Page 1 of 5
Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:55 pm
by stephenhamley
Eh good game get the feel of the trenches well but if memory seves me correctly the High Seas fleet was more of a baltic ports fleet and never came out in strength after Jutland, This game would benefit from a more historical system or afrom scrapping it. The idea of German transports bobbing up and down happily across the north Atlantic is a bit stupid.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:59 pm
by SMK-at-work
Have you tried having transports bobbing about the Atlantic? they usually don't last long against the British and French - you might get away with it vs the aI, but that's no great achievement
Whether the German fleet stays in port or not is entirely up to the German player. Historically the Germans kept putting considerable resources into the High Seas Fleet....you can choose to do that or try an alternative course - what's your problem with that?[&:]
This game gives you options to what was done historically - and IMO the options you get have believeable outcomes - somethign a lot of game designers could learn from!!
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:29 pm
by Hanal
If I wanted an exact duplicate of historical events and circumstances in my wargames, then I would save the money and read a book instead....I never understood gamers who have such a myopic view of how a game should play....[8|]
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 pm
by SMK-at-work
Yep....but I add a requirement that the options you get have to be believable......a classic one is WW2 games that make it fairly easy for the Axis to invade England....suffice to say I think if it happened the war would have been shorteend due to the Axis losing every soldier they sent either shot, drowned or captured......
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:05 am
by Hanal
Oh, and in the games that I play v. the AI, if I send out my transports unprotected, they do not remain at sea long enough to just bob along....
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 6:57 pm
by Graf Leinsdorf
ORIGINAL: J P Falcon
If I wanted an exact duplicate of historical events and circumstances in my wargames, instead....I never understood gamers who have such a myopic view of how a game should play....[8|]
Certainly in wargames history should not be too a tight constraint that it cannot be reversed through a skillful strategy accomplished by human players. BUT history should definitely be hard to reverse for a wargame to assert itself as minimally historical and not phantasy. That is also part of the enjoyment of these peculiar pastimes of ours: the player feels proud of having been able to win against unfavourable odds, like for instance in the role of the historical underdog General Lee in Gettysburg.
In Guns of August on the contrary (at least in the current level of development of this overall well devised and innovative game), just since my second campaign and thus being not yet particularly experienced in the game mechanics and strategies, while playing as CP, I have been always able to easily smash the AI Entente. Moreover almost in every game I astonishingly assisted around 1916 to the quite unhistorical surrender of Britain just due – I suppose – to the outcome of some naval battles in the North Atlantic and in spite of a certain amount of successful offensives accrued in France by the Western Allies. Germany, instead of being starved by the Entente blockade, ended regularly with plenty of resources as though the powerful British Home Fleet had never materialized.
Not very amusing according to my point of view : I would have saved the money and buy "The Phantasy Great War of Goblins"
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:01 pm
by SMK-at-work
Youo're obviously too good for the neutral AI - have you tried playing with some pro-AI bias?
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:46 pm
by EUBanana
I think the transports that Germany can sneak through,even against a human opponent, is kinda reflected by blockade runners and that sort of thing, so its not like its completely ahistorical. They did have blockade runners and smugglers and such.
In any case they won't usually last long.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:17 am
by James Ward
I do see the point he is making.
In the game if Russia surrenders, as it historically did, there is no food problem for Germany. Even before Russia surrenders there is rarely a food problem for Germany.
Historically the German were pretty much starved by the blockade. I don't see how you can put pressure on Germany with a blockade even if the game goes exactly as history.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 9:28 am
by SMK-at-work
Germany produces 7 food, and consumes 10 - so it needs another 9 captured food to make up that missing 3 (captured only produces at 1/3rd per unit remember).
Austria is a drain too - it uses 7 and produces 6 so that's another 3 captured food needed.....Turkey is neutral - producing and consuming 7.
IIRC Germany gets another 6 food from Russia's surrender. Romania can yield 3, Serbia and Belgium 1 each. France has a couple by Dijon that are the closest to the German border, and there's 1 just north of Paris.
So Germany needs to get almost all of those - any 12 - to make up the food shortage for it and Austria.
All the CP powers combined have an initial surplus of 20 food. Assuming they quickly capture 3 Russian sources and the Serbian one they will lose an average of 2 2/3rd food/turn - so they have about 8 strategic phases before they start losing morale for lack of food - more if they capture more.
If the Russian player kindly lines his border with his troops to get killed in the first turn then that's fairly easy....the AI does that a lot - often you can kill 1/2 the Russian army before the 2nd strat phase (I just did 560,000 TE casualties all Serbian and Russian in the 1st turn to 180,000 CP)
But a decent human player isn't going to make it so easy - and some of the German food is close enough to the Russian border to be able to be threatened if things go wrong....
The CP does not have secure food supplies by any means!!
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:16 pm
by James Ward
ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Germany produces 7 food, and consumes 10 - so it needs another 9 captured food to make up that missing 3 (captured only produces at 1/3rd per unit remember).
Austria is a drain too - it uses 7 and produces 6 so that's another 3 captured food needed.....Turkey is neutral - producing and consuming 7.
IIRC Germany gets another 6 food from Russia's surrender. Romania can yield 3, Serbia and Belgium 1 each. France has a couple by Dijon that are the closest to the German border, and there's 1 just north of Paris.
So Germany needs to get almost all of those - any 12 - to make up the food shortage for it and Austria.
All the CP powers combined have an initial surplus of 20 food. Assuming they quickly capture 3 Russian sources and the Serbian one they will lose an average of 2 2/3rd food/turn - so they have about 8 strategic phases before they start losing morale for lack of food - more if they capture more.
If the Russian player kindly lines his border with his troops to get killed in the first turn then that's fairly easy....the AI does that a lot - often you can kill 1/2 the Russian army before the 2nd strat phase (I just did 560,000 TE casualties all Serbian and Russian in the 1st turn to 180,000 CP)
But a decent human player isn't going to make it so easy - and some of the German food is close enough to the Russian border to be able to be threatened if things go wrong....
The CP does not have secure food supplies by any means!!
But the point is the Naval blockade does nothing regarding the food situation for Germany and in the war it had an effect.
If Russia surrenders Germany loses 1 morale point per turn for the rest of the game assuming they gain no other food sources. Yet blockade that had bigger effect later in the war.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:33 pm
by SteveD64
Isn't the blockade effect represented by the shortfall in German food producton (consumes 10 produces 7)? If there was no blockade in this game then the Germans would consume 10 and produce 10.
The question of whether or not the fall of Russia should alleviate the German food problem is another matter entirely.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:09 pm
by James Ward
ORIGINAL: CLEVELAND
Isn't the blockade effect represented by the shortfall in German food producton (consumes 10 produces 7)? If there was no blockade in this game then the Germans would consume 10 and produce 10.
Perhaps that is what is shown. I don't recall reading of widespread food shortages in Germany in 1915 though.
While it is possible to get German transports into the North Atlantic and get food in trade in practice it is impossible even at the start of the war. Germany can 'blockade' the UK with U-boats and force the UK to surrender regardless of how the land war is going but the TE really can't force Germany into the same situation which seems odd. Perhaps putting the North Sea as a trade zone for Germany to receive food via instead of the North Atlantic would make the blockade more meaningful and something to actually pursue.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:14 pm
by Walloc
ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Germany produces 7 food, and consumes 10 - so it needs another 9 captured food to make up that missing 3 (captured only produces at 1/3rd per unit remember).
Austria is a drain too - it uses 7 and produces 6 so that's another 3 captured food needed.....Turkey is neutral - producing and consuming 7.
IIRC Germany gets another 6 food from Russia's surrender. Romania can yield 3, Serbia and Belgium 1 each. France has a couple by Dijon that are the closest to the German border, and there's 1 just north of Paris.
So Germany needs to get almost all of those - any 12 - to make up the food shortage for it and Austria.
All the CP powers combined have an initial surplus of 20 food. Assuming they quickly capture 3 Russian sources and the Serbian one they will lose an average of 2 2/3rd food/turn - so they have about 8 strategic phases before they start losing morale for lack of food - more if they capture more.
If the Russian player kindly lines his border with his troops to get killed in the first turn then that's fairly easy....the AI does that a lot - often you can kill 1/2 the Russian army before the 2nd strat phase (I just did 560,000 TE casualties all Serbian and Russian in the 1st turn to 180,000 CP)
But a decent human player isn't going to make it so easy - and some of the German food is close enough to the Russian border to be able to be threatened if things go wrong....
The CP does not have secure food supplies by any means!!
I fear that if thats how its suppose to work, then there is a bug. Ill in next 3 post show 3 pic's from july '15. Where CP hasnt taken any russian food sources at all. Just Austria the Serbian 1 and German 1 in France and 1 in Belgium and its now has the food it need not to lose moral. AH being +1 and Germany being minus 1. I've never ever in any of my campaigns as CP from 1.1 to 1.2b2 ever lost 1 moral from not having food as CP.
First pic is overall pic.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:16 pm
by Walloc
German production. Notice the go from 4 to 3 aka lose 1 food in reality.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:18 pm
by Walloc
and AH food going from 5 to 6 gaining 1. With 1 transfered u can keep up the german food aka with 3 taken food resources my experience is that u are home free.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:45 pm
by SteveD64
Perhaps putting the North Sea as a trade zone for Germany to receive food via instead of the North Atlantic would make the blockade more meaningful and something to actually pursue.
I can see this. My "Jutland" happened in the North Atlantic which ended up contested and allowed me a turn of outside trade. Historically, this wasn't going to happen. What would be the conseqences of switching German trade to the North Sea from the North Atlantic?
Aside from denying the British amphib capabilities (granted a very good thing) control of the North Sea doesn't mean much. Or does it?
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:25 pm
by jimwinsor
The Germans can get a steady supply of food from Baltic trade too, right?
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:28 pm
by James Ward
ORIGINAL: jimwinsor
The Germans can get a steady supply of food from Baltic trade too, right?
They get resources from the Baltic and Food from the Atlantic.
RE: Blockade +Jutland?
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:22 pm
by Joel Rauber
ORIGINAL: James Ward
Perhaps that is what is shown. I don't recall reading of widespread food shortages in Germany in 1915 though.
While it is possible to get German transports into the North Atlantic and get food in trade in practice it is impossible even at the start of the war. Germany can 'blockade' the UK with U-boats and force the UK to surrender regardless of how the land war is going but the TE really can't force Germany into the same situation which seems odd. Perhaps putting the North Sea as a trade zone for Germany to receive food via instead of the North Atlantic would make the blockade more meaningful and something to actually pursue.
The UK was much more reliant on food imports in RL than Germany was. Whether or not the relative reliance is being simulated correctly is another matter. But I think that the fact that the UK is more easily brought to its knees from blockade is accurate.