Matrix Games Forums

I faced the competent Opponent Boogada once again. Previously as the CP he maulled me so I wanted to see what I could do in the mirror match, that game ended very early with my demise. Though this match continued on awhile and eventually from the ashes of defeat the ET picked up some steam. I asked my Girlie, who is French what Entente means and how it is pronounced. It is "On-Taunt" and it means agreement I think she said... So Threeway Agreement

Anyway... When the game began, opening turns were slow steady push with the Russians, I never took the Galician Forts the whole of the game. Instead I focused on threatening Budapest and East Prussia. Eventually the Russian Drive pushed onward through Prussia and into Berlin, but never taking the Capitol there. I kept running out of Activation Points but I had a surplus of Corps and it took me some time to use a Siege Cannon on the Frontier Forts to bust them and exhaust the Germans with endless Russian Surges... Very classic and slow... The Eastern Front was mostly boring and I could fall asleep watching it, no pretty cannons and no pretty actions just a Wall of Russians and the Germans eventually couldn't stop them, but the AH-German combo managed to do well against them in the Carpathians

On the Western Front, the Germans smashed through the French like a fist through a itty bitty glass window. Nothing left of them after a few short turns. I decided after losing half of France to pull back to Paris and defend the capitol. The Germans consumed a great deal of Food/Raw hexes but this didn't help them much and though Serbia had long surrendered and the OE was open for business the Germans never found much iniative after the a whole year of sieging Paris. The French kept transfering in fresh raw recruits, old and young... Some C and even D grade troops as Morale of the Country was down in the Gutter. Didn't aide the Germans though, I think they wasted a lot of HQ readiness and overdeployed in the East and Italian fronts or so they mentioned... Also they had a great deal of subs to deal with Great Britian. Didn't do much good though as unfortunately just as Germany sank all of the British Transport fleet the Americans joined to alleviate the Pressure. Had this not happened it would have possibly collapsed the entirety of England. Which had no raws and barely any food by 1917, forcing precious resources into Transport Production and Ship Repair. Lordy I made a few Errors deploying my fleet! <BEWARE: you better double check fleet deployment, this game can be tricky that way>

There were delays getting BEF units to the frontlines as The German/Austrian/OE fleet exacted a major deathtoll on my fleets early. The British had very few operational Dreadnaughts by wars end. I think only 3, relying heavily on the Italian and French to keep them from starving... I had foolishly split up my DNs early and they were damaged and I couldn't ever operate out of Egypt, lost an HQ there. The disaster went on for awhile, but luckily I managed to get most of the BEF onto the Continent by late '15 and into '16 and help alleviate the Paris Siege

During the War on the Western Front British A Corps really helped... It wasn't worth it, honestly for the Germans to contend with them... The French were rendered from early 1915 on useless but they kept the Entire German Army held up while the British Slowly mowed down 1 by 1 every group of German unit occupying France.. I am beginning to subscribe to the philosphy Capitols like Paris aren't worth taking, easier to destroy the rest of the nation... Italian HQs were shipped and that country was left to surrender to the CP as it wasn't vital... As I needed every last activation point I could find. The Techs were pretty up there, Tech 2 for Fighters, tech 5 Artillery... the 2 British Artillery I shipped to the Continent were exacting 10 Hits per Shot..Pretty nice, didn't need to actually fight much anymore and denying the Germans Recon was costly I imagine. I had several more Artillery pieces couldn't get them on boats though. Germans did so well in stopping them... would've be nice on those level4 entrenchments

In the end I learned a about Entente play, they're is a bit more micromanagement... In this game I was particularly close to losing a few times but never threw in the towel though the CP had the advantage for a larger amount of the game. They did not press on it when they could've, a few Cav charges in Southern France and toward the Atlantic would've starved France to death...

Meanwhile It is easy to get sidetracked by other fronts or attempt to do too many fancy things. The Russians in the long run are pretty unstoppable, if you do not make a move on them they will probably conquor Germany by 1916, or the AH much earlier, I found bypassing and surrounding strongpoints much safer and Clumping your Navy Utterly Vital...


By the way the end was this: 68 ET victory Points 6,093,000 CP dead, 6,348,000 ET dead

This was my first ET game and it proves my theory, ET has a easier time... I think the siege factors of this game should altered, they make it too easy for one to stalemate things, though I guess the siege of Paris would've been hell. In another ET game I'm playing, I took Paris in 1914, with 1 corps vs an HQ, allowed the French to put several corps in there to hold me up really really annoying... But that's war

all in all very fun game, tough battles, the Russians are the boring front, they would be real real interesting with assualt troops I guess???

Here's my view:

I lost this game. Yet somehow in a strange way. My initial attack in the west was really doing well. I got all of Belgium really fast, and I broke through the boarder fortifications too. But when my right wing was at the gates of Paris it was all out of readyness and the offensive had to be stopped. So thats what it feels like....
In the meantime my left wing finished southern France, secured some food hexes and the troops moved to Paris to finish it off. But they were unable to take it. There was intense fighting for a few turns but I failed. France was already down to weak and taking the capitol was the last step to make it collapse... Then massive British reinforcements arrived and I lost initiative in the west.

Serbia fell fast, and I made a mistake by moving those troops up against Italy almost entirely. Also I added some fresh German corps to the Alps. That army group was big and strong enough to do severe damage to the Italians and it took only a few turns to make them surrender. But if I had used those troops in the West.... would they have been able to do the final push... I guess so.

The other fronts were mostly static. The Russians advanced slowly in the East. I did not put up many troops against them. In the end they were at the gates of Berlin like I was at the gates of Paris 1 year earlier. They also attacked A-H but tried to move around the strong forts. I dont think this was a real good offensive. I could hold it with minor loses. The Turks took Cairo but failed to conquer Alexandria. The Bulgarians took Saloniki, barely anyting happened in Romania.

In the West the massive amount of Brits sealed my fate. They retook Belgium and were unstoppable.

Also with the loss of some food hexes in East Prussia, Germany was starving in 1916. I took some French ones, but still my moral was going down fast and steadily. My uboats were doing good (and there were up to 9 of them at a time), but I was starving before the ET was. So I lost.

I've lost two games as the CP in a row now, both times failing to capture Paris early enough (in the other game) or at all (in this game). My worst enemy is still food not bombs...

The way that I see it, the Germans starve a little too easy. I do not think that Eastern Prussia would've starved the German People with the successes in France that this player had...He had nearly half my food hexes. 1916 into 1917, I didn't have to fight the Germans, I just had to hold them in place.

There are couple other weak points, the Italian Entry is rigged, it really wasn't a front that was so OPEN... The Austrians held the Italians with little or nothing! I think there should be a greater defense or perhaps a mountain training for troops, or no passage over certain mountains!

The Russians have too much Corps... I know historically their army was huge. Though really, the Russian Army is equivelant to the German one by 1916, only lesser in Activation Points and overall unit size... On top of it the Russian troops never run out. I know they had a lot of men in WW1 but they didn't have a lot of morale after a little losses they did worse than the French in that regard. They surrendered and their Government of nearly 4 hundred years collapsed..

Sieges are very very painful! I am besieging Paris in a current game through 2 TURNS! Lordy!!! The only good of taking Paris is the fact I clean off the Industry point and hurt French Morale. Other than that he has held me there and will likely hold me there as long as he wants...

The Surrender rule is the last point that causes issues I know we don't want Majors to surrender to quickly, but certain actions should cost more. I should've lost the above game, Paris should've fallen... So sieging and surrender are a pain in the ass. No amount of Russian troops can break the Eastern Front, it is a trench region by early 1915... Meanwhile the OE Mountains were hell for both sides, pretty much a steamroll region with any Russians!

On top of it the Russian troops never run out. I know they had a lot of men in WW1 but they didn't have a lot of morale after a little losses they did worse than the French in that regard.

&nbsp;
I dont' know where you got your history from, but Russian morale didn't collapse "arfter a little loss" - it collapsed after the 1916 Brusilov offensive....which cost Russia over 500,000 casualties - more than France suffered at Verdun.
&nbsp;
Russian forces in GoA are numerous....but rapidly deteriorate - the 3rd set of reinforcements that arrives in (IIRC) late 1915 is&nbsp;all "C" class - significantly worse quality than the pre-war troops.&nbsp; They also cannot replace losses very well - having limited production capacity that has to be spread over replacements, artillery, aircraft, trenches and naval.....even if they ignoer all teh other stuff they have a hard time keeping up to strength if here's any decent combat.&nbsp;
&nbsp;
They are incapable of steamrolling a reasonable defence - probably some of the troops from Italy might have been useful holding them back...but then conquering Italy quickly is always good too.
&nbsp;
The way Germany sacked French resources has been written about on here before - the model whereby captured resources will eventually be destroyed is based on how the Germans exploited northern France - they prettty much took what they wanted and to hell with anyone else - this stripped the country bare and laid it waste for a decade or more after the war - it was not a policy that gave a steady stream of food and resources to replace those cut by the blockade. So no, captured French food will not replace captured Prussian food for very long at all.
&nbsp;
I dont see why you think Paris should be easier to take...it had a lot of forts - the older ones from the 1870s were still there, plus an outer ring of more modern ones, and it was designed to be difficult to take.

but if you do take it you'll probably force France from the war - especially given what apepar to be substantial losses of French territory elsewhere - normally you have to take Paris and Lyon or Orleans (IIRC) plus all of northern France to force surrender.
&nbsp;
I've lost games as teh CP due to the losses I've taken trying to capture Paris too...I learned that somethines you have to stop short rather than over-extend!
&nbsp;
All in all it looks like you had a tough game, which is cool....and that your problems were mainly due to the decisions you made, which is also cool because it gives you the opportunity to learn!
&nbsp;
Thanks for the writeup

You could have got 1 permanent food in each of Belgium, Netherlands, Serbia and up to 3 in Romania. I think these food resources should be a prime target for the CP in any game, when the time is ripe.

Sure the Russians get a lot of Corps but you can basically disregard their quality. Their great limitation is difficulty in replenishing activation points and their limitation of stacking 4 * 18 = 72 strength point in a hex to between 72 SP and 96 SP for the CP. And you have to take into consideration that attacker losses are taken before they get to fire back. So as SMK has pointed out you should possibly work on your defensive.

Regarding the siege of Paris sometimes its better to barrage your opponent at a target he has to defend (i.e. a second Verdun) and use your excessive forces to attack elsewhere.

ORIGINAL: hjaco

You could have got 1 permanent food in each of Belgium, Netherlands, Serbia and up to 3 in Romania. I think these food resources should be a prime target for the CP in any game, when the time is ripe.

What to you mean by permanent food? In a current PBEM game as CP the food hexes in Belgium and Serbia no longer appear after those countries where conquered by the CP. And as I recall only 1 of the three remain in Romania. The fact is, the CP suffers from significant food deficits even if they conquer several minors and take food hexes in France and Russia.

Lascar, the offensive power of the Russians is unstoppable! Not because they can defeat a CP clump, they usually have a hard time doing it as mentioned, they can replace their losses easily. I run out of Manpower for Germany before I run out of Arms... Russia has to merely wait, dig in and and can replenish easy. Only in an East first or a situation where she is targeted will she have issues. Her industry must gear up and she needs to capture some resources, in this game I was producing 10 EPs per turn! As Hjaco said, my biggest issue was HQ activations... I would've ended the game a lot easier with them, collapsed the OE and AH much much earlier! God knows what I could've done to Germany...My units didn't move for 1.6 years while I geared up...I ended up shipping in other HQs to do the job and I had 20-40 Russian corps sitting on the AH border-OE Border unable to fight because they were immobile. Bunch of 0 HQs! It is however a way to suck out CP units from other fronts, with your Cav since the East is a good place to use them and those food hexes are soooooo vital to the CP
There is also couple Raws on the AH border worth taking but once that's done it's easy to Stalemate the East


It's usually TrenchWare in the East in at least all my games, as the Food Hexes are soooo vital the CP will protect them more than any other front by digging in to 3 or 4 trench by 1915 and plugging gaps with Massive Stacks

Russians don't build Fighters, Navies, etc... They build HQ Points and Arms Period, maybe a Siege Cannon

The Food hexes can be gained in the Balkans you merely have to bypass destroying them this will require some smart tactics

Historically I don't know anything about the Eastern Confrontation other than the Russians got smooshed at the same time as the French were getting smooshed, not easy to repeat in GOA


As for Paris capture, real tough one..... I disagree once troops take it, they take it.... It wouldn't take 6 months to clear it, they should be repulsed or they should have it, this way avoiding holding 200,000 men in a siege clearing buildings for 6 months, or at least if they have a Siege there should be a progress Report. So we understand it... Now it's confusing, no one knows what's going on and a besieged city in my game above was fed new units continually over and over again. Until basically the Germans ran out and I pooled my forces. Once the attacker starts to destroy and possess portions of the city it should be done in percentage increments so that the Reinforcer cannot force it to start from Point A every time

i.e. 10% of Paris is captured, impulse 1   --    Impulse 3  38% of Paris is captured by the CP  so if I'm still at 10% after 6 months I'll retreat and leave the city, Boogada never knew how I kept it and lost tens of thousands of his men and precious time for nothing


P.S. The Food Hexes in East Prussia, 2 are what collapse the Germans after about 2 years. She has issues trading or stealing them from elsewhere then slowly any other food hex that is lost will cost her the game... I do not think that those would collapse her in Real Life... Do you? LikeWise, Poland-tiny portion of the Ukraine and the Baltics can hurt the Russians but takes a bit more to collapse them, and virtually half of France does not neccesarily mean it will ever surrender it's food is more plentiful

ORIGINAL: Lascar

ORIGINAL: hjaco

You could have got 1 permanent food in each of Belgium, Netherlands, Serbia and up to 3 in Romania. I think these food resources should be a prime target for the CP in any game, when the time is ripe.

What to you mean by permanent food? In a current PBEM game as CP the food hexes in Belgium and Serbia no longer appear after those countries where conquered by the CP. And as I recall only 1 of the three remain in Romania. The fact is, the CP suffers from significant food deficits even if they conquer several minors and take food hexes in France and Russia.

Each turn there is a check made whether a controlled resource is permanently depleted and removed in the game. That can happen within 1 to 4 game turns inclusive the turn you took it.

This check however is not made to conquered resources so basically avoid taking resources in minors you can conquer until
after they have been conquered.

ORIGINAL: wargamer123

Historically I don't know anything about the Eastern Confrontation other than the Russians got smooshed at the same time as the French were getting smooshed, not easy to repeat in GOA

After being stuck in France in late 14' the Germans launched a winter offensive ([X(]) in December which lasted through the summer of 15'. The result was the capture of all parts of Poland and up to the gates of Balticum. The Russians lost most of their first and second line Infantry (A and B corps) in this process and the result to Russian morale was devastating.

As for Paris capture, real tough one..... I disagree once troops take it, they take it.... It wouldn't take 6 months to clear it, they should be repulsed or they should have it, this way avoiding holding 200,000 men in a siege clearing buildings for 6 months, or at least if they have a Siege there should be a progress Report. So we understand it... Now it's confusing, no one knows what's going on

The Paris hex is still 50 km across...or whatever it is - Paris was specifically designated an "Armed Camp", with its own garrison of 200,000 men (eventually siphoned off into field formations of course) and 3 (IIRC) concentric rings of forts.

Premzyl held for 100 days in 1915, Paris was beseiged for 4 and a bit months in 1870-71, and then again when held by hte Commune on April-May of 1871.

The people were expecting another seige, the Germans were expecting to beseige it...there is no reason to expect that anythign else would happen.

As for progress......what info do you want?&nbsp; You know what forces you have in hte hex, you can guess what forces the other guy has...this is a strat level game and you're not going to be told when every fort falls.&nbsp; If you want to take hte hex you have to keep winning the combats - it's that simple - you need to manage your reserves and bombard the other guy wherever possible in the hex or in hexes he may be feeding reserves into it from.

It's going to be expensive and bloody!

The germans launched a couple of offensives in 1915 - the 2nd battle of the Masurian lakes was launched in February, in a snow storm, and booted the Russians out of East Prussia.&nbsp; Then there was the Gorlice-Tarnow campaign, where they attacked from south of Poland and broke through the Russian lines.&nbsp; Attacks from East Prussia also broke the lines and threatened to surround the Russian armies in Poland (somethign that sometimes happens in GoA!).

It needs to be remembered that the Russians were still attacking the Austrians at the start of this - and had pretty much passed the Carpatian mountains in some places - the Austrians had launched an attack in March that was defeated.

The Russians conducted a fightign withdrawl - their rearguards gained them time at successive river lines, and generally they managed to withdraw in reasonable order - some armies were destroyed or routed, but as a whole the Russian army was not

The Tsar replaced Grand Duke Nichlas as CinC, and I don't think the blow to Russian morale was as bad as hjaco implies - but it didn't do them any good.

An account by a British observer with the Russian army is at http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/gor ... server.htm

What are your sources on Russian losses SMK ? Part of the problem is that Russian sources are scarce or very unreliable but according to my information Russia suffered alone in 1915 around 2 million casualties. I have no solid data on 1914 but between 0.5 and 1 million should be plausible ?

http://www.richthofen.com/ww1sum2/

http://www.naval-history.net/WW1CampaignsRussia.htm

As far as i can read the 1916 losses were approximately the same as in 1915 with 1 million casualties for the offensive alone. But the CP was in general in the defensive that year so losses was kept "down".

So losses alone would not have been that different from previous years.

Bottomline my point was that the prewar firstline and secondline troops (A and B corps) was virtually gone by the end of 1915 due to heavy casualties.

Second the issue about morale depends very much on what we are talking about. I sense you mean Army morale ? I mean public morale [;)] The loss of Russia up to short before Riga through Minsk the Pripet marshes and down to the Dniester River was a severe blow in top of the already severe domestic problems in Russia.

Watching a Documentary on the Eastern Front, all I got the impression from it is that the Germans were dreadful to the Poles. As vile there as Belgium? Then again, there was rumours that the French army and Belgians were sniping Germans in Belgium behind the lines, and this may have caused a sort of hysteria?
&nbsp;
As for the German starvation, I think it would be better represented that she cannot trade for enough food and the starts with a certain stockpile, but letting the Russians rob her and AH of 3-4 Hexes of food doesn't seem right.
&nbsp;
Millions of Russian Casualties, hard to imagine, hard to imagine furthermore&nbsp;WinterFighting on such a scale. The Russia of WW1 was not like the Russia of Napoleon's era or WW2
&nbsp;
much weaker&nbsp;

ORIGINAL: hjaco

ORIGINAL: Lascar

ORIGINAL: hjaco

You could have got 1 permanent food in each of Belgium, Netherlands, Serbia and up to 3 in Romania. I think these food resources should be a prime target for the CP in any game, when the time is ripe.

What to you mean by permanent food? In a current PBEM game as CP the food hexes in Belgium and Serbia no longer appear after those countries where conquered by the CP. And as I recall only 1 of the three remain in Romania. The fact is, the CP suffers from significant food deficits even if they conquer several minors and take food hexes in France and Russia.

Each turn there is a check made whether a controlled resource is permanently depleted and removed in the game. That can happen within 1 to 4 game turns inclusive the turn you took it.

This check however is not made to conquered resources so basically avoid taking resources in minors you can conquer until
after they have been conquered.

This apparently means that only conquered resources within that partitioned area assigned to the conquering powers are available to the conqueror. So for example, there is not much point for the CP to advance to the east of the Dniepr to secure the numerous resources in the Ukraine since they will be outside the occupation zone after Russia surrenders.

ORIGINAL: Lascar
This apparently means that only conquered resources within that partitioned area assigned to the conquering powers are available to the conqueror. So for example, there is not much point for the CP to advance to the east of the Dniepr to secure the numerous resources in the Ukraine since they will be outside the occupation zone after Russia surrenders.

There most certainly is a point in doing this as this will speed up Russian surrender and hurt their production. Say you take the 6 food resources west of the Dniepr/Dvina line and Russia will loose a staggering 12 morale lose per turn due to starvation.

Similarly actual production will be lowered by 6*11/100 each turn so they will stay with 1 for most of the time with their slow gear up. So they will have great difficulty buying activation points to hurt you with.

I dont' have any sources on Russian losses other than what's around on the web - I tend to go to www.worldwar1.com first..mainly because it uses hte West Point maps that give a great sense of the movements and main features.

Casualties for individual battles are fairly readily available, but I dont' think I've seen anything giving a month-month or year-year totals for all combatants - I did see a breakdown of US casualties month-month somewhere tho that was very intersting.

Definitely will go with Hjaco here, just taking 4 Food Hexes off the Russians reduced them to "Strong" within a few turns. No real combats! That and a few frontal forts/cities that go along with it. Though the real prize is removing the threat on the 3-4 Frontier Food Hexes of the Germans/AH... Since Germany is the Primary Fighter for the CP, there is no replacements for these that won't sink the AH-OE into eventual starvation and collapse, as I'd rather transfer AH-OE's Food to Germany than to have German -2 Food per turn for awhile or -3

One can almost justify the loss of several frontline factories/Cities in the West just because they will not mean imminent doom, and what good are they without food?

I have never seen anyone able to really take the Ukraine Grain really without German help or abandoning Galicia and the defense positions to protect the Raws there though


As for Russian casaulties, I've seen a vastly different figures, though it doesn't seem to matter, I never knew that the Germans transfered most of their Army East after the initial failures in the West to finish off the Russians......

Hi
I know this is an old thread which I found searching for all surrender threads, but there were those concerns of Wargamer123 which sparked my interest
I`m not a longtime player of GoA but after only two games I got problems with the intention of that game.
Is it either a recreation of the real WWI or is it a what-if game.
In both cases I have the feeling it misses.
As I said Im not a experienced player of GoA but I have my knowledge of history.

Let`s talk about the Alpine Front. Fact is the Italian Alpini were not defeated in alpine warfare, but in the Isonzo Battle which is quite a regular land battle. So not in GoA. Just take a few AH Corps and you meet in Florence and soon after you are down in Rome.
Okay, if it is now a what-if game, you should take Italy and let it pay, but again, you loose all the benefit of having conquered the Po plain and the possibility to have unrestricted access to hardgrain pasta and even more to have access to the weak bottom of south France.
If you go for Russia, same problem. You capture the Ukraine which is the grain bowl of Russia and anyway Germany starves to surrender. At that time haute cousine and even "go large" was unknown to most of the Germans, you remember they were nicknamed Krauts, so why do they starve?

If I missed something with this game can anybody please help me understand it?
Hellmuth