the mod. However, I don't quite understand the problem you describe. Are you saying that the Ottomans captured Suez (the town, on the west side of the canal) and then UK ships occupied the canal hexes cutting off the occupying Ottoman corps from other sources of supply? If so, the only way the Entente could move ships into the canal hexes is if they were still under Entente control. That sounds more like a game-play issue due to the Ottomans failure to secure their supply lines back to Gaza with other ground units. But please describe the problem as you see it in a bit more detail. (A screen-shot would be ideal).

I can't think of any feature of the mod which would create this vulnerability. But happy to investigate further with you

Michael

Michael,
First of all i am not blaming your excellent mod.
I am sorry to have not taken screenshots of my game.

Anyway, i will try to describe the situation-
1. I launched an all out Schlieffen, force marching and all that and have taken upto Amiens and surrounded Verdun (it still stands)
2. UK decides to get it's Indian, Canadian and Anzac troops to France/UK instead of Egypt etc.
3. UK was left with 2 measly garrisons in Egypt + HQ + i think 1 Cavalry
4. i force marched the starting 3 Ottoman corps to Sinai and fought a running battle with his troops, 2 Corps damaged his garrisons and an opening was found.
5. I captured SUEZ (on Egyptian side) with an Ottoman corps
6. However, next turn he closed supplies with his cavalry, so i force marched my Medina corps to Aqaba to try and send a reinforcement by Sea.
7. Then he moved 3 ships and bombarded my suez unit and thus reduced its supply and blockaded the port, stalling my possiblities to reinforce or resupply or to add more troops.

I thought it was a-historical.
Regards,
Shri.

[mdsmall]

Anyway, i will try to describe the situation-
1. I launched an all out Schlieffen, force marching and all that and have taken upto Amiens and surrounded Verdun (it still stands)
2. UK decides to get it's Indian, Canadian and Anzac troops to France/UK instead of Egypt etc.
3. UK was left with 2 measly garrisons in Egypt + HQ + i think 1 Cavalry
4. i force marched the starting 3 Ottoman corps to Sinai and fought a running battle with his troops, 2 Corps damaged his garrisons and an opening was found.
5. I captured SUEZ (on Egyptian side) with an Ottoman corps
6. However, next turn he closed supplies with his cavalry, so i force marched my Medina corps to Aqaba to try and send a reinforcement by Sea.
7. Then he moved 3 ships and bombarded my suez unit and thus reduced its supply and blockaded the port, stalling my possiblities to reinforce or resupply or to add more troops.

I thought it was a-historical.
Regards,
Shri.

Hi shri - to be honest, it sounds like an exciting game to me. You did a daring attack and your opponent found a creative way to turn the tables relying on his naval superiority to counter it. Moves like the ones you describe above are what make games against a human opponent so much more interesting than SP play.

Yes, it may be ahistorical for your Ottoman corps to run out of supply as quickly as it did after a naval bombardment (even though it sounds like it was cut off from Gaza by the Entente recapturing the canal hexes). But it is also ahistorical that the Ottomans could have organized enough transports in one turn in the Red Sea to send significant reinforcements from Aqaba to the captured port of Suez. But good for you for even thinking of this tactic! Too bad your opponent was able to recapture the canal and move enough naval units into the Red Sea to counter it.

There are limits to how historical any game engine can be, while still keeping the game playable and interesting for both sides. Overall, I think Strategic Command does a pretty good job of balancing historical accuracy with playability. I would suggest you just chalk up this this episode to experience.

Good luck in beseiging Verdun!

Michael

[shri]

Anyway, i will try to describe the situation-
1. I launched an all out Schlieffen, force marching and all that and have taken upto Amiens and surrounded Verdun (it still stands)
2. UK decides to get it's Indian, Canadian and Anzac troops to France/UK instead of Egypt etc.
3. UK was left with 2 measly garrisons in Egypt + HQ + i think 1 Cavalry
4. i force marched the starting 3 Ottoman corps to Sinai and fought a running battle with his troops, 2 Corps damaged his garrisons and an opening was found.
5. I captured SUEZ (on Egyptian side) with an Ottoman corps
6. However, next turn he closed supplies with his cavalry, so i force marched my Medina corps to Aqaba to try and send a reinforcement by Sea.
7. Then he moved 3 ships and bombarded my suez unit and thus reduced its supply and blockaded the port, stalling my possiblities to reinforce or resupply or to add more troops.

I thought it was a-historical.
Regards,
Shri.

Hi shri - to be honest, it sounds like an exciting game to me. You did a daring attack and your opponent found a creative way to turn the tables relying on his naval superiority to counter it. Moves like the ones you describe above are what make games against a human opponent so much more interesting than SP play.

Yes, it may be ahistorical for your Ottoman corps to run out of supply as quickly as it did after a naval bombardment (even though it sounds like it was cut off from Gaza by the Entente recapturing the canal hexes). But it is also ahistorical that the Ottomans could have organized enough transports in one turn in the Red Sea to send significant reinforcements from Aqaba to the captured port of Suez. But good for you for even thinking of this tactic! Too bad your opponent was able to recapture the canal and move enough naval units into the Red Sea to counter it.

There are limits to how historical any game engine can be, while still keeping the game playable and interesting for both sides. Overall, I think Strategic Command does a pretty good job of balancing historical accuracy with playability. I would suggest you just chalk up this this episode to experience.

Good luck in beseiging Verdun!

Michael

Thanks Michael,
Beseiging Verdun in hindsight was a mistake, it led to his consolidation behind Amiens while i did futile attacks on Verdun and wasted precious MPP.
Verdun is just too strong unless you have 2 artillery or 1 artillery + 1 heavy artillery to attack.
Suez i thought was a move to deplete my UK opponent's NM, since in the long run other than "unrestricted warfare" UK morale never dips much unlike France or Russia or Servia.

[Morsey]

Question about ENT morale.

Why is it that when the US joins the war there is no morale boost for the ENT countries. I have used DIP chits in the last 2 games I have played and both times when the US hit 60+% readiness it dropped 20 points it is 1916 when this occurs. When they do get in the ENT member's morale drops and keeps falling. Why is that?

Do CP countries get - morale from the ENT navies blocking the NE and NW trade routes?

Thanks for your reply.