Well, in the real world the Entente did find that they could reduce the first line to mush with enough weight of shells, especially by 1917 once they had begun to use the artillery in better conjunction with the infantry. This led to forward sectors being held as weakly as possible. Second and third lines could not be as quickly and effectively reduced and so any offensive would bog down assaulting line after line of trenches with the Germans either counterattacking and retaking their old positions or falling back and digging new reserve trenches until the attackers were exposed in a salient which could then be bombarded from all sides.Mark Breed wrote: Sat Jun 04, 2022 9:46 pm
Now, in 1917, even before initiating an offensive, he is carrying on the same tactics. In one weekly turn alone, he has done more than 50% damage bombarding a half-a-dozen fully entrenched infantry divisions on the front and, now, they are no longer entrenched. I am not sure how to stand up to that occurring every turn. Artillery in this particular situation is too over-powered.
I'd say the problem for the scenario is the scale. Almost the whole defensive system is compressed to a single hexrow, so in effect the Entente player is able to hammer multiple lines of defence simultaneously. You could still defend lightly in the forward hex but at this scale even being shoved back one hexrow every few turns is quite a serious rate of retreat.
I'd say the design issue is that the designer is using shock bonuses for offensives at all. It would be better to manipulate supply levels, which is how offensives are prepared in the real world. Not with everyone magically getting 10% stronger for two weeks.The other interesting design issue I found is that the Entente gets better shock values than the Central Powers on their offensives.
