The Churchill plan

[Joel Rauber]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Nope

Which I have no problems with - can you imagine the arguments?

"But the 23 1/2th Ebonian mountain cavalry corps had 2 batteries of 96.7mm gun-howitzers which CLEARLY qualifies them as better grade than their Oxyboslen opponents.....why did you downgrade them??...."[8|][8|]

I know what you mean; but I can ignore those kinds of posts. I'd like to know sometime, but it isn't pressing. And the important thing to know was told in the beginning that it can be different for different nationalities.

[SMK-at-work]

Yes he's said so - see http://tinyurl.com/2vrmko
 
And yes I agree that not mentioning it even in passing in the manual is a shortcoming.

[Joel Rauber]

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Yes he's said so - see http://tinyurl.com/2vrmko

And yes I agree that not mentioning it even in passing in the manual is a shortcoming.

It is mentioned elsewhere as well, but I don't recall if it was another thread on the forum or buried briefly in the manual. I knew about it, but not from the above quoted thread.

[FrankHunter]

The US corps represent more troops because of the size of their divisions.   For example, there's only 15 US corps in the game.  Yet even by August 1918 the US had 42 divisions which were double the size of other Allied divisions. 

[FrankHunter]

Actual numerical quality is printed in the combat display.

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

Actual numerical quality is printed in the combat display.

Any possibility we could get that displayed on the units themselves inside the normal UI? Or if that's a PITA, maybe just a list somewhere or other that could be referred to, even if it's just a forum post?

[ulver]

The May/Jun 1917 Strategic phase also finally see the fall of zar in Russia. I was frankly amazed it took so long




Subsequent turns would frequently see Russian morale fall to 0 with the German capture of Riga only to see Russian spirits recovery at the last possible moment with the recapture of the city.

[ulver]

Jul/Aug 1917 Strategic phase: The revolution seem to be causing problems – again.

[ulver]

No worries: We shall just have to liberate Riga – again. It’s getting traditional that we take turns holding the city. Works for me – every turn is one more turn Russia keeps fighting.



Jul/Aug 1917 Strategic phase:

[ulver]

The summer 1917 Entente offensive on the Western front sees a series of cautious single corps attacks liberate Belgium pressing the Germans gradually backwards – but oddly enough the West front turns out to be something of a sideshow in the summer.



Jul/Aug 1917 strategic phase: Never stack more then a single corps in front in such an artillery rich environment. I’ve also noticed quite a drastic reduction in losses to artillery if I only deploy A corps in the front line.

[ulver]

The main Entente thrust in 1917 is in a front that has so far seen two years of calm. Under cover of total Entente air superiority massive forces roll into position behind the Italian Front poised to strike eastwards. Strategic surprised is achieved as 6 Entente artillery corps blows a hole in the Austrian defences pulverising their trenches and follow up with a massive Gas barrage on second line troops ill equipped to withstand the sudden onslaught. In an unusual mobile war of manoeuvre rather then static mutual shelling that has become the norm the Americans break out into Austria.

This could be it: This could be the offensive that wins the war.

[ulver]

Sep/Oct 1917 strategic phase does have some bad news for the Entente



But....., but I took Riga back like I always do. This is so unfair.

[ulver]

So it is now 7 against 2 and the scorekeeper thinks the Central Powers are winning [X(]



Sep/Oct 1917. Central Powers ahead by 18 points: Does the computer knows something I don’t?

[ulver]

Who is this Lenin character and how do I get rid of him?



Must be a nefarious German agent. I’m so intervening in the Russian civil war. Churchill dispatch Reilly to overthrow him.

[ulver]

In the air I have utterly and completely driven the Central powers from the sky.



Hmm.... would be nice if they had time to do some ground observations while flying around celebrating their air supremacy. At least I know they enemy isn’t observing anything

[EUBanana]

Thats a mindboggling amount of industry spent on aircraft there.

...do you think that was industry well spent?  thats like, ~350 odd arms - an entire French army - or 150 barrages...

[hjaco]

Ulver only knows one way and thats the "all out" way [:D]

[ulver]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

Thats a mindboggling amount of industry spent on aircraft there.

...do you think that was industry well spent? thats like, ~350 odd arms - an entire French army - or 150 barrages...

Partly there was a role-playing aspect to it. After the dismal failure of my 1915 grand offensive I was fiercely determined to avoid any more large-scale offensive infantry battles. Losing over a million young men in two weeks gave the Entente Governments something of a scare I can tell you. I figured that if I gave my generals more men they would just be tempted to throw them away on more pointless offensives.

But yes in retro respect I think they have been a better investment then the alternative. Something like 95% of the casualties inflicted in the game has been caused by artillery. I long ago maxed out my force pool of artillery and I have been keeping sufficient stockpiles of shells to keep them firing constantly so I simply could not have spent the investment on more artillery. I have been spending quite liberally on navy, consistently on the technology fields of artillery, aircrafts, and trenches and on ASW till I reached level one and I always maximised my investments on US diplomacy – arguably the best return of all investments in the game.

What has been paying for all this: Arms. I reached the conclusion that in such an artillery rich environment non-a quality infantry corps were all but useless – the artillery would just shoot them to bits. I’ve seem dug in German 24 strength point corps in level 3 trenches evaporated by massed artillery fire – The Central power defensive line in the Alps I had to cross being a good example. The Butchers Bill for a frontal attack would have been staggering while 60 strength point of Anglo-Italian-American artillery with air support just blew them and their fortifications away. I basically only ever launch attacks with 1 max 2 corps on opponents who have been hammered by deadly accurate artillery fire. I got the industry points for this by cannibalising non-A class corps to keep my A units in fighting trim. Don’t forget the investment in air power gives a triple bonus. It gives you air support bonus to your artillery and denies it to him, it gives you a favourable rate of attrition in air combat, and it removes the fog of war for you while clouding him with it: The ability to archive complete strategic surprise in my Italian Attack is an example of this.

I fully understand your point of alternative cost but I don’t think I would have gotten nearly as good a return on my investment by having a much bigger infantry army, which was the alternative on offer.

Also it has negated the need for armour or assault training: With this kind of air support and high tech artillery I’ll just blow his trenches away.

[hjaco]

Well enjoy your time with 1.1 for with 1.2 your HQ and artillery are highly prone to overrun.

[SMK-at-work]

Stop spoiling the fun hjaco!! [:D][:D]
 
It's still an impressive feat.