Kaiser Ulver Attacks the Ottomans in sheer desperation

[ulver]

Well your Balkan offensive may well doom the Kaiser’s cause but at least the neutrals are upset about your flagrant aggression.

You have got to post some screenshots of your Balkan offensive. A Serbian/Ottoman attack on Bulgaria: Brilliant.




Marts 1915: More brutal Entente aggression in support of the Serbian terrorist state.

[ulver]

The Entente diplomacy has been noticeably absent in marked to the efforts of the Imperial German foreign office.



Mr. President!! I shudder to think of the fate awaiting Christian women in the harems of the beastly Muslim invaders. The Teutonic peoples of Austria and Germany stands as the only shield of Western civilization against the hordes from the East.

[Lascar]

Looks like the British army is on the continent. So nothing was really gained by the CP declaring war on the Ottomans. What was lost is considerable. Free access through the Dardanelles for British supplies and troops to Russia and the loss of the large accumulated pool of Ottoman resource points which provide a much needed infusion to the German economy in 1915. Well at least it was interesting to see how this unusual strategy is playing out.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: Lascar

Looks like the British army is on the continent. So nothing was really gained by the CP declaring war on the Ottomans. What was lost is considerable. Free access through the Dardanelles for British supplies and troops to Russia and the loss of the large accumulated pool of Ottoman resource points which provide a much needed infusion to the German economy in 1915. Well at least it was interesting to see how this unusual strategy is playing out.

Yeah, they seem to be coming over alright. Though in truth I'm not sending them to France anyway so far! The Western Front is turning into a side show.

As for the Yanks, pff. Like in the game with Lava. The TE don't need the Yanks to win. Specially as Russia will not be going under in this game!

[ulver]

Status Marts 1915

[ulver]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Lascar

Looks like the British army is on the continent. So nothing was really gained by the CP declaring war on the Ottomans. What was lost is considerable. Free access through the Dardanelles for British supplies and troops to Russia and the loss of the large accumulated pool of Ottoman resource points which provide a much needed infusion to the German economy in 1915. Well at least it was interesting to see how this unusual strategy is playing out.

Yeah, they seem to be coming over alright. Though in truth I'm not sending them to France anyway so far! The Western Front is turning into a side show.

As for the Yanks, pff. Like in the game with Lava. The TE don't need the Yanks to win. Specially as Russia will not be going under in this game!

Just to be clear: Can you transport British Infantry by sea?

If you can I fear I’ll have to concede. No point in playing really. I’m just surprised I tested it all that way to 1917 in hot seat to make sure the stratagem was valid. Also a little disappointed as I was really looking forward to losing with the CP in a whole new way.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: ulver

Just to be clear: Can you transport British Infantry by sea?

If you can I fear I’ll have to concede. No point in playing really. I’m just surprised I tested it all that way to 1917 in hot seat to make sure the stratagem was valid. Also a little disappointed as I was really looking forward to losing with the CP in a whole new way.

Certainly some of them, those British units in Bulgaria came over via Gallipoli by boat, at least some of them, and Haig is on the Western Front with two British corps. I don't know about Kitchener's hordes yet as they havn't arrived.

If you want I can keep the rest at home?

[EUBanana]

And the game doesn't like the Ottoman Empire being in the Entente. To get access to their industrial screen I have to click on an OE unit and then hit the button, if you click on the flag icon in the strategic turn the Ottomans do not appear.

...I think Frank did not expect this. [:D]

I suspect any freezing of British troops is a bug not a feature, given that.



Its kinda amusing really I've never tried a Gallipoli before, so I actually stacked up my initial British deployments on the Ottoman border looking to attempt one for the first time.

And then you attacked the OE. [:D][:D]

[Lascar]

ORIGINAL: ulver

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: Lascar

Looks like the British army is on the continent. So nothing was really gained by the CP declaring war on the Ottomans. What was lost is considerable. Free access through the Dardanelles for British supplies and troops to Russia and the loss of the large accumulated pool of Ottoman resource points which provide a much needed infusion to the German economy in 1915. Well at least it was interesting to see how this unusual strategy is playing out.

Yeah, they seem to be coming over alright. Though in truth I'm not sending them to France anyway so far! The Western Front is turning into a side show.

As for the Yanks, pff. Like in the game with Lava. The TE don't need the Yanks to win. Specially as Russia will not be going under in this game!

Just to be clear: Can you transport British Infantry by sea?

If you can I fear I’ll have to concede. No point in playing really. I’m just surprised I tested it all that way to 1917 in hot seat to make sure the stratagem was valid. Also a little disappointed as I was really looking forward to losing with the CP in a whole new way.

If I recall the rules correctly, Britain can't transport by sea in August 1914 unless either Belgium or Holland is invaded. Or once the Ottomans enter the war. The Ottomans entered the war when the CP declared war on them.

It would be a gamey flaw to prohibit the British from ever sea transporting their troops to the continent for the entire duration of the war. If the British are going to be at war then they are going to use all there resources to win that war and not let the entire British army sit in Britain as spectators.

[ulver]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: ulver

Just to be clear: Can you transport British Infantry by sea?

If you can I fear I’ll have to concede. No point in playing really. I’m just surprised I tested it all that way to 1917 in hot seat to make sure the stratagem was valid. Also a little disappointed as I was really looking forward to losing with the CP in a whole new way.

Certainly some of them, those British units in Bulgaria came over via Gallipoli by boat, at least some of them, and Haig is on the Western Front with two British corps. I don't know about Kitchener's hordes yet as they havn't arrived.

If you want I can keep the rest at home?

No. That would be gamy and completely artificial.. I concede. I’m really disappointed thought it was a nice option build into the game.

As stated when I tested in hot seat I could not sea lift any INF with Benelux neutral and OT in the Entente camp. I could sealift HQ’s normally and didn’t test with ART and Cav.

Making house rules retroactively would seem artificial. Clearly I have lost big time with the game as it stands.

I do think Frank should seriously consider introducing the option for Limited British entry.

[EUBanana]

Well, I don't mind accepting a handicap to replicate a fitting scenario.

...and I think I'll happily exchange Kitchener's hordes for depriving you of Ottoman resources and an open route to Russia!

[ulver]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Well, I don't mind accepting a handicap to replicate a fitting scenario.

...and I think I'll happily exchange Kitchener's hordes for depriving you of Ottoman resources and an open route to Russia!

Sure that was why I liked the option: It was interesting, radically different and still balanced. However, given that the game doesn’t work like that it would be pointless to find out if it the strategy could be made to work. It would be a completely artificial situation and neither of us would know how well or badly we played given that no one will ever replicate the set-up. I would feel no satisfaction at all eking out a win with the CP seeing as it wouldn’t be a real win but the result of a house rule introduced mid-game.

It was a good idea I think but the game just doesn’t work like that apparently.

Also the premise has already been undermined. What would you suggest? No British sea movement from now on? No British Sea movement of future reinforcements but OK to move existing units. No use of future reinforcements. No use of future reinforcements except those arriving in Egypt and India?

The beauty of the No Sealift effect was that it was clear-cut. Any house rule we introduce now would be arbitrary

I’d be happy to continue the game if it is intended that British land units can not sea lift until German DoW Belgium, the Netherlands or the Ottoman enters the war on the Central Powers side. You can just move the Corps in France back to the UK at your convience and not move any British land unit by sea from now on

If it is not that Frank just removed a bug and that is that.

[EUBanana]

A house rule isn't any different from a rule Frank coded in.

The only British units deployed atm are the initial ones, ie the Regular Army.  If Britain went to war, even without public support sufficient to employ a mass conscript army, the 'Old Contemptibles' would be involved, so thats not unrealistic.  I think the only leeway there is whether Kitchener's hordes would show up.

So I'm happy to keep playing with only the regular British army (ie, the starting units) being deployed outside Britain so long as you dont attack Belgium?
That just means no more.

[EUBanana]

Only question is whether the ANZACs and Canadians ought to be deployed or not when they show up.  And I think there are extra Indians too.

[ulver]

Mailed Frank:

GOA bug or working as intended?

HI Frank.

Me and the (EU) Banana playing a PBM game, AAR to be found at
tm.asp?m=1864970
Could really use a clarification on how you intend a rule to work. Basically my understanding about the limitation of British sea transport of Land combat units was that Britain could not move her units by sea until either the Central Powers declared war on Belgium or the Netherlands, or the Ottoman empire joined the Central Powers.

As a stratagem I declared war on the Ottoman Empire with the Central Powers in order to keep all but the Middle Eastern British land forces out of the war.

It seem to be an elegant and balanced way to simulate a limited British involvement in the Great War in a situation where British interests were not threatened and her treaty obligations were not invoked. It had the added advantage of not changing the balance between the sides.

My opponent reports that he can now move British land forces by sea with the Ottoman Empire in the war on the Entente side and that; furthermore he has some difficulty accessing the Ottomans in the Strategic phase (He’s found a workaround)

He has graciously offered introducing a house rule to reflect the limited British involvement in the war but before continuing that game I would like to know the intention behind the limited British sealift rule. Is British forces supposed to be allowed to move by sea with the Ottoman Empire on the Entente side?

If that matter is one you have never considered could we persuade you to do so now? We both agree that the rule as stated makes for an interesting alternative game but I would not be interested in pursuing the game if you fixed a bug. All I can say is that I genuinely thought it was a deliberate what-if option. If it was not intended as such would you consider introducing it?

[EUBanana]

Well, I'm off to the parents now anyway, and they do not have internet access to my knowledge.  So theres plenty of time to mull over it.  [:D]

[ulver]

If the no sea lift rule worked that way I assumed it did Britain could be assumed to start of with 1 corps in Egypt (The Forth in standard setup), she would receive the first Indian corps on turn 1, the second Indian on turn 4, the South African corps on turn 6 the Australian on turn 7. So 5 in corps in total on turn 7 (Jul/August 15) with their usefulness somewhat limited by their inability to move by sea. The remaining Corps would be stuck in UK/Canada, as would any additional land forces Britain build.

There is an element of chance as Britain could theoretically decide to start more then one corps in Egypt but I considered that extremely unlikely and that was offset by the chance the she would not start with her one corps in Egypt.

That means 17 Corps would be stuck in Britain and the ones she had was of limited utility (They effectively had to use Russian or Ottoman rail moves to go anywhere and those tend to be in short supply) in exchange for the Ottoman entry on the Entente side.

That was the scenario I thought was legitimate, balanced and interesting to try out. If it turns out to be illegitimate and the removal of the British restrictions was a bug correction I was beaten fair and square and concede.

If it turns out that British unit are not supposed to be able to sea move until Belgium/Netherlands is attacked or the Ottoman Empire join the Central Powers then I fully expect you to be the gentleman player you have always been in the past and move any units transported out of the UK or Canada back there and not move any British unit by sea until I should decide to attack Belgium and/or the Netherlands. (Honestly don’t know about Luxemburg)

The game would be slightly marred by the fact that you sea moved unit to the Bulgarian border, likely advancing your schedule there by a turn or two. But then you would have wasted transports moving forth and back to/from France so that likely evens more or less out.

You are right that any rules we make up would as “real” as any hardcode and I have no problem with house rules but I’m not interested in changing the Scenario halfway.

I win or I lose but I don’t move the goalpost during the game. In the absence of a clarification I’d be happy to play on the provisional assumption that the game is supposed to work as outlined above.

(Oddly enough it still works like that for me on hot seat solo play.)

[ulver]

ORIGINAL: Frank

The below is correct. I had never considered it. I assumed that the
Ottoman Empire would always eventually end up on the Central Powers
side. And British amphib is allowed if the Ottomans are at war, it
doesn't check to see which side the Ottomans are on because again I had
assumed they would be on the CP side.

>
> If that matter is one you have never considered could we persuade you to
> do so now? We both agree that the rule as stated makes for an interesting
> alternative game but I would not be interested in pursuing the game if you
> fixed a bug. All I can say is that I genuinely thought it was a deliberate
> what-if option. If it was not intended as such would you consider
> introducing it?

Users always find ways to do things they are not supposed to. Run into that every day at the office.

Thanks for a fast reply, once again demonstrating a level of commitment to post release support I’ve never experienced before.

If any additionally patches come out you should probably take a look at the control interface if countries end up on the opposite side. My opponent reports that he couldn’t access the Ottoman in the Strategic phase by clicking on their flag. He found a workaround by clicking on their units so it’s no big deal.

Now that you have thought about it: Should the British be able to amph with the Ottomans in the war on the Entente side?

[ulver]

More from Frank:

Hi Ulver, in retrospect, I should have foreseen that happening. I'm
going to take a look at the control problem as soon as I can.

The answer to your question is something I would have to think about.
On the one hand I could see the Brits wanting to support the Ottomans
because of their interests not coinciding with German troops in the area
but on the other hand it makes the overall situation less dire. Hard to
say.

Right now I'm tied up with another game and its not the kind of thing
(the AI) where I can switch from it to GoA and still retain my train of
thought. Which is also why I haven't been around the forum recently.
However, as soon as I can I will come back to this issue.

Thank you!

[ulver]

So it looks like the Ottoman Gambit was not intentional.

Frank has indicated that he simply hadn’t considered the Ottoman Gambit and he has to consider whether British forces are supposed to be allowed to use Amph movement.

That leaves us two possible assumptions.

a) It is intentional that British forces are released fully when the Ottomans enter the war in either side. In that case I think we can both agree that you won an overwhelming victory the moment I declared war on the ottomans

b) Frank made a mistake in the coding. He only meant to release the British forces when the Ottoman Empire entered the war on the side of the Central Powers

In theory would could try to agree on a Gentleman’s agreement to return that game to a state that would have existed if British sealift had been denied but there are a number of objections to doing so that makes me doubt the wisdom of even attempting it.

Basically I think we are far to late to remedy the situation. Just about anything we do would be a case of changing the rules mid-way and I have no interest in playing an ad-hog scenario created halfway. I genuinely thought this was a real and allowed option. Any Gentleman’s agreement would have to be designed to recreate the conditions that would exist if Frank had intended that Ottoman entry on the Central Powers side was a prerequisite for British sealift and not an attempt to create an alternate “fair” scenario.

I have no objections to house rules and alternative scenarios but I do insist that they are agreed beforehand.

Regrettably it seems doubtful we would be able to recreate the situation that would have existed with a no British sealift option in force since you have already moved considerable forces by sea and planned and executed your attack on Bulgaria based on a set of assumptions very different from mine.

Remedying the situation by moving all sea lifted forces back to their port of origin would tie up valuable shipping and force abort an attack you might have been able to executed with purely Turkish forces and we would likely not ever agree exactly how things would stand if the game had worked the way I assumed it did.

An even worse objection is that we seem to be living on separate planets when it comes to the balancing issue of the Ottoman gambit

As stated in my previous post my assumption was the Britain would (maybe) have a single class B (The 4th) Corps) set up in Egypt and no further forces at all except from the Indians, Australian and South Africa forces and these with quite limited utility since they would be unable to sealift at all.

In truth I always assumed it was pretty unlikely that Britain would deploy any forces in Egypt at all since the point of decision was likely to be France most players would tend to deploy their forces ready to intervene on the West front. My, perhaps optimistic, assumption was a 90% probability that there would be no forces from the British Isles at all.

That is massively different from having the A class starting units at your disposal and being able to move them as you suggested as a house rule. We seem to be miles apart in terms of what would constitute a workable gentleman’s agreement to the point where there scarcely seems any point in even trying to reach one.

With apologies for wasting your time I feel it is probably best to abandon this game under the circumstances.

I still however think the Ottoman Gamble would make a good addition to the game and it has the advantage of being eminently practical for Frank to Implement. We are talking about changing a single line of code. I personally think it would be even better, more balanced, and a far more plausible historical what-if, to simulate a neutral Britain by adding another line of code disabling British strategic movement as well.

Putting my money where my mouth is I’d like to take this opportunity to throw down the following gauntlet:

I’d love to take the either side in a game with the following pre-game agreement:
The Central Powers declare war on the Ottoman Empire on turn 1
Russia leaves any forces setup within 3 hexes of the Ottoman-Russian border in a historical deployment where they are.
No British Land forces may be set up outside the United Kingdom

(This simulate that the Entente player should not have prior knowledge of the option)

Until either the Central Powers declare war on a Benelux country or the United States enter the war British Forces many not use Amph movement or rail movement. (This would include HQ’s)

This essentially simulate a neutral but strongly Entente-learning Britain in a way that would be very easy to code and is therefore realistic to ask Frank to implement.

So any takers?