Suggestion: An easy way to prevent most game breaking 'Gambits'

[AshFall]

I'd suggest the following changes to the game as an easy way of preventing most of the very odd cases of exploitative behavior in the game.

1. Remove the starting tech chits of all nations active at the start of the war (i.e. not Britain, The ottomans and Italy).

2. Add a str 8 german detachment to Bromberg.

3. Add an event to each nation affected by the tech chit loss that fires at the end of mobilization (Start of t3 for all nations except Russia, which is start of T4), adding one time funds.

"War administration releases funds held for development"
FR: 110
RU: 275
GE: 235 (Less 40, discounted detachment)
Aus: 235
Serbia: 110

This last one for Serbia might be too high, judging how bad the Industry tech is for Serbia and how useful 110mpp is in this unique case. Maybe make it just 55?

Similar weighing can be done for the others, but shouldnt be a problem in the same way.

[Bavre]

For the love of god, don't do that! I had one game with "no chit selling" houserule, and that completely broke the game. It basically makes a modified Russia first super powerful. I can demonstrate if required.

[mdsmall]

The option to sell tech chits is important for players in the mid to later phases of the game as it allows you to cash out extra chits you invested to get key technologies early in the game. So I am not in favour of prohibiting it. The gambit issues you describe really only arise from selling chits on the first turn which magnify the Central Powers first mover advantage.

My preferred way of dealing with this is to have a house rule between opponents that neither side will sell tech chits on turn one (only). After that they can do what they like. In my Balkan Variations mod, I also gave the Germans 60 MPPs to start and the Russians and Austro-Hungarians 44 MPPs. That allowed all three of those powers to operationally move 3 corps and two detachments (in the case of Germany) or 2 corps (in the case of Russia and Austria-Hungary). This bit of extra flex on turn allowed both sides to compensate for gaps in their initial deployments.

In the game I recently played with this mod (see Old Crow's Strategic Arcana You Tube channel), I used these extra MPPs to kick-start a Russia First opening as Germany which was powerful, but not over-powering. And it left me with all the initial tech investments the designers had given me. My only regret was that I sold my airship tech chit on the second turn to get 20 MPPs for some minor purpose which seemed important at the time and it took me forever to get around to reinvesting in that tech.

[Tanaka]

Yeah seems like at least just preventing chit selling on first turns would prevent a lot of problems. I mean it is mobilization or not? Hey Devs! [;)]

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Yeah seems like at least just preventing chit selling on first turns would prevent a lot of problems. I mean it is mobilization or not? Hey Devs! [;)]

Yep...just house rule 1st turn research selling for vanilla game. Fixes most everything.

With the Balkan Variations Mod (still beta) designed by mdsmall with contributions by me and ideas from others in past discussions, this issue is dealt with rather elegantly as described by Michael in his previous post on this thread.

[AshFall]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

The option to sell tech chits is important for players in the mid to later phases of the game as it allows you to cash out extra chits you invested to get key technologies early in the game. So I am not in favour of prohibiting it. The gambit issues you describe really only arise from selling chits on the first turn which magnify the Central Powers first mover advantage.

My preferred way of dealing with this is to have a house rule between opponents that neither side will sell tech chits on turn one (only). After that they can do what they like. In my Balkan Variations mod, I also gave the Germans 60 MPPs to start and the Russians and Austro-Hungarians 44 MPPs. That allowed all three of those powers to operationally move 3 corps and two detachments (in the case of Germany) or 2 corps (in the case of Russia and Austria-Hungary). This bit of extra flex on turn allowed both sides to compensate for gaps in their initial deployments.

In the game I recently played with this mod (see Old Crow's Strategic Arcana You Tube channel), I used these extra MPPs to kick-start a Russia First opening as Germany which was powerful, but not over-powering. And it left me with all the initial tech investments the designers had given me. My only regret was that I sold my airship tech chit on the second turn to get 20 MPPs for some minor purpose which seemed important at the time and it took me forever to get around to reinvesting in that tech.

You would still be able to sell chits on any later turn, there would be no changes to how things work. There just wouldnt be any chits to sell on the first turn, which seems to mostly cause a bunch of silly stuff.

It would avoid the need for "house rules", since those can be complicated to communicate when setting up games, and many people dont like them.

[Bavre]

A picture says more than a thousand words...
Opener for German Russia first strategy with no possibility to operate troops as Russia on turn 1

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: Bavre

A picture says more than a thousand words...
Opener for German Russia first strategy with no possibility to operate troops as Russia on turn 1

mdsmall's Balkan Variations Mod solves this to some extent. The Russians have 44 MMP's on their first turn. It costs 22 MMP's to operate a corp. The Helsinki and Petrograd corp can be operated to Riga and the next hex behind the Dvina. Of course..the First Turn 'No research chit selling' house rule has to be in effect. Not optimal..but would work, especially if a Russian unit could get into Tilsit.

According to mdsmall, who heard it from the dev's...because of the nature of the game engine...proscribing chit selling on ONLY the first turn is not possible. Hence...a houserule. So mdsmall came up with a way by slightly increasing the starting MMPs of a few of the belligerents so that they can operate a small amount of units, without selling tech from the get go.

Russia having to sell tech from the get go to operate units means they will lose.

So someone says 'Houserules' don't work. Well they do if you find honest opponents that will adhere to them...and the house rules are simple and not complicated. The ELO tourneys with WiE and WaW use them to mitigate cheesy, exploitive, or severely unbalancing stratagems used by some folks taking advantage of the game engine or mechanics.

Anyway...seems we are entering into shades of Chernobyl's 'Montenegro Gambit' thread again.

What its all about is fair play and sportsmanship. Some folks just want to win. The game play comes second. Out witting someone by a good strategy also takes second seat if a loophole or flaw is found, and they run with it.
This kind of 'win by any means possible' culture infects human society now. Always has and always will. Sigh.

[Bavre]

That above was just a quick and dirty screen to show the danger of sniping Riva and the neccessity to be able to operate at least some units in vanilla or become victim of just another brand of delicious cheese. Hmmm cheese ...
I am absolutely not against houserules, my point is just that they can backfire, which would be the case here.
About Tilsit: I only moved the guys directly involved in the dash (screen is from a hotseat vs myself), the units further south would of course cover their comrades.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

ORIGINAL: Bavre

A picture says more than a thousand words...
Opener for German Russia first strategy with no possibility to operate troops as Russia on turn 1

According to mdsmall, who heard it from the dev's...because of the nature of the game engine...proscribing chit selling on ONLY the first turn is not possible. Hence...a houserule. So mdsmall came up with a way by slightly increasing the starting MMPs of a few of the belligerents so that they can operate a small amount of units, without selling tech from the get go.

Ah that explains why there has been no fix. I see. Yes no choice house rules it is then...

[AshFall]

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor


According to mdsmall, who heard it from the dev's...because of the nature of the game engine...proscribing chit selling on ONLY the first turn is not possible. Hence...a houserule. So mdsmall came up with a way by slightly increasing the starting MMPs of a few of the belligerents so that they can operate a small amount of units, without selling tech from the get go.

I had heard this as well. That's why I thought of simply removing the chits from start instead and making a "release funds" event after mobilization.

Also, if I remember your capabilities correctly Bavre you would be able to force march and counter attack in some nasty fashion elsewhere to make the germans pay for stretching out like that. They cant operate first turn either after all! There will be vulnerabilities if he charges out like that. Take a wound to inflict one!

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: AshFall

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor


According to mdsmall, who heard it from the dev's...because of the nature of the game engine...proscribing chit selling on ONLY the first turn is not possible. Hence...a houserule. So mdsmall came up with a way by slightly increasing the starting MMPs of a few of the belligerents so that they can operate a small amount of units, without selling tech from the get go.

I had heard this as well. That's why I thought of simply removing the chits from start instead and making a "release funds" event after mobilization.

This is not a bad idea but working out the 'amount' of release funds for each country might be hard to determine.
I quess from extrapolating what each country in vanilla had going in research before mobilization is the way to go, but what then? Starting with a lot less MMPs then what it would cost to get these original research trees (or other tech research) going still wouldn't stop someone from not researching at all..and using what funds were available to operate units.

Well...mdsmall as an elegent solution. We played it out and tested it. The Germans can still operate units, just not a 100,000 strong Army Group by selling off all their research on turn 1. For this to work though..it has to require the house rule of no research chit selling first turn. In vanilla, if the Russians are forced to sell ALL their tech to counter the Germans...the Russians have ZERO chance of recovery. In Michaels Balkan Variations Mod, he add enough money to the Russians to be able to operate 2 corps if they need to.

Still...I am interested to hear more about Release Funds idea. I generally don't like house rules either, especially because they will only be used or accepted by only a small group of the entire community. We have been stymied by the constraints of the game engine with this first turn stuff. A better solution without relying on adding on a 'house rule' would be optimal.

I guess that is why some of us design, test, and play mods...to enhance a great but slightly flawed end product.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: AshFall

I'd suggest the following changes to the game as an easy way of preventing most of the very odd cases of exploitative behavior in the game.

1. Remove the starting tech chits of all nations active at the start of the war (i.e. not Britain, The ottomans and Italy).

2. Add a str 8 german detachment to Bromberg.

3. Add an event to each nation affected by the tech chit loss that fires at the end of mobilization (Start of t3 for all nations except Russia, which is start of T4), adding one time funds.

"War administration releases funds held for development"
FR: 110
RU: 275
GE: 235 (Less 40, discounted detachment)
Aus: 235
Serbia: 110

This last one for Serbia might be too high, judging how bad the Industry tech is for Serbia and how useful 110mpp is in this unique case. Maybe make it just 55?

Similar weighing can be done for the others, but shouldnt be a problem in the same way.

Looking at the numbers here again...this might also solve another problem...delaying the on set of uber-artillery for awhile. Serbia..110 or 55. Hmmmm..how about split the difference, around 80 maybe.

[BillRunacre]

Hi all

The reason I didn't make any further changes that would be detrimental to the Central Powers in the recent patches was because a large number of changes were made to reduce or even eliminate the effectiveness of some CP strategies, and I wanted to wait and see how this affected the overall game balance before introducing any more.

So cutting off Poland and going all out in the Balkans are no longer nearly as effective as they were. The big question is then, where does that leave us? Is the game still easier to win in multiplayer for the CP? If so, by how much?

I can think of some easy ideas to make an all out Russia first strategy slightly harder, but really want a better understanding of the bigger picture before embarking on too many, because I don't want to then find that we've effectively made the game too hard for the CP to win.

Bill

[mdsmall]

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Hi all

The reason I didn't make any further changes that would be detrimental to the Central Powers in the recent patches was because a large number of changes were made to reduce or even eliminate the effectiveness of some CP strategies, and I wanted to wait and see how this affected the overall game balance before introducing any more.

So cutting off Poland and going all out in the Balkans are no longer nearly as effective as they were. The big question is then, where does that leave us? Is the game still easier to win in multiplayer for the CP? If so, by how much?

I can think of some easy ideas to make an all out Russia first strategy slightly harder, but really want a better understanding of the bigger picture before embarking on too many, because I don't want to then find that we've effectively made the game too hard for the CP to win.

Bill

Hi Bill - you have opened up a much bigger question with your comment quoted above (one that might be usefully moved to its own thread). I have only played one full PBEM game since the most recent patch was introduced (using my Balkans Variations mod, which is built on the 1.05 version of the game). In that game I was playing the Central Powers and I used a Russia First strategy.

The adjustments that you made in the last two patches made a real difference in my opening moves. For example, I did not try assaulting Cetinje in the first two turns via the Montenegro Gambit, since by making Cetinje a fortified town with a Montenegrin detachment already entrenched, it required more concentrated fire-power to capture than I could muster until I achieved Artillery Weapons One in mid-1915. I also did not try the assault-Grodno opening - pioneered very effectively by Bavre - since upgrading the ground cover and strength of the Russian detachment that starts in Grodno made it very challenging to capture on the first turn. Also, by adding alternate mobilization points for the Russian corps, you prevented me as Germany from pre-empting Russia's ability to mobilize. All these changes were pluses for game balance.

I added two more tweaks to this mod to help the Entente. First, I played with a house rule as described above, to prevent either side from selling chits on the first turn (with the small offset of giving some additional MPPs to start to Germany, A-H and Russia). Second, I eliminated the effect of a surrender by minor or major powers on land and sea units morale - for the reasons I described in past threads.

Even with all of these adjustments - yours and mine - I did not find the game was weighted against the CP. I was able to move most of my armies to Poland on turns 2 and 3 and won significant early victories there against Russia in 1914. The Serbian front was much slower going given that I only used AH units to attack there. But in the end, I won the game by September 1917. And that was against a very experienced opponent.

So my two cents worth are that the vanilla game as it presently stands is certainly not unbalanced against the Central Powers and that there is some scope for further adjustments to help the Entente, in particular in 1914. I think preventing the sale of tech chits on turn one (only) would certainly curb most of the gambit openings, while still leaving a Russia first opening very viable for the Central Powers. I favour dialling back the morale swing when minors surrender, especially against other powers on the same side that are not the controlling power for the minor.

I look forward to hearing other players views!

Michael

[Sigizmund]

I have suggestion for Ash to not blame the game on your loses before you got some expirience.
And my view that not any balance changes should be taken before many tests beetween expirienced players is done.

[AshFall]

ORIGINAL: Sigizmund

I have suggestion for Ash to not blame the game on your loses before you got some expirience.
And my view that not any balance changes should be taken before many tests beetween expirienced players is done.

The discussion is not based off our game.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

ORIGINAL: mdsmall

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Hi all

The reason I didn't make any further changes that would be detrimental to the Central Powers in the recent patches was because a large number of changes were made to reduce or even eliminate the effectiveness of some CP strategies, and I wanted to wait and see how this affected the overall game balance before introducing any more.

So cutting off Poland and going all out in the Balkans are no longer nearly as effective as they were. The big question is then, where does that leave us? Is the game still easier to win in multiplayer for the CP? If so, by how much?

I can think of some easy ideas to make an all out Russia first strategy slightly harder, but really want a better understanding of the bigger picture before embarking on too many, because I don't want to then find that we've effectively made the game too hard for the CP to win.

Bill

Hi Bill - you have opened up a much bigger question with your comment quoted above (one that might be usefully moved to its own thread). I have only played one full PBEM game since the most recent patch was introduced (using my Balkans Variations mod, which is built on the 1.05 version of the game). In that game I was playing the Central Powers and I used a Russia First strategy.

The adjustments that you made in the last two patches made a real difference in my opening moves. For example, I did not try assaulting Cetinje in the first two turns via the Montenegro Gambit, since by making Cetinje a fortified town with a Montenegrin detachment already entrenched, it required more concentrated fire-power to capture than I could muster until I achieved Artillery Weapons One in mid-1915. I also did not try the assault-Grodno opening - pioneered very effectively by Bavre - since upgrading the ground cover and strength of the Russian detachment that starts in Grodno made it very challenging to capture on the first turn. Also, by adding alternate mobilization points for the Russian corps, you prevented me as Germany from pre-empting Russia's ability to mobilize. All these changes were pluses for game balance.

I added two more tweaks to this mod to help the Entente. First, I played with a house rule as described above, to prevent either side from selling chits on the first turn (with the small offset of giving some additional MPPs to start to Germany, A-H and Russia). Second, I eliminated the effect of a surrender by minor or major powers on land and sea units morale - for the reasons I described in past threads.

Even with all of these adjustments - yours and mine - I did not find the game was weighted against the CP. I was able to move most of my armies to Poland on turns 2 and 3 and won significant early victories there against Russia in 1914. The Serbian front was much slower going given that I only used AH units to attack there. But in the end, I won the game by September 1917. And that was against a very experienced opponent.

So my two cents worth are that the vanilla game as it presently stands is certainly not unbalanced against the Central Powers and that there is some scope for further adjustments to help the Entente, in particular in 1914. I think preventing the sale of tech chits on turn one (only) would certainly curb most of the gambit openings, while still leaving a Russia first opening very viable for the Central Powers. I favour dialling back the morale swing when minors surrender, especially against other powers on the same side that are not the controlling power for the minor.

I look forward to hearing other players views!

Michael

In a nut shell. [8D]

[Bavre]

Yes, pretty much that.

Now that I have played a few rounds as Entente vs variants of my own CP strategy, I must say I have a rather good feeling about the overall balancing. Of course doing so many CP Russia firsts in the last few month gave me a big advantage here, since I knew precisely which weaknesses my CP opponents would be going for. Well that and a ton of metagaming knowledge ...

My theory is that Russia firsts, especially combined with a strong push vs Serbia, are not per se unbalanced but merely have a high chance of catching rather inexperienced players unaware. The overall strategy can be countered, but if you play your Entente, especially your Russia and Serbia, like you would vs a Schlieffen you make it very easy for the CP.

Things NOT to do:
Make a stand with Serbia out in the open.
Once you see Germans pop up in force on the Balkans, swallow your pride and accept that your units there are nothing but a speed bump and will ultimately die. Just make it as time consuming and bloody for the enemy as possible. To that end immediately abandon north Serbia and make a stand in the mountains around Uskub.

Doing the usual Galicia offensive with the Russians is imho also a very bad idea. Most likely you will only loose precious men and resources for nothing, because two dozend+ corps of the spikey helmets will be on you in no time. While you can snatch the occasional town or even do limited diversionary counterattacks if the CP player is careless, you should generally avoid getting into any unneccessary large scale pounding matches. German units and HQs are significantly better than their Russian counterparts and can therefore easily overpower even entrenched Russian corps if they attack in force. Your best friend here is entrenchment, invest 4 chits asap and pray for a breakthrough plus early winter. Should your Russia survive 14 largely intact, you're actually in a pretty decent position for the rest of the match.

[John B.]

I guess one question from the inexperienced player point of view is should the Russians just run away as fast as they can when the see the Germans spilling over the boarder? And, is there anything France can do to take any pressure off? Or does Russia first make it an entirely east front affair for about a year?