Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I >> RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/6/2020 2:11:15 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

That does make me feel better haha did the Ottomans surrender on you?


No, but their NM crashed bad enough that the Ottomans couldn't make effective attacks anymore. I've noticed that while the loss of the NE Anatolian NM cities is bad...it isn't a game ender for the Ottomans as it can be loosing Medina or anything in the Levant..even temporarily. Which reminds me of a passage in 'Seven Pillars of Wisdom' by T.E. Lawrence or seen on the movie 'Lawrence of Arabia' referring to Medina.....

Gen. Allenby: "Should we push them out of Medina?
Lt. Lawrence: "No, we should leave them. They know they can't go anyway, for if they do, their Empire will be lost."

Kind of sums up what happens when the Turks lose Medina.

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 31
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/7/2020 3:50:59 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
And two turns later Austria Hungary quits the war. Don't really understand why as she was in a perfectly defensible position. I think the Bulgarian gambit was just too much for the Ottomans and AH morale to handle. Just curious if the Devs will be working on this issue as the consensus seems to be for fixing it?

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 9/7/2020 3:51:31 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 32
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/7/2020 6:11:07 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

And two turns later Austria Hungary quits the war. Don't really understand why as she was in a perfectly defensible position. I think the Bulgarian gambit was just too much for the Ottomans and AH morale to handle. Just curious if the Devs will be working on this issue as the consensus seems to be for fixing it?

Well, Austria-Hungary losing Trento, Brubeck, and Klagenfurt to the Italians..after losing all the NM cities in Galicia, prior to Bulgaria and then the Ottoman surrender, was more of a contributing factor...her allies surrender was just the final two straws.

Btw..I screen shot the aftermath of the successor states that rise out of Austria-Hungary. There's stuff that happens that's wonky also. Not only did German units get flung out of their positions there, but so did the Russians. Not only that, but the new states go Entente..and can basically get operated anywhere in the east. This I highly don't like, even if my side is the beneficiary of such largess. The thing is, there are some highly interesting things and operations that can occur in the East, but Serb or Hungarian units being able to operate to lets say like the Dvina/Riga area is a bit too much. A few of my friends and I came up with the house rule that the forces of Serbia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania have to stay within their new borders, except for detachments. The Poles can move anywhere, and western Entente forces may also if they so choose. Of course, this is just a house rule...and really doesn't fix the problem.

I know there is a recent thread dealing with this Austro-Hungarian surrender, but I'll go ahead and post an image here of the situation in central Europe and the carcass that once was the Habsburg domains in our game now, where the Germans are still extremely strong holding the west, and ready to envelop Riga in the east.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/7/2020 9:19:55 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 33
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/7/2020 7:13:08 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

And two turns later Austria Hungary quits the war. Don't really understand why as she was in a perfectly defensible position. I think the Bulgarian gambit was just too much for the Ottomans and AH morale to handle. Just curious if the Devs will be working on this issue as the consensus seems to be for fixing it?

Well, Austria-Hungary losing Trento, Brubeck, and Klagenfurt to the Italians..after losing all the NM cities in Galicia, prior to Bulgaria and then the Ottoman surrender, was more of contributing factor...her allies surrender was just the final two straws.

Btw..I screen shot the aftermath of the successor states that rise out of Austria-Hungary. There's stuff that happens that's wonky also. Not only did German units get flung out of their positions there, but so did the Russians. Not only that, but the new states go Entente..and can basically get operated anywhere in the east. This I highly don't like, even if my side is the beneficiary of such largess. The thing is, there are some highly interesting things and operations that can occur in the East, but Serb or Hungarian units being able to operate to lets say like the Dvina/Riga area is a bit too much. A few of my friends and I came up with the house rule that the forces of Serbia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania have to stay within their new borders, except for detachments. The Poles can move anywhere, and western Entente forces may also if they so choose. Of course, this is just a house rule...and really doesn't fix the problem.

I know there is a recent thread dealing with this Austro-Hungarian surrender, but I'll go ahead and post an image here of the situation in central Europe and the carcass that once was the Habsburg domains in our game now, where the Germans are still extremely strong holding the west, and ready to envelop Riga in the east.





Yeah I feel like at this point I should wave the white flag. I felt pretty good about the situation in France and Russia and was ok with my defensive positions in AH and offensive in Serbia but now I am cut off everywhere. What a mess

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 9/7/2020 7:14:10 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 34
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/18/2020 2:37:06 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for the explanations and this sounds harder and more expensive to achieve than it first appeared.

I don't think the Detachment in Sofia starts with any Ground Cover, and I'm tempted to change that so such an invasion would be just a tad harder in future.


Have the Devs made any decisions on the Bulgarian Gambit for the next patch? We are looking to start a new game then and would be interested to know?

_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 35
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/18/2020 8:36:32 AM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4518
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
I will do something there, but not sure when the next patch will be released so if you're really keen to get started then I wouldn't delay.

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 36
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/18/2020 9:54:23 AM   
wodin


Posts: 10720
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
This is the second best WW1 grand strategy game for me. WW1 Gold\Centennial being my favourite. Though this is by far the easier to learn and get into.

_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 37
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/19/2020 12:33:08 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for the explanations and this sounds harder and more expensive to achieve than it first appeared.

I don't think the Detachment in Sofia starts with any Ground Cover, and I'm tempted to change that so such an invasion would be just a tad harder in future.


Have the Devs made any decisions on the Bulgarian Gambit for the next patch? We are looking to start a new game then and would be interested to know?


Tanaka,
I won't hesitate to attack Bulgaria again, even if things are tweaked a bit if given the same circumstances on a macro strategic level like I found Serbia and the whole situation in the Middle East and the Balkans in our previous epic confrontation.

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/19/2020 12:46:59 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 38
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/19/2020 6:10:17 AM   
FOARP

 

Posts: 625
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline
Yeah, honestly the thing is not that you can one-shot Bulgaria. It’s that a surprise attack on Bulgaria from Serbia makes sense even from a historical POV if you think they’re going to enter the war on the CP side and if you can overwhelm them before help from the rest of the CP arrives. But the thing is you have to have the forces there to do it.

I guess one thing we haven’t talked about is whether there should be a morale hit (or US entry hit) for doing this, because it does mean you’re attacking a neutral and the Entente were supposed to be the “good guys” in terms of respecting neutrality.

_____________________________

American Front: a Work-in-progress CSA v USA Turtledove mod for SC:WW1 can be seen here.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 39
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/19/2020 5:58:45 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Thanks for the explanations and this sounds harder and more expensive to achieve than it first appeared.

I don't think the Detachment in Sofia starts with any Ground Cover, and I'm tempted to change that so such an invasion would be just a tad harder in future.


Have the Devs made any decisions on the Bulgarian Gambit for the next patch? We are looking to start a new game then and would be interested to know?


Tanaka,
I won't hesitate to attack Bulgaria again, even if things are tweaked a bit if given the same circumstances on a macro strategic level like I found Serbia and the whole situation in the Middle East and the Balkans in our previous epic confrontation.


Attack away. I would just like to at least be able to defend. And I promise you the situation will not be the same haha

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 40
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/19/2020 5:59:31 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I will do something there, but not sure when the next patch will be released so if you're really keen to get started then I wouldn't delay.


Great to hear thanks Bill!

_____________________________


(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 41
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 9/19/2020 7:35:26 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: FOARP

Yeah, honestly the thing is not that you can one-shot Bulgaria. It’s that a surprise attack on Bulgaria from Serbia makes sense even from a historical POV if you think they’re going to enter the war on the CP side and if you can overwhelm them before help from the rest of the CP arrives. But the thing is you have to have the forces there to do it.

I guess one thing we haven’t talked about is whether there should be a morale hit (or US entry hit) for doing this, because it does mean you’re attacking a neutral and the Entente were supposed to be the “good guys” in terms of respecting neutrality.


I'm not sure if a morale hit on the Entente (though, possibly yes on the US) is warranted given the situation that had occurred in this game between Tanaka and I.

It was mid 1916, and Tanaka bypassed Belgrade, but took Nish early in the war. Now, as I understand things regarding Bulgaria's pro-CP sympathies, taking Belgrade, besieging (and/or taking Novo-Georgievsk-Warsaw, taking Nish and other CP successes will increase the Bulgars interest in entering the war on the CP's side significantly Without diplomacy investments. Bulgaria has a baked-in irredentist policy towards a Greater Bulgaria..which means seizing Serbian held Macedonia.

Now, in the game between Tanaka and I, (As pointed out earlier in this thread and another), Bulgaria stood at 70% pro-CP for over a year because of successes by Tanaka's CP in Poland and Serbia. However, he did not invest any diplomatic money in Bulgaria the whole time. I managed to get Romania into the war and used them to hazard the Austro-Hungarians in Nish and relieve my lone Serb corp surrounded in Belgrade. The Romanians got mauled, I lost Belgrade, but retook Nish with a combined Serbo-Greek-Uk group. This adhoc group attacked Sofia, even though there were KuK right next to them. It was I that would have my forces there in southern Serbia "crushed like a beer can" if I hadn't sprung on Bulgaria at that time. Bulgaria's intent to quit neutrality and join the Central Powers was quite evident, as her pro-CP leaning shot up in 2 turns to 99%. Now this is not some helpless nation like Belgium or Denmark wishing to stay neutral...this is a country that has willful intent to commit aggression. If it was Bulgaria in 1914 with a lowish pro-CP leaning being surprised attacked somehow by an Entente power, then maybe some kind of NM hit would be warranted, at least, in my opinion.

I do think, though, that something to 'beef up' the detachment in Sofia or swapping of a corp there or some other means is necessary to make it slightly harder so that Bulgaria can possibly survive "The Bulgarian Gambit"

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 9/20/2020 12:38:30 AM >

(in reply to FOARP)
Post #: 42
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/7/2020 10:47:20 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Version 1.03.00 change:

>Added 2 levels of Ground Cover to the Bulgarian Detachment in Sofia (OldCrowBalthazor).

Thanks for this fix, which some of us have been calling 'The Bulgarian Gambit'.

Kudos to Britbong and Fafnir, whom both earlier this year punished me for my leisurely campaign against Serbia with this strategem,and thus showed me that this could be done.

Also, creds to Tanaka's unorthodox offensive against my Serbia which led to my desperate attack on Bulgaria with a scratch force of Greeks, British and Serbian forces to knock them out of the war. The easy sacking of Sofia and Bulgaria's surrender lead to a premature ending of a truly epic game...

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 12/7/2020 10:53:36 PM >

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 43
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 3:39:27 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

It would certainly make me nervous as a CP player if Rumania entered the war prior to Bulgaria joining. Otherwise, Bulgaria is fairly insulated from a surprise attack.

I'm assuming the majority of the units that pulled off this coup were Russian? Or Allied out of Greece? I know the Rumanian army is no great shakes and likely couldn't do it alone.


Insulated from a surprise attack? The capitol is right on the border of Serbia and only defended by a weakened detachment. It can be attacked and entered the same turn you declare war. Why is the capital not defended by a Corps and instead of a weak detachment?

I see this is the only protection added in the newest patch and I'm just not sure it is enough.

- Added 2 levels of Ground Cover to the Bulgarian Detachment in Sofia (OldCrowBalthazor).

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/20/2020 3:41:12 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Platoonist)
Post #: 44
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 7:41:56 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Bulgarian Gambit

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

It would certainly make me nervous as a CP player if Rumania entered the war prior to Bulgaria joining. Otherwise, Bulgaria is fairly insulated from a surprise attack.

I'm assuming the majority of the units that pulled off this coup were Russian? Or Allied out of Greece? I know the Rumanian army is no great shakes and likely couldn't do it alone.


Insulated from a surprise attack? The capitol is right on the border of Serbia and only defended by a weakened detachment. It can be attacked and entered the same turn you declare war. Why is the capital not defended by a Corps and instead of a weak detachment?

I see this is the only protection added in the newest patch and I'm just not sure it is enough.

- Added 2 levels of Ground Cover to the Bulgarian Detachment in Sofia (OldCrowBalthazor).


Tanaka, the situation you are in as the Central Powers in our current match (not the match featured in this thread) is not 'The Bulgarian Gambit' e.g. a surprise attack on Bulgaria. However, I also agree that the ground cover buff for the detachment is not enough. I posted a copy of a E-mail I sent to you this evening as I saw this thread got bumped to the top.

>"......the situation you are in in this current match isn't quite like the Bulgarian Gambit move in the other game. Those 2 French Corps in Serbia were to prop up Serbia's back door with Bulgaria and not a force designed for an offensive. This time, I didn't wardec Bulgaria first and you had the first move. I was surprised you didn't move that detachment out of Sofia and move or operate a Corp in. If you haven't fix that by my next move (haven't seen your last move and your second chance to get a Corp in) then chances are I will take Sofia, Bulgaria is out of the war, and its game over. That would be a bummer because the rest of our match has been quite good and we again are deadlocked on all fronts trying to gain advantage somewhere..as was the case in the 'real war'

That said, I do agree that the latest patch probably isn't enough..as I have tested this in a hotseat...not in a PM, and have found that a determined Entente surprise attack can still take Sofia in one round. As a matter of fact, as a chess player, I have seen the value of sacrificing a major piece (a 'front' let's say in this game) to get British or French units into Serbia in 1914 early 1915 and take out Bulgaria...which will be checkmate for the Central Powers.

I am of the opinion that the ground cover buff isn't enough. A Corp with either ground cover or entrenched is necessary because even though Sofia may not be taken, Bulgaria would still be in trouble by a surprise attack because its army is spread across Bulgaria. With a Corp in Sofia, at least the Central Powers player would be able to defend Bulgaria."< end mssg sent.

So in conclusion, though I sent out some dirty laundry for all to see, I agree the latest patch regarding Sofia and The Bulgarian Gambit is not enough.


< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 12/20/2020 7:50:20 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 45
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 8:36:00 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Bulgarian Gambit

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoonist

It would certainly make me nervous as a CP player if Rumania entered the war prior to Bulgaria joining. Otherwise, Bulgaria is fairly insulated from a surprise attack.

I'm assuming the majority of the units that pulled off this coup were Russian? Or Allied out of Greece? I know the Rumanian army is no great shakes and likely couldn't do it alone.


Insulated from a surprise attack? The capitol is right on the border of Serbia and only defended by a weakened detachment. It can be attacked and entered the same turn you declare war. Why is the capital not defended by a Corps and instead of a weak detachment?

I see this is the only protection added in the newest patch and I'm just not sure it is enough.

- Added 2 levels of Ground Cover to the Bulgarian Detachment in Sofia (OldCrowBalthazor).


Tanaka, the situation you are in as the Central Powers in our current match (not the match featured in this thread) is not 'The Bulgarian Gambit' e.g. a surprise attack on Bulgaria. However, I also agree that the ground cover buff for the detachment is not enough. I posted a copy of a E-mail I sent to you this evening as I saw this thread got bumped to the top.

>"......the situation you are in in this current match isn't quite like the Bulgarian Gambit move in the other game. Those 2 French Corps in Serbia were to prop up Serbia's back door with Bulgaria and not a force designed for an offensive. This time, I didn't wardec Bulgaria first and you had the first move. I was surprised you didn't move that detachment out of Sofia and move or operate a Corp in. If you haven't fix that by my next move (haven't seen your last move and your second chance to get a Corp in) then chances are I will take Sofia, Bulgaria is out of the war, and its game over. That would be a bummer because the rest of our match has been quite good and we again are deadlocked on all fronts trying to gain advantage somewhere..as was the case in the 'real war'

That said, I do agree that the latest patch probably isn't enough..as I have tested this in a hotseat...not in a PM, and have found that a determined Entente surprise attack can still take Sofia in one round. As a matter of fact, as a chess player, I have seen the value of sacrificing a major piece (a 'front' let's say in this game) to get British or French units into Serbia in 1914 early 1915 and take out Bulgaria...which will be checkmate for the Central Powers.

I am of the opinion that the ground cover buff isn't enough. A Corp with either ground cover or entrenched is necessary because even though Sofia may not be taken, Bulgaria would still be in trouble by a surprise attack because its army is spread across Bulgaria. With a Corp in Sofia, at least the Central Powers player would be able to defend Bulgaria."< end mssg sent.

So in conclusion, though I sent out some dirty laundry for all to see, I agree the latest patch regarding Sofia and The Bulgarian Gambit is not enough.



Not saying it is. I'm saying you should have and I think you would have gotten the same result. The problem is if you move a Corps into the Cap you are leaving one of the roads into the country wide open for invasion and undefended. And yes that is my next move but you will probably destroy it and enter the city first. We will see...Nice to see we agree! Haha

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 46
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 8:55:13 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
Tanaka, (concerning latest match) it was muddy and the combat projection was poor for the Serbian and French Corp who positioned themselves against that detachment in Sofia. That said, a prepared attack would do it for sure....and with good weather, a hasty attack after a surprise wardec still works now post-patch, just as it did pre-patch.

I agree fully though, that the dispositions of Bulgaria's army needs some reworking, since the Central Powers player can't do anything to mitigate a growing threat to Bulgaria while it is neutral. Sofia is the key to what ever fix that needs to be considered imho.

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 47
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 10:44:15 AM   
ThisEndUp

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 6/24/2020
Status: offline
Adding an alternate capital might the the best solution in my opinion, since it doesn't really alter the forces available in any way, thereby maintaining the current balance. Of course, the only foolproof way to prevent this would be an energetic campaign in Serbia in 1914.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 48
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 2:29:44 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThisEndUp

Adding an alternate capital might the the best solution in my opinion, since it doesn't really alter the forces available in any way, thereby maintaining the current balance. Of course, the only foolproof way to prevent this would be an energetic campaign in Serbia in 1914.


Somewhere on the vast thread was the suggestion of a second capital for Bulgaria, such as Serbia and Romania does. (and in certain circumstances, France). I for one had proposed this, but it didn't gain much traction for a variety of reasons. I still think its a valid idea.

An energetic campaign against Serbia is of course the optimal approach, but campaigns can stumble for a time, especially if the Russians have or are in the process of breaking through the Tartar gates for example.

A robust diplomatic initiative by the Central Powers is also an option to help get Bulgaria in earlier, before the western Entente can scrape enough forces to ship to Serbia and be a threat. Also, military successes by AH in Serbia and German advances in Russian Poland, such as the taking of Novo-Georgievsk, Warsaw, and a spot s.e. of Seylitz, can trigger Bulgaria's mobilization up pro-CP. Diplomacy combined with military success is potent.

With that said, I still think some work needs to be done to mitigate Bulgaria's vulnerabilities, particularly from surprise attack over its western frontier with Serbia on Sofia, and the resulting immediate surrender of Bulgaria. (The Bulgarian Gambit)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 12/20/2020 11:20:38 PM >

(in reply to ThisEndUp)
Post #: 49
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/20/2020 6:25:25 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ThisEndUp

Adding an alternate capital might the the best solution in my opinion, since it doesn't really alter the forces available in any way, thereby maintaining the current balance. Of course, the only foolproof way to prevent this would be an energetic campaign in Serbia in 1914.


I think Old Crow would agree that in both games my campaigns in Serbia were very energetic

So yes it is a must but it is not the solution. The only solution in my opinion is to swap out the detachment in Sophia with a Corps. That at least ensures a few turns of Bulgaria's survival. Although I am not sure what the historical setup actually was. Anyone know?

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/20/2020 9:52:14 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to ThisEndUp)
Post #: 50
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 6:09:33 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
Update: Great news! He attacked my detachment in Sophia with two Corps and it survived. He pulled another Corps back to the Serbian front instead of using it to attack. I then had time to swap out with a Corps into Sophia. Bulgaria has not surrendered and lives to fight more than one turn!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/21/2020 7:18:15 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 51
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 8:09:01 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 753
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Update: Great news! He attacked my detachment in Sophia with two Corps and it survived. He pulled another Corps back to the Serbian front instead of using it to attack. I then had time to swap out with a Corps into Sophia. Bulgaria has not surrendered and lives to fight more than a turn!


Yes, this happened. It's possible we may loose Nish because of this gamble...but it was worth the try.

Still, this was not a sneak attack with a surprise wardec and a hasty assault on a detachment with only ground cover of 3...you had time to entrench that detachment. I still think a Corp should be in the capital (Sofia) at the very start.

As it is, you made great moves with what you had to get that Corp in. Operating any unit next to an enemy unit is not the best course because of a loss of morale and readiness and that Corp would not of been able to entrench.

Well played! Now the Entente has got one more problem to deal with.

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 12/21/2020 8:22:44 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 52
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 8:30:09 AM   
Dazo


Posts: 102
Joined: 9/28/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
So yes it is a must but it is not the solution. The only solution in my opinion is to swap out the detachment in Sophia with a Corps. That at least ensures a few turns of Bulgaria's survival. Although I am not sure what the historical setup actually was. Anyone know?


Hi Tanaka, historical setup for Bulgaria in 1915 is as follow:

Serbian border in the west:

Facing Nish in the north: 1st army (Boyadiev) with 4 infantry divisions (1-6-8-9) and 1 cavalry brigade.
(195,620 men and 422 guns)
Serbia: 2nd army (Stepanovik) with 3 infantry (Sumadija, Morava, Combined) and 1 cavalry (Danub) divisions.
(90,000 men and 248 guns)

Facing Uskub in the south: 2nd army (Todorov) with 3 infantry (2-3-7) and 1 cavalry divisions.
(99,497 men and 182 guns)
Serbia: Macedonian Legion (Boyovic)
(29,600 men and 50 guns)

Other:
Facing romanian border: 3rd army (Toshev) with 2 infantry divisions (4-5) and various fortress units/garrisons.

1st and 2nd army are the bulk of Bulgarian forces throughout the war:
- 616,680 men and 960 guns in september 1915 (3 armies)
- 697,157 men and 1,459 guns in september 1918 (4 armies)
- 420,597 men for Serbs in 1914 down to around 125,000 after retreat to the coast
Just to say: serbian commanders Stepanovik (2nd army) and Boyovic (1st army, promoted) got their revenge at Salonique in 1918.

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 53
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 11:07:25 AM   
stockwellpete

 

Posts: 582
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline
Should there be any diplomatic/home front penalties for Entente Powers who pre-emptively attack Bulgaria? Given what they have told themselves and their populations about the reasons why they have entered the war? Self-determination and anti-militarism and so on. Just a thought.

(in reply to Dazo)
Post #: 54
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 11:52:57 AM   
stockwellpete

 

Posts: 582
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

Should there be any diplomatic/home front penalties for Entente Powers who pre-emptively attack Bulgaria? Given what they have told themselves and their populations about the reasons why they have entered the war? Self-determination and anti-militarism and so on. Just a thought.


I am thinking particularly in relation to US attitudes towards the war. Should a pre-emptive attack on Bulgaria by the Entente delay US participation in the war? If so, by how long? 3-9 months? 6-12?

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 55
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 12:56:04 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4518
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
It will currently move the US 3-5% away from the Entente.

I quite like the idea of a second capital as I think that will reduce the great incentive for the sudden strike? Not to say it won't still be useful, but rather than it being game over for Bulgaria is Sofia is taken, it could make for a new and interesting area for everyone to fight over?

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 56
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 1:44:10 PM   
stockwellpete

 

Posts: 582
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

It will currently move the US 3-5% away from the Entente.

I quite like the idea of a second capital as I think that will reduce the great incentive for the sudden strike? Not to say it won't still be useful, but rather than it being game over for Bulgaria is Sofia is taken, it could make for a new and interesting area for everyone to fight over?


OK, so you have got that idea covered. Is 3-5% enough, do you think? A second capital sounds like a good idea too. Plovdiv or Varna? I think I would prefer Varna.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 57
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 1:55:17 PM   
ThisEndUp

 

Posts: 58
Joined: 6/24/2020
Status: offline
Why any at all? Bulgaria's intentions were clear to everyone. Not to mention Rhode Island cares as little for Plovdiv as Plovdiv cares for Rhode Island - none.

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 58
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 2:18:34 PM   
stockwellpete

 

Posts: 582
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ThisEndUp

Why any at all? Bulgaria's intentions were clear to everyone. Not to mention Rhode Island cares as little for Plovdiv as Plovdiv cares for Rhode Island - none.


Woodrow Wilson was trying to keep USA neutral in WW1 until early 1917. He wanted to be the "honest broker" of the conflict. A pre-emptive Entente attack on Bulgaria arguably would have strengthened his position domestically against those arguing for US participation in the war. But it is all hypothetical so we cannot be sure.

Bulgaria's intentions were to join whichever side seemed most likely to satisfy their own territorial ambitions, particularly in relation to Serbia. In 1914 it wasn't a certainty that they would eventually join the Central Powers. They were not too keen on being allied with Ottoman Turkey for starters.

(in reply to ThisEndUp)
Post #: 59
RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? - 12/21/2020 7:21:42 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3870
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

Update: Great news! He attacked my detachment in Sophia with two Corps and it survived. He pulled another Corps back to the Serbian front instead of using it to attack. I then had time to swap out with a Corps into Sophia. Bulgaria has not surrendered and lives to fight more than a turn!


Yes, this happened. It's possible we may loose Nish because of this gamble...but it was worth the try.

Still, this was not a sneak attack with a surprise wardec and a hasty assault on a detachment with only ground cover of 3...you had time to entrench that detachment. I still think a Corp should be in the capital (Sofia) at the very start.

As it is, you made great moves with what you had to get that Corp in. Operating any unit next to an enemy unit is not the best course because of a loss of morale and readiness and that Corp would not of been able to entrench.

Well played! Now the Entente has got one more problem to deal with.


Agree with a Corps in Sophia or Second Capital.

Question: Why did you not attempt the Surprise Gambit on Sophia this time? Would have been interesting to see if it happened again!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 12/21/2020 7:22:56 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I >> RE: Gamey, Broken, or Just fine? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.289