Eliminating Montenegro on turn 2

[The Land]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor
and the mine and ship will reduce the port by 1 point per turn

Okay but I actually don't know: what does this accomplish? If you take their port down to level 0 what exactly does that do? Does the city also reduce in strength?

Doesn't affect the city at all, but if the port goes down to 0 then the convoy can no longer run to it and vanishes until the port has some strength points.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: The Land

Doesn't affect the city at all, but if the port goes down to 0 then the convoy can no longer run to it and vanishes until the port has some strength points.

Thats right. My example is basically killing two birds with two stones. The sea blockade reduces the port to shut down the convoy. The land siege is to reduce the towns supply...which honestly is a secondary objective. For the towns supply reduction...it will help the CP if the Entente player picked the second Serb HQ instead of the Montenegrin HQ and there's a Montenegrin unit defending Cetinje.

Sometimes, because of FoG...It's not apparent which HQ he picked...but a check on the unit defending Cetinje and its supply and readiness level will let you know if its under an HQ attachment...or not.

[Chernobyl]

Why is reducing the town the secondary objective? Serbia gets a ton of MPP each turn from Cetinje and also the lower the city supply the easier it is to take the city. Eliminating the convoy is nice, but at least that MPP has to come from France.

And in any case the Entente can always "break" the montenegro blockade by "accidentally" striking the mine.

It might be nice to do, but it doesn't compare at all to reducing the city itself.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

Why is reducing the town the secondary objective? Serbia gets a ton of MPP each turn from Cetinje and also the lower the city supply the easier it is to take the city. Eliminating the convoy is nice, but at least that MPP has to come from France.

And in any case the Entente can always "break" the montenegro blockade by "accidentally" striking the mine.

It might be nice to do, but it doesn't compare at all to reducing the city itself.

Your right actually. The town can be reduced before the port will. I meant to say taking Cetinje comes second to taking Belgrade on the first turn. I put up a port blockade and then start popping the Cetinje to knock its entrenchments down slowly. This is with a AH mostly effort I devised for Serbia and Montenegro. I just reread what I posted and I wasn't very clear by using the word 'secondary objective'. I didn't make clear that Belgrade is the primary objective for the first turn.

Anyway..this deviated from your German led gambit on Montenegro...which doesn't have much of a chance of resisting that stratagem. I worked out another way with AH and one German corp to take both states down by spring of 1915, short of western Entente intervention. Belgrade needs to go down on turn one...two corps have to besiege Cetinje also on turn one...and a blockade of the port needs to be put up. Cetinje town is a secondary objective.

This image is the start of the CP turn 2 (Aug 15, 1915). Belgrade fell on turn 1. Cetinje will be reduced to 4 strength in 6 turns unless taken earlier..which is a possibility depending on what the Serbian (Entente) player does. There's another objective that needs to be reached and thats the Russo-Serb convoy line outside Nish.
That spot and Cetinje are secondary objectives. These both can be accomplished before spring 1915..and possibly sooner.

I was trying to figure out away to not send 3 or 4 German corps and an HQ into this AO. Those can be used in Galicia between Crackow and Pryzemsl for defending AH's left flank and future operations into Russian Poland...while still pursuing a France First with a strong right armed Schlieffen but static on the Verdun to Belfort Fortline.

I guess I went off topic from the subject of a purely Montenegrin focused Gambit.

[Chernobyl]

As of right now I don't prefer to attack Belgrade immediately. It has a chance of failure and in any case you can do just as well focusing on Serbian corps on turn 2.

Serbia basically can't resist a focused attack from the hills near Belgrade and they have to fall back immediately. If they entrench or reinforce where they stand, Serbia will lose a corps and then things snowball. Even if they retreat as far south as possible, you can chase them and punch a hole in the river (the one near your circled #3) on the third turn. Then later you can go take Belgrade at your leisure.

HOWEVER all that being said, I think it's a bit ridiculous how easy (70% chance? Someone else said 90% but it's not that easy for me) to take Belgrade on turn 1.

All in all, if I had to unilaterally change things now, I would do this:

#1:
EITHER: -Montenegro begins with their HQ in Pec, and the event which spawns a HQ is eliminated.
OR: -Montenegro starts with their second detachment in the hex north of Cetinje, preventing an immediate siege.
#2:
-Belgrade detachment begins at strength = 8 instead of 6
#3:
-Slightly beef up the starting Serbian corps situation, either by boosting a couple of them from strength 8 to 9, or by placing one in hex 188,95 southeast of Belgrade preventing an immediate Austrian river crossing + entrenchment via swap on turn 1. The fact that the Austrians can get a toehold and entrench across the Belgrade river on turn 1 pretty much dooms Belgrade in the long run even if it isn't captured immediately. The Serbian corps placed there may need to be set to strength 9 or 10, not sure.

Intended changes would be to secure Cetinge, to prevent a turn 1 capture of Belgrade, and to prevent a turn 1 breach of the terrain vital for Serbia making a reasonable stand along the northern border.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

All in all, if I had to unilaterally change things now, I would do this:

#1:
EITHER: -Montenegro begins with their HQ in Pec, and the event which spawns a HQ is eliminated.
OR: -Montenegro starts with their second detachment in the hex north of Cetinje, preventing an immediate siege.
#2:
-Belgrade detachment begins at strength = 8 instead of 6
#3:
-Slightly beef up the starting Serbian corps situation, either by boosting a couple of them from strength 8 to 9, or by placing one in hex 188,95 southeast of Belgrade preventing an immediate Austrian river crossing + entrenchment via swap on turn 1. The fact that the Austrians can get a toehold and entrench across the Belgrade river on turn 1 pretty much dooms Belgrade in the long run even if it isn't captured immediately. The Serbian corps placed there may need to be set to strength 9 or 10, not sure.

Intended changes would be to secure Cetinge, to prevent a turn 1 capture of Belgrade, and to prevent a turn 1 breach of the terrain vital for Serbia making a reasonable stand along the northern border.

Yes...you nailed it down I think

#1: I would prefer the Pec Montenegrin detachment moved to that hex north of Cetinje over an early HQ deployment..but the latter is viable too.

#2 Yes on that. 8 strength detachment Belgrade.

#3 Yes on slightly strengthening the Serb corps or a big Yes on slightly adjusting the placement of an existing corp to stop the river crossing. (as far as I understand, the Austro-Hungarians didn't envelop Belgrade in the opening weeks of the war..they frontally assaulted it.)

btw..that image I posted previously was from the Trento-Alto-Adige edit thread I did earlier. That hotseat test was joined by a friend of mine...who finished demolishing Serbia and Montenegro by early summer 1915. I still have the images of each turn to Sept 1915 I believe.

However its accomplished...Serbia going down before even the Greeks get in is almost a death stroke for the Entente strategically. There's really no viable hope of intervening to stabilize that area at all. At least historically, Serbia held out long enough for their remaining forces to get to Corfu...and the western Entente to get established in Salonika. Doesn't happen if Serbia goes down by mid 1915..or even earlier for that matter.

Helluva good thread Chernobyl....there's been much food for thought here! [8D]

[Chernobyl]

:3

I think it should be possible to destroy Serbia well before the historical date, but I have to admit as of now it's a bit too easy. (It can be even worse than that if Austria gets really nice rolls)

It pains me to say that as I love destroying Serbia quickly, but yeah. Too strong in my opinion.

[mdsmall]

I am in the opening moves playing the Entente in a PBEM game and my opponent went "the full gambit" against Montenegro. Cetinje fell as forecast on turn 2 and Montenegro surrendered. Albania never joined the Entente and remains neutral. The French convoy ended and Serbia lost all access to a port on the Adriatic, so reinforcements from France were not even a theoretical possibility.

Things snowballed from there exactly as Chernobyl describes. I had to retreat my understrength Serbian corps to the hills and rivers between Pristina and Nish to prevent them from being outflanked. Even so, facing a concerted Austrian offensive reinforced by several German corps, the small Serbian army was demolished. Serbia will surrender next turn, before the end of October 1914. Bulgaria is preparing for war this turn, and the Ottomans should join the Central Powers by mid-November.

To add insult to injury, I discovered that DE423 offering Serbia the choice of having their second HQ part of the Serbian or Montenegrin army does not fire if Montenegro has surrendered. Jankovic never showed up.

Of course my opponent has made a strategic choice by deciding to concentrate a significant force against Serbia on the opening moves. But the strategic pay-off is huge and meanwhile the Central Powers are doing very nicely against the Russians. I might have made a couple of different reinforcement and entrenching decisions on Turn One that might have lengthened Serbia's survival by a turn or two at most, but not any more.

Given this experience, I would strongly endorse all of the tweaks suggested by Chernobyl and Old Crow above to improve Serbia's opening hand. The Entente player should expect Serbia to be in trouble by 1915. But Serbia's current opening deployments have some fatal weaknesses which can not be remedied against a CP player who knows how to exploit them.

[stockwellpete]

Do you think this "Montenegrin gambit" in its current form makes an "East First" strategy for the CP virtually unstoppable? What if your CP opponent in your PBEM game has decided that A-H will give up Trento and Trieste in the spring of 1915 (my understanding is that this always takes Italy out of the war)? So having taken Cetinje and knocked out Montenegro in September 1914, the CP quickly consolidates on the Western Front (just taking Luxemburg) and then switches his main attack to the Russians in late 1914 and 1915. The Russians would be completely isolated for about a year as the Entente would not have the required artillery to blast the Western Front open. The A-H infantry units could be used to police the Balkans and A-H could switch to improving Tech and strengthening their navy in order to contest the Mediterranean. Very hard to see how the Entente can win in that situation as it is relatively easy to keep the USA out of the war in 1917.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

I am in the opening moves playing the Entente in a PBEM game and my opponent went "the full gambit" against Montenegro. Cetinje fell as forecast on turn 2 and Montenegro surrendered. Albania never joined the Entente and remains neutral. The French convoy ended and Serbia lost all access to a port on the Adriatic, so reinforcements from France were not even a theoretical possibility.

Things snowballed from there exactly as Chernobyl describes. I had to retreat my understrength Serbian corps to the hills and rivers between Pristina and Nish to prevent them from being outflanked. Even so, facing a concerted Austrian offensive reinforced by several German corps, the small Serbian army was demolished. Serbia will surrender next turn, before the end of October 1914. Bulgaria is preparing for war this turn, and the Ottomans should join the Central Powers by mid-November.

To add insult to injury, I discovered that DE423 offering Serbia the choice of having their second HQ part of the Serbian or Montenegrin army does not fire if Montenegro has surrendered. Jankovic never showed up.

Of course my opponent has made a strategic choice by deciding to concentrate a significant force against Serbia on the opening moves. But the strategic pay-off is huge and meanwhile the Central Powers are doing very nicely against the Russians. I might have made a couple of different reinforcement and entrenching decisions on Turn One that might have lengthened Serbia's survival by a turn or two at most, but not any more.

Given this experience, I would strongly endorse all of the tweaks suggested by Chernobyl and Old Crow above to improve Serbia's opening hand. The Entente player should expect Serbia to be in trouble by 1915. But Serbia's current opening deployments have some fatal weaknesses which can not be remedied against a CP player who knows how to exploit them.

Serbia out by October 1914 due to the Montenegrin Gambit! Albania and Greece neutral so no where for any surviving Serbs to find refuge? The Entente wants to intervene, but Tirana and Salonika ports are off limits?

Well......[:D]

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Do you think this "Montenegrin gambit" in its current form makes an "East First" strategy for the CP virtually unstoppable? What if your CP opponent in your PBEM game has decided that A-H will give up Trento and Trieste in the spring of 1915 (my understanding is that this always takes Italy out of the war)? So having taken Cetinje and knocked out Montenegro in September 1914, the CP quickly consolidates on the Western Front (just taking Luxemburg) and then switches his main attack to the Russians in late 1914 and 1915. The Russians would be completely isolated for about a year as the Entente would not have the required artillery to blast the Western Front open. The A-H infantry units could be used to police the Balkans and A-H could switch to improving Tech and strengthening their navy in order to contest the Mediterranean. Very hard to see how the Entente can win in that situation as it is relatively easy to keep the USA out of the war in 1917.

Yes...you are on to something here too! I had an opponent last summer that took down Serbia in early 1915...and elected to cede The Trentino to Italy.
At first, I thought that was crazy with the big NM hit...but that hit was compensated by his gain with Serbia.

The end result was the Entente in the Mediterranean at a worst position than in WW2. Italy was neutral. He swept Albania and Greece in 1915....ruled the waves in the eastern Mediterranean and Black Sea. Had Bulgarian and AH artillery on the Gaza...and all of Russia's gains in Galicia were lost by the end of that year, with Poland.

I was routed by 1916. However, it was instructive and morbidly interesting to experience it all.

[BillRunacre]

The French convoy to Serbia will not arrive if the port is at zero, meaning less MPPs for Serbia.

It also slows down the process of unloading units there, and prevents the embarkation of units. Neither may be of relevance here, but they may be elsewhere...

[shri]

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

:3

I think it should be possible to destroy Serbia well before the historical date, but I have to admit as of now it's a bit too easy. (It can be even worse than that if Austria gets really nice rolls)

It pains me to say that as I love destroying Serbia quickly, but yeah. Too strong in my opinion.

A shift to Serbia can also mean weakening the opening gambit in the west or worse a total flanking of Austria by Russia resulting in the loss of Lemberg or more.

Historically, Belgrade fell early but the Serbs counter-attacked well as the 2nd Army went to Lemberg. This is why Historical and game deviation crops up.

[Bavre]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

I am in the opening moves playing the Entente in a PBEM game and my opponent went "the full gambit" against Montenegro. Cetinje fell as forecast on turn 2 and Montenegro surrendered. Albania never joined the Entente and remains neutral. The French convoy ended and Serbia lost all access to a port on the Adriatic, so reinforcements from France were not even a theoretical possibility.

Things snowballed from there exactly as Chernobyl describes. I had to retreat my understrength Serbian corps to the hills and rivers between Pristina and Nish to prevent them from being outflanked. Even so, facing a concerted Austrian offensive reinforced by several German corps, the small Serbian army was demolished. Serbia will surrender next turn, before the end of October 1914. Bulgaria is preparing for war this turn, and the Ottomans should join the Central Powers by mid-November.

To add insult to injury, I discovered that DE423 offering Serbia the choice of having their second HQ part of the Serbian or Montenegrin army does not fire if Montenegro has surrendered. Jankovic never showed up.

Of course my opponent has made a strategic choice by deciding to concentrate a significant force against Serbia on the opening moves. But the strategic pay-off is huge and meanwhile the Central Powers are doing very nicely against the Russians. I might have made a couple of different reinforcement and entrenching decisions on Turn One that might have lengthened Serbia's survival by a turn or two at most, but not any more.

Given this experience, I would strongly endorse all of the tweaks suggested by Chernobyl and Old Crow above to improve Serbia's opening hand. The Entente player should expect Serbia to be in trouble by 1915. But Serbia's current opening deployments have some fatal weaknesses which can not be remedied against a CP player who knows how to exploit them.

As I am the CP opponent in this game I can confirm that this was a totally hopeless fight from the start. Appart from some very very minor things mdsmall from my perspective did everything possible to keep Serbia alive.

I would suggest two things here:

The change in the Montenegro staring position OldCrow suggested and maybe allowing the Serbian units to start with full AP. This would make a full retreat at least an option. As it stands, even if Serbia does something unorthodox like giving up Belgrade, their units just get swallowed by the onslaught while en route to the mountains.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Bavre

As I am the CP opponent in this game I can confirm that this was a totally hopeless fight from the start. Appart from some very very minor things mdsmall from my perspective did everything possible to keep Serbia alive.

I would suggest two things here:

The change in the Montenegro staring position OldCrow suggested and maybe allowing the Serbian units to start with full AP. This would make a full retreat at least an option. As it stands, even if Serbia does something unorthodox like giving up Belgrade, their units just get swallowed by the onslaught while en route to the mountains.

This gambit may become a standard early game opening move for the CP in MP's unless some fixes are implemented. I've hot seated this twice...its unmitigated disaster for the Entente. I am curious though if there is anything else the Entente can do once 'accepting' that Serbia is lost and moving on. This aftermath of the Montenegro Gambit needs human vs human testing.

Short of the devs tweaking Montenegro and Serbia as proposed in various forms on this thread, it might take an Entente gambit of some type...

Hmmmm........

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Bavre (Central Powers) and I (Entente) just started a match featuring Chernobyl's 'Montenegrin Gambit', and we are posting our moves in the War Room. Its time to see how bad or not this gambit is for the Entente.

Its going to be good fun.

[mdsmall]

Does the 20-30% unit morale swing against allied Majors when "a country" surrenders (as per section 6.30.3 of the rules) apply to Montenegro too? If so, that not only will hasten Serbia's demise but will have a depressing effect on Russian, French and British units morale.

[BillRunacre]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Does the 20-30% unit morale swing against allied Majors when "a country" surrenders (as per section 6.30.3 of the rules) apply to Montenegro too? If so, that not only will hasten Serbia's demise but will have a depressing effect on Russian, French and British units morale.

Yes, these are universal settings applying to everyone on the relevant side.

[mdsmall]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Does the 20-30% unit morale swing against allied Majors when "a country" surrenders (as per section 6.30.3 of the rules) apply to Montenegro too? If so, that not only will hasten Serbia's demise but will have a depressing effect on Russian, French and British units morale.

Yes, these are universal settings applying to everyone on the relevant side.

So, the Montenegro Gambit has an immediate negative continent-wide effect on Entente unit morale. That makes it an even more rewarding move for the Central Powers.

[Bavre]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

Does the 20-30% unit morale swing against allied Majors when "a country" surrenders (as per section 6.30.3 of the rules) apply to Montenegro too? If so, that not only will hasten Serbia's demise but will have a depressing effect on Russian, French and British units morale.

Yes, these are universal settings applying to everyone on the relevant side.

So, the Montenegro Gambit has an immediate negative continent-wide effect on Entente unit morale. That makes it an even more rewarding move for the Central Powers.

Yup, that's also the reason why my combat odds are sometimes so extremely good in our game. Damned russian weather unfortunatelly prevented me from fully capitalizing on the same effect after Serbias end [:@]