What's happening?

[warspite1]

In addition to the above point, are there any plans to amend supply per some recent posts?

Specifically the fact that if France falls then its game over for the British and Amercians as they have no supply capability (unless they stick to the coast) or almost as bad, half supply if they have a city.

The same problem manifests itself for any amphibious invasions. The defender just has to stop the defender from taking a city and just sit back and destroy with relative ease.

Thanks

[stockwellpete]

ORIGINAL: Myrddraal

Should it really be impossible to move through the green dots? Does that mean it should never be possible to carry out a naval invasion (even if you've defeated the entire enemy fleet)? It would also prevent any German movement in the channel or near any of the British ports.

EDIT:
I'm not trying to shoot the idea down, I just don't really get it at the moment.

Do you like that minefield idea that kirk has posted? It is the first time that I have seen it but it looks interesing and would be appropriste for the places that warspite has suggested, maybe Scapa Flow too.

[Hellfirejet]

ORIGINAL: Myrddraal

Should it really be impossible to move through the green dots? Does that mean it should never be possible to carry out a naval invasion (even if you've defeated the entire enemy fleet)? It would also prevent any German movement in the channel or near any of the British ports.

EDIT:
I'm not trying to shoot the idea down, I just don't really get it at the moment.

Its not that it should be impossible to move through the green dots,maybe look at the movement cost, should be more say like mountain terrain but at sea,so each turn the max an enemy ship can move is 1 hex,this would reflect the slow approach necessary as if they were slowly traversing a mine field?Friendly units can move as normal in their own port areas,but its much more difficult to move about if you are an enemy force!

As for invasion,there is nothing to stop forces coming ashore,as in game at the present time anywhere along the coast,just that this way trying to invade via the port hexes is a much more difficult task to accomplish.[;)]

SOME MINE INFO WORLD WAR 1


World War I mines were used extensively to defend coasts, coastal shipping, ports and naval bases around the globe. The Germans laid mines in shipping lanes to sink merchant and naval vessels serving Britain. The Allies targeted the German U-boats in the Strait of Dover and the Hebrides. In an attempt to seal up the northern exits of the North Sea, the Allies developed the (North Sea Mine Barrage ). During a period of five months from June almost 70,000 mines were laid spanning the North Sea's northern exits. The total number of mines laid in the North Sea, the British East Coast, Straits of Dover, and Heligoland Bight is estimated at 190,000 and the total number during the whole of WWI was 235,000 sea mines.Clearing the barrage after the war took 82 ships and 5 months, working around the clock.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: kirk23

ORIGINAL: Myrddraal

Should it really be impossible to move through the green dots? Does that mean it should never be possible to carry out a naval invasion (even if you've defeated the entire enemy fleet)? It would also prevent any German movement in the channel or near any of the British ports.

EDIT:
I'm not trying to shoot the idea down, I just don't really get it at the moment.

Its not that it should be impossible to move through the green dots,maybe look at the movement cost, should be more say like mountain terrain but at sea,so each turn the max an enemy ship can move is 1 hex,this would reflect the slow approach necessary as if they were slowly traversing a mine field?Friendly units can move as normal in their own port areas,but its much more difficult to move about if you are an enemy force!

warspite1

But these are one or two week turns. If the British had tried a close blockade of Wilhelmshaven they would not have just been slowed up, they would have suffered heavy loss - and the plan was for the Germans to sail with the fleet as soon as losses had started to equalise the numbers.

[Hellfirejet]

I'm on your side with this,whether that be the dice roll penalties,or what ever I just want to see an end to the free unhindered movement of enemys ships in and around the major naval bases.[:)]

If the enemys approach is slowed up,this gives the defending side time to intercept and repel the encroachment,which would be the case in history,you only have to look at the failed Dardenelles campaign,when the allies were stopped by the minefields there.[;)]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: kirk23

I'm on your side with this,whether that be the dice roll penalties,or what ever I just want to see an end to the free unhindered movement of enemys ships in and around the major naval bases.[:)]

warspite1

I know - we, and others are working to the same goal here by throwing out the ideas - an even better WWI game, without moving away from its strategic genre [:)]

Being able to rock up and land thousands of troops unmolested in the Heligoland Bight doesn't do much for realism [;)]

[Hellfirejet]

All in all its pretty easy to fix this modding wise,I can only hope that the game designers, can input fixes that us naval gamers are highlighting as problem areas within the game as is,with the intention off making a very good game even better![8D]

[jack54]

I really like both ideas, movement penalties in foreign green dot areas and especially random damage. [:)]

[Hellfirejet]

Any feedback on these suggestions would be more than welcome from the game designers,us gamers are play testing,and as a group are trying to improve the game.[;)]

[Myrddraal]

We're reading everything, but we can't necessarily comment straight away without discussing things internally & with Matrix/Slith. But we are reading [:)]

[Hellfirejet]

Cheers! As for the update so far so good I'm liking the changes,the game just keeps getting better very promising.[;)]

[Hellfirejet]

Commander The Great War

1 = Germany lacks PP during game play.
2 = Artillery too effective needs toning down abit.
3 = Strategic Bombing too effective needs toning down abit also.
4 = Battleships reduce bombardment effect.
5 = Cruiser give them bombardment ability but to a lesser degree than Battleship.
6 = Submarine's are too weak in attack,and are not effective enough.
7 = Diplomacy needs alot of work,there needs to be a button option to influence Countries.
8 = Anti climax when defeating a Country,winning side should get a morale boost at least.
9 = Loss of Battlefleet etc,defeated side morale loss is correct,but on the flip side winning side should get a morale boost.
10 = I think all cities should give full supply,within a range of 5 hexes,same as Capitals but to a lesser degree.
11 = Fortresses should give full supply to the hex they are in.
12 = Admirals should be available to deploy from the start of the war,and there should be more of them,Beatty & Hipper to name just two.

The Game is much better with the latest patch,but I feel looking at some of the above points will help the game improve.

[Myrddraal]

3 = Strategic Bombing too effective needs toning down abit also.

Still? We have significantly reduced their effectiveness in the latest patch.

[stockwellpete]

Should Germany be able to have a slightly larger stockpile of ammo to partially offset the fact that the Entente has very clear artillery superiority in the second half of the war? With maximum stockpiles of ammo set at 50 then each power does not really need more than 2 artillery units - so you can have a situation in 1916 where Britain has 2 guns, France 2 guns, Russia 2 guns and Italy 1 gun making 7 whereas the Central Powers have just 4 guns (2 each for Germany and Austria).

[FOARP]

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Commander The Great War

1 = Germany lacks PP during game play.
2 = Artillery too effective needs toning down abit.
3 = Strategic Bombing too effective needs toning down abit also.
4 = Battleships reduce bombardment effect.
5 = Cruiser give them bombardment ability but to a lesser degree than Battleship.
6 = Submarine's are too weak in attack,and are not effective enough.
7 = Diplomacy needs alot of work,there needs to be a button option to influence Countries.
8 = Anti climax when defeating a Country,winning side should get a morale boost at least.
9 = Loss of Battlefleet etc,defeated side morale loss is correct,but on the flip side winning side should get a morale boost.
10 = I think all cities should give full supply,within a range of 5 hexes,same as Capitals but to a lesser degree.
11 = Fortresses should give full supply to the hex they are in.
12 = Admirals should be available to deploy from the start of the war,and there should be more of them,Beatty & Hipper to name just two.

The Game is much better with the latest patch,but I feel looking at some of the above points will help the game improve.

1 - Don't think so. I'm playing a couple of MP games and Germany seem to have plenty of PP to go round.
2 - to an extent. At the very least there should be diminshing returns.
3 - Haven't played the latest version so I don't know if this is fixed yet
4 - Actually battleships only seem to take a point or so off a corps, no biggy.
5 - Agreed. Cruisers should be capable of fire-support.
6 - Submarine warfare is not worthwhile at the moment.
7 - agreed.
8 - agreed, but this is not the biggest problem with the way surrender works right now.
9 - Sure.
10 - I don't think so - at least not all cities as this would remove the point of encircling the enemy. I'd go with all cities with a port giving full supply though, since amphibious invasions are impossible otherwise.
11 - No. This would make fortresses indestructible. I favour the system remaining the same on this.
12 - Not a big problem.

[jack54]

Just a thought

I'd like to see 'Grand Offensive' added to the production pool. Here's how it could work...

it would increase offensive stats for a few turns to all units in a small radius; similar to adding an 'offensive General'. (You could actually have a General assigned to the Offensive if it makes implementation easier)....After a few turns the bonus would disappear.

this could add some more 'WWI flavor' to a really good game.[:)]

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: jack54

Just a thought

I'd like to see 'Grand Offensive' added to the production pool. Here's how it could work...

it would increase offensive stats for a few turns to all units in a small radius; similar to adding an 'offensive General'. (You could actually have a General assigned to the Offensive if it makes implementation easier)....After a few turns the bonus would disappear.

this could add some more 'WWI flavor' to a really good game.[:)]

Sounds good..WW1Gold did Grand Offensive mechanic superbly. You need a WW1 game to be all about Grand Offensives with one maybe two Max each year on a front. The game should be all about trying to build up the resources and hitting the right spot and then keeping momentum..it should be very hard and the result mainly should be attrition on both sides. a slow bleeding of the armies and it be he who bleeds the most esp on the Western front (picking the right spot and choosing the right tactics generals etc is hwta will mean you come away less bloody than the enemy and even take some land maybe even the defender hits with a counter attack and the attacker loses land again a major NM hit (not as major as no attack though again I'm talking about the Entente here after 1915). Also you will have to do one esp if the Entente due to NM reasons so no just sitting there you have to commit to a GO during the year.