Missing & unlikely combatants

[SMK-at-work]

Portugal - fielded 2 divisions as Corpo Expedicionário Português, CEP (effectively a corps) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portugal_in_the_Great_War. Seized German ships in Portuguese ports at British request Feb 1916, Germany declared war March 1914, decided to field a corps August 1916 and first troops arrive at Brest February 1917, arriving at the front in April. Troops were to be withdrawn from frontline March 1918 as too poorly equipped, but German offensives meant they had to stay in the line.

A 3rd Portuguese division never arrived, so the 2 divisions alrady in France had to serve extended periods in the front line and were aparently the most exhausted units on the allied side. Lost about 1/3rd its force at battle of Lys April 1918 & survivors were incorporated into various British units.

I suggest it could be represented by an 18 pt corps, with an initial minimal reinforcement pool 93 or 4 points?) representing troops being returned to the lien rather than reinforcements per se - once htey are gone it would rapidly become exhausted.

Portugal also fielded a significant nubmerof artillery crews to man French heavy artillery batteries, but I think they are adequately represented by French arty as is.

Portugal should only join the war if the UK & France are both still fighting

Brazil - when Brazil declared war in October 1917 they were able to seize German 46 ships in its ports. Brazilian food was an important addition to the alied supplies in 1918. Brazil only sent a medical contingent and some individual soldiers as observers by the end of the war, but the game goes to the end of 1918, and there are tantalising hints on the web that they may have been mobilising in 1918......so perhaps they should be represented by a Corps, or possibly even 2, from mid-1919? but only if the USA is in the war.

Lastly there is Romania - the number of times Romania joins the war after Russia surrenders is jsut plain silly - can we have a rule to stop it happening please??

[Joel Rauber]

SMK could probably address the geopolitics better than me, but perhaps making the bar as far away as possible from joining war upon Russian surrender.

Or better yet, IMO, I'm still an advocate of having an option for having some countries join either side, with appropriate diplomatic effort and geo-political situation.

[Shawkhan]

...Another interesting fact: Russian troops served in France on both sides. There were three Russian brigades serving with the French army, while some 50,000 captured Russian troops were used as construction crews in building the Siegfried(Hindenberg) Line. Another argument, btw, for increasing the number of trenches Germany can construct over that of the allies.

[SMK-at-work]

Not really - the allies get colonial labour - including Vietnamese (for the French), Africans & Indians.  50,000 russian POW's is pretty minimal, and if you want to build better trenches they you had better make a choice in the game to research them and fund them.

[Joel Rauber]

I agree with SMK, the game handles this with research and funding options.

As the hawkers used to say on Coney Island; youse pays your nickel and youse take your choice.

[FrankHunter]

Portugal isn't actually in the game but originally I had a Portugese corps that was part of the British army like Canada's and Australia's.  I must have accidentally deleted them at some point and the corps became another numbered Brit.

I'll change the Romanian rule.