Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out!

 
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 >> WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/16/2021 7:28:22 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
I do fine in my research in WIE and WAW. Is there a difference in Research and S&I in the WW1 game? As CP against Old Crow my research was just slogging away at a snails pace he was in like level 3 trenches and I was still in level 1 even though I had started research into it early I just had not put all chits into it or S&I. My chits were more spread out. Is it necessary must to have to put all chits into trench warfare and S&I immediately to have any chance to win the WW1 game?

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 1/16/2021 7:29:53 PM >


_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/16/2021 11:09:58 PM   
Chernobyl

 

Posts: 378
Joined: 8/27/2012
Status: offline
I usually put 4 chits into trench warfare pretty quick for all nations. If you spread out your research into too many things you will lose.

< Message edited by Chernobyl -- 1/16/2021 11:10:55 PM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 2
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/16/2021 11:30:56 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

I usually put 4 chits into trench warfare pretty quick for all nations. If you spread out your research into too many things you will lose.


Yeah this is what I thought and feared! Very different from WIE/WAW! One option only! You live and learn!

_____________________________


(in reply to Chernobyl)
Post #: 3
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/16/2021 11:35:04 PM   
Bavre

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 12/5/2020
Status: offline
Yes definitely!
Some techs (Arty, trenches) are so immensely powerful you need them asap at any cost.

However I am not really sure I fully grasp chit stacking:
It gives you (avg) 5% per chit and every tech advance consumes 1 chit, right?
This would make investing multiple chits extremely powerful. Chit 1 gives you 5% till techlvl 1, chit 2 gives you 5% all the way till techlvl 2, meaning chit 2 gives double the benefit. Investing a third would yield tripple the benefit etc ...
Am I overlooking something here? Do the additional chits get somehow penalized?


(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 4
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/16/2021 11:44:49 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline
Tanaka, I know your asking this because of our current game with you as Central Powers..its mid 1917...and your still struggling with some aspects of your research, particularly entrenchments.

For the Germans, get investments into S&I and trenches..even incrementally, as early as possible. The UK already has one chit in S&I, and I for one always invest more into that so I can impede the Germans. It hurts to do this early with all the disasters that befall the western Entente, but the long term ramifications can be a huge problem for Germany (and the rest of her allies consequently).

For Germany (and everyone else btw), max out your entrenchment chits if possible. While it may seem counter intuitive to do this for Germany, who has to be offensive minded always somewhere in Europe...you will need to have superior entrenchments than your enemies for two primary reasons:

1) Defensive; Germany cannot be on the offensive on all fronts. So the fronts where you wish to hold with a smaller number of troops defensively (while you pursue an offensive on another front) must have the strongest entrenchments possible, especially if coupled with favorable terrain.

2) Offensive; Where you are pushing an offensive, you will want to hold new ground as strongly as possible against counter attack. Since this is WW1, it may seem like a slow crawl...and it is! But, with good quality entrenchments, you can push and hold new ground sequentially. It may be a few months before another push is made on another sector of the front, but this is how entrenchment-maneuver operations can be successful by making salients and/or encroachments on key objectives.

Also, Chernobyl, in his post, spelled it out in a nutshell.

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 1/17/2021 1:27:09 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 5
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 1:10:53 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Tanaka, I know your asking this because of our current game with you as Central Powers..its mid 1917...and your still struggling with some aspects of your research, particularly entrenchments.

For the Germans, get invest into S&I and trenches..even incrementally, as early as possible. The UK already has one chit in S&I, and I for one always invest more into that so I can impede the Germans. It hurts to do this early with all the disasters that befall the western Entente, but the long term ramifications can be a huge problem for Germany (and the rest of her allies consequently.

For Germany (and everyone else btw), max out your entrenchment chits if possible. While it may seem counter intuitive to do this for Germany, who has to be offensive minded always somewhere in Europe...you will need to have superior entrenchments than your enemies for two primary reasons:

1) Defensive; Germany cannot be on the offensive on all fronts. So the fronts where you wish to hold with a smaller number of troops defensively (while you pursue an offensive on another front) must have the strongest entrenchments possible, especially if coupled with favorable terrain.

2) Offensive; Where you are pushing an offensive, you will want to hold new ground as strongly as possible against counter attack. Since this is WW1, it may seem like a slow crawl...and it is! But, with good quality entrenchments, you can push and hold new ground sequentially. It may be a few months before another push is made on another sector of the front, but this is how entrenchment-maneuver operations can be successful by making salients and/or encroachments on key objectives.

Also, Chernobyl, in his post, spelled it out in a nutshell.


Yes I am having to get used to this one big difference in this game vs WIE/WAW so ALL chits ALWAYS into entrenchments and S&I and artillery it must be! I think and now know this is the biggest reasons new players suffer so badly in this game by not realizing this. It is the #1 rule for this game in my opinion!

< Message edited by Tanaka -- 1/17/2021 1:13:44 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 6
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 1:16:41 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

Yes definitely!
Some techs (Arty, trenches) are so immensely powerful you need them asap at any cost.

However I am not really sure I fully grasp chit stacking:
It gives you (avg) 5% per chit and every tech advance consumes 1 chit, right?
This would make investing multiple chits extremely powerful. Chit 1 gives you 5% till techlvl 1, chit 2 gives you 5% all the way till techlvl 2, meaning chit 2 gives double the benefit. Investing a third would yield tripple the benefit etc ...
Am I overlooking something here? Do the additional chits get somehow penalized?




Good question!

_____________________________


(in reply to Bavre)
Post #: 7
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 4:10:57 AM   
Chernobyl

 

Posts: 378
Joined: 8/27/2012
Status: offline
To illustrate I am playing a game right now where it's early 1916. As Germany I have 4/5 Trench Warfare already researched and I still have 3 chits working on the last tech.

As far as I know there are no diminishing returns for investing multiple chits into one tech, even when it comes to the chance for a breakthrough (they all add equally to that chance).

Early research is worth way more than late research. And because mid game and later research is more constrained by the research limit than the lack of MPP, finishing off a single tech earlier means you get to dump more MPP into other techs earlier.

Also be aware that certain nations (Russia, Austria, Ottomans) all research higher level techs more slowly. They depend more on bonuses (sharing, opponent's tech level) than other nations to finish those last techs. Or to put it another way, getting that last trench warfare for Austria or Russia might take longer than you would expect for UK or Germany.

As Germany I generally go for this:
4x Trench Warfare (reinvest to 4 chits when you advance a level)
2x Artillery Weapons (reinvest to keep two chits to finish off level 2)
3x Industrial (probably reinvest to keep 3 chits at least once or twice)
3x Gas/Shell Production (probably reinvest once, I haven't found a slight delay to level 3 to be absolutely critical)
2x Spy/Intel (reinvest once, or possibly go 3x)
1x Infantry Weapons

Infantry Weapons is a special case because you can only invest one chit and it is very important but takes a long time to come online. I usually go Infantry Weapons sometime in the middle of getting all the above.

Only AFTER I get all that do I invest 2 German chits into C&C. This is despite C&C being an extremely useful and strong tech. Luxury techs are Production Tech and 3x Aerial Warfare preparing for de-entrenching bombers. Production Tech is okay late game cause it reduces your NM loss somewhat. And then maybe tanks? I'm not sure honestly what is the strongest of the late game stuff.

The above represents my current opinions but I'm by no means the sole authority. I have been known to be mistaken occasionally :)

Bonus Tip: If you are at 97-99% complete on a tech you have multiple research chits invested in, you can cancel all but one and immediately get half your money back on those, letting you research more right away. You'll still finish that tech at the end of your turn.

< Message edited by Chernobyl -- 1/17/2021 4:43:35 AM >

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 8
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 5:12:21 AM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

To illustrate I am playing a game right now where it's early 1916. As Germany I have 4/5 Trench Warfare already researched and I still have 3 chits working on the last tech.

As far as I know there are no diminishing returns for investing multiple chits into one tech, even when it comes to the chance for a breakthrough (they all add equally to that chance).

Early research is worth way more than late research. And because mid game and later research is more constrained by the research limit than the lack of MPP, finishing off a single tech earlier means you get to dump more MPP into other techs earlier.

Also be aware that certain nations (Russia, Austria, Ottomans) all research higher level techs more slowly. They depend more on bonuses (sharing, opponent's tech level) than other nations to finish those last techs. Or to put it another way, getting that last trench warfare for Austria or Russia might take longer than you would expect for UK or Germany.

As Germany I generally go for this:
4x Trench Warfare (reinvest to 4 chits when you advance a level)
2x Artillery Weapons (reinvest to keep two chits to finish off level 2)
3x Industrial (probably reinvest to keep 3 chits at least once or twice)
3x Gas/Shell Production (probably reinvest once, I haven't found a slight delay to level 3 to be absolutely critical)
2x Spy/Intel (reinvest once, or possibly go 3x)
1x Infantry Weapons

Infantry Weapons is a special case because you can only invest one chit and it is very important but takes a long time to come online. I usually go Infantry Weapons sometime in the middle of getting all the above.

Only AFTER I get all that do I invest 2 German chits into C&C. This is despite C&C being an extremely useful and strong tech. Luxury techs are Production Tech and 3x Aerial Warfare preparing for de-entrenching bombers. Production Tech is okay late game cause it reduces your NM loss somewhat. And then maybe tanks? I'm not sure honestly what is the strongest of the late game stuff.

The above represents my current opinions but I'm by no means the sole authority. I have been known to be mistaken occasionally :)

Bonus Tip: If you are at 97-99% complete on a tech you have multiple research chits invested in, you can cancel all but one and immediately get half your money back on those, letting you research more right away. You'll still finish that tech at the end of your turn.


Wow nice tips! Is that last one considered a cheat that should be fixed?

_____________________________


(in reply to Chernobyl)
Post #: 9
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 5:39:34 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


Wow nice tips! Is that last one considered a cheat that should be fixed?


No...not a cheat. You will get that minimum 3% progression with the one chit.

Side note: Once you have maxed out a research to its fullest level..it will show a red number on the research table. However, you want to double check to see if there are extra chits still on that que. You can redeem them at 50% just as you can if you needed money and redeemed one before the research was complete.

Chernobyl was illustrating his supra-optimal skills with this particular subject

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 10
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 10:51:54 AM   
stockwellpete

 

Posts: 582
Joined: 12/20/2012
Status: offline
It seems a bit weird to me that players are investing 4 chits in Trench Warfare at the very beginning of the game when the armies are fighting a "war of movement" and are not expecting to entrench. I also find it odd that whole areas of Tech can be ignored and a player can still win. I would have expected the challenge in the game to be to generally advance your Tech on a broad front, and have 2-3 priorities for each particular nations (e.g. subs and airships for Germany, tanks for France etc). I think it would probably be better if a maximum purchase of investment chits was set at 2 for everything (except for those categories already restricted to 1 chit) and players could not buy excess chits beyond the maximum total achievable to speed along various Tech advances (so you could not have 2 chits to speed along the final level of research).

What I am picking up from a number of players now who play MP is that the way to win is to focus on a quite limited range of Techs and use them to win the war. What with completely OTT artillery fire, micro-landings and "weird diplomacy" as well, it is really putting me off playing MP at all (apart from the fact that once I start losing badly, and I will at first, I am not really going to want to carry on playing the same game for the next 6 weeks!).

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 11
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 1:50:34 PM   
Dazo


Posts: 102
Joined: 9/28/2018
Status: offline
Hi everyone,

Chernobyl as indeed shown efficient research investments for Germany, there are some variations depending on your strategy of course but it's hard to go wrong with that.

I'd like to point out some things that needs to be considered about spreading reasearch chits a bit more:

If you have say 4 chits on the same tech, you can only have 1 breakthrough per turn.
If you have 4 chits on 4 techs (1 each), you have 4 chances to get a breakthrough each turn.

You also need to avoid investing in minor techs early on to maximize the chance to get a breakthrough in major techs (infantry/artillery/industry).
(but it can still pay to take an early tech gamble like subs, tanks or whatever if you have some extra MPPs though diplomacy might be a better choice)
Plus it gets harder to reach higher levels if you're ahead in tech (can't copy what others are doing :p).

And you also need to balance the cost of techs with the number of chits invested, that's why trench tech is an early favorite (low cost, no upgrade cost, quick return).

Lastly you have to consider the seasons as it's more interesting to invest in tech during summer than during winter.
Less turns in winter so you have to buy units to have them ready for spring. More turns in summer means more chances to advance your tech each month.

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 12
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 5:58:07 PM   
Bavre

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 12/5/2020
Status: offline
The breakthrough optimization is indeed a reason to spread out a bit. However certain techs give such a bonkers power spike that imho getting them asap outweights some net loss in overall research speed. Best examples are arty 1's deentrenchment and trenches 1, which is the first to enable instant entrenchment on normal fields.
And lets not forget the snowballing that some key techs trigger. For example: advanced Arty with good shell production quickly gives a lot of xp to the commanding HQ, both through to artys many shots and the easy follow ups of the inf, thereby considerably buffing the entire army group.

(in reply to Dazo)
Post #: 13
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 6:43:44 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

It seems a bit weird to me that players are investing 4 chits in Trench Warfare at the very beginning of the game when the armies are fighting a "war of movement" and are not expecting to entrench. I also find it odd that whole areas of Tech can be ignored and a player can still win. I would have expected the challenge in the game to be to generally advance your Tech on a broad front, and have 2-3 priorities for each particular nations (e.g. subs and airships for Germany, tanks for France etc). I think it would probably be better if a maximum purchase of investment chits was set at 2 for everything (except for those categories already restricted to 1 chit) and players could not buy excess chits beyond the maximum total achievable to speed along various Tech advances (so you could not have 2 chits to speed along the final level of research).

What I am picking up from a number of players now who play MP is that the way to win is to focus on a quite limited range of Techs and use them to win the war. What with completely OTT artillery fire, micro-landings and "weird diplomacy" as well, it is really putting me off playing MP at all (apart from the fact that once I start losing badly, and I will at first, I am not really going to want to carry on playing the same game for the next 6 weeks!).


I agree that these are some of the most frustrating aspects of the WW1 game. These are big reasons why new MP players will get shredded...

_____________________________


(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 14
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 6:48:14 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dazo

Hi everyone,

Chernobyl as indeed shown efficient research investments for Germany, there are some variations depending on your strategy of course but it's hard to go wrong with that.

I'd like to point out some things that needs to be considered about spreading reasearch chits a bit more:

If you have say 4 chits on the same tech, you can only have 1 breakthrough per turn.
If you have 4 chits on 4 techs (1 each), you have 4 chances to get a breakthrough each turn.

And you also need to balance the cost of techs with the number of chits invested, that's why trench tech is an early favorite (low cost, no upgrade cost, quick return).

Lastly you have to consider the seasons as it's more interesting to invest in tech during summer than during winter.
Less turns in winter so you have to buy units to have them ready for spring. More turns in summer means more chances to advance your tech each month.


So I did the 4 chits on 4 techs and I can't say that helped me in any way. Better to invest in different seasons? What? Damn you guys keep impressing me with your little tricks...

_____________________________


(in reply to Dazo)
Post #: 15
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 6:50:39 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka


Wow nice tips! Is that last one considered a cheat that should be fixed?


No...not a cheat. You will get that minimum 3% progression with the one chit.

Side note: Once you have maxed out a research to its fullest level..it will show a red number on the research table. However, you want to double check to see if there are extra chits still on that que. You can redeem them at 50% just as you can if you needed money and redeemed one before the research was complete.

Chernobyl was illustrating his supra-optimal skills with this particular subject


Damn more micro to the game!

_____________________________


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 16
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 6:52:27 PM   
Tanaka


Posts: 3865
Joined: 4/8/2003
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bavre

The breakthrough optimization is indeed a reason to spread out a bit. However certain techs give such a bonkers power spike that imho getting them asap outweights some net loss in overall research speed. Best examples are arty 1's deentrenchment and trenches 1, which is the first to enable instant entrenchment on normal fields.
And lets not forget the snowballing that some key techs trigger. For example: advanced Arty with good shell production quickly gives a lot of xp to the commanding HQ, both through to artys many shots and the easy follow ups of the inf, thereby considerably buffing the entire army group.


Agreed I feel like some balancing still needs to be done here...

_____________________________


(in reply to Bavre)
Post #: 17
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 7:15:36 PM   
Chernobyl

 

Posts: 378
Joined: 8/27/2012
Status: offline
The manual makes it seem like your chance for a breakthrough depends on the # of chits invested. I assumed this means if I had 4 invested in one tech, I would get like a 20% chance per turn instead of like a 5% chance.

In any case even if that's not true (you only get a certain chance per tech type being researched) I wouldn't change my research strategy very much.

I don't really care very much about the seasons very much because usually there's a clear winner for a unit or a research you want to pick regardless of how fast it will come. I think I might try to sneak in buying an artillery piece or two in late 1914 (at the expense of some tech) just to get their shell supply increasing a little earlier.

(in reply to Tanaka)
Post #: 18
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 9:03:06 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4514
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

What I am picking up from a number of players now who play MP is that the way to win is to focus on a quite limited range of Techs and use them to win the war. What with completely OTT artillery fire, micro-landings and "weird diplomacy" as well, it is really putting me off playing MP at all (apart from the fact that once I start losing badly, and I will at first, I am not really going to want to carry on playing the same game for the next 6 weeks!).


Are you able to provide any examples of the weird diplomacy you've mentioned here?

Thanks

Bill

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 19
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/17/2021 10:57:16 PM   
stockwellpete

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Are you able to provide any examples of the weird diplomacy you've mentioned here?

Thanks

Bill


In one of my games against the AI I was able to buy 2 chits (300 MPP's) for Germany and this kept USA out of the war quite easily even though I had been doing unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1917. I thought that was far too easy. Nearly every knows not to send the Zimmerman telegram too - maybe that shouldn't be a DE? Just make it so it happens 2 times out of 3 and USA belligerence rises correspondingly.

Really - "weird" means ahistorical diplomatic things like getting Switzerland into the war, or preventing Bulgaria from entering. Things that a new player to MP would not really cotton on to. I expect there are plenty of others.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 20
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 7:04:29 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

It seems a bit weird to me that players are investing 4 chits in Trench Warfare at the very beginning of the game when the armies are fighting a "war of movement" and are not expecting to entrench. I also find it odd that whole areas of Tech can be ignored and a player can still win. I would have expected the challenge in the game to be to generally advance your Tech on a broad front, and have 2-3 priorities for each particular nations (e.g. subs and airships for Germany, tanks for France etc). I think it would probably be better if a maximum purchase of investment chits was set at 2 for everything (except for those categories already restricted to 1 chit) and players could not buy excess chits beyond the maximum total achievable to speed along various Tech advances (so you could not have 2 chits to speed along the final level of research).

What I am picking up from a number of players now who play MP is that the way to win is to focus on a quite limited range of Techs and use them to win the war. What with completely OTT artillery fire, micro-landings and "weird diplomacy" as well, it is really putting me off playing MP at all (apart from the fact that once I start losing badly, and I will at first, I am not really going to want to carry on playing the same game for the next 6 weeks!).


Where do I begin to respond to statements like this, from someone who has never played a PVP match here with SC-WW1, but deigns to comment on how its being played in human to human matches currently.

Since I have been in 24 matches since Feb 2020, of which at least 20 were against what I would call intermediate to advanced opponents, I think I have a clearer idea of whats going on playing humans then you do. Also, some of us discuss game matters off the forums before we pop up here to opine. Also, I take screenshots..and have data to back up what I am saying.

First, broad categories of research ARE being done by all the opponents that I have played against. I will submit a screen shot of my British research as it is July 1917 in an epic match against Tanaka that is still on going.

As you will see, obviously, I have a broader palette than what what you surmise we are doing out here. Chernobyl was just illustrating what we all believe is the way to proceed early game.
In my current match with Tanaka, I had to re-prioritize my lagging aircraft tech..because Tanaka came in strong with that and Zeppelins, and was starting to dominate the airspace on the western front.
The thing is, playing PvP, YOU have to be creative...and there is nothing ahistorical about that.

Also, what is this so called 'weird diplomacy' your alluding too? If your referring to what is called in WaW and WiE 'uber diplo', which is spending expensive chits to keep a great power out of the war...I have NEVER seen that done for the USA..it would be ridiculous to do anyway.
Diplo on Bulgaria? Why shouldn't either side try to get her in or stay out of the war, if they want to spend the money. If the Entente is trying to suppress Bulgaria, let them try..for there are MANY mobilization triggers in Russian Poland and Serbia that the Central Powers can hit to get Bulgaria into the CP, Entente diplo or not.

Finally, some of the the PvP play that is posted here by us and makes you fussy, Stockwell, is presented so we can try to FIX to get a MORE HISTORICAL feel to the game...just the sameway you are when you contend with the AI.

With that, I present an image of the British research table as example. JULY 1917 OldCrowBalthazor (Entente) vs Tanaka (Central Powers). Broad Research is required to achieve success in PvP AND vAI.

(France's research is more robust but for security reasons I don't want to use her as an example)

o7





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 1/18/2021 7:13:12 AM >

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 21
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 8:21:50 AM   
stockwellpete

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Where do I begin to respond to statements like this, from someone who has never played a PVP match here with SC-WW1, but deigns to comment on how its being played in human to human matches currently.

Since I have been in 24 matches since Feb 2020, of which at least 20 were against what I would call intermediate to advanced opponents, I think I have a clearer idea of whats going on playing humans then you do. Also, some of us discuss game matters off the forums before we pop up here to opine. Also, I take screenshots..and have data to back up what I am saying.




Oh dear. A bit "precious" about the game are we? How dare someone relatively new comment about how MP seems to them. Please read Tanaka's reply to my post. He also plays MP and he completely agreed with me.

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 22
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 9:00:37 AM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

Where do I begin to respond to statements like this, from someone who has never played a PVP match here with SC-WW1, but deigns to comment on how its being played in human to human matches currently.

Since I have been in 24 matches since Feb 2020, of which at least 20 were against what I would call intermediate to advanced opponents, I think I have a clearer idea of whats going on playing humans then you do. Also, some of us discuss game matters off the forums before we pop up here to opine. Also, I take screenshots..and have data to back up what I am saying.




Oh dear. A bit "precious" about the game are we? How dare someone relatively new comment about how MP seems to them. Please read Tanaka's reply to my post. He also plays MP and he completely agreed with me.



I did read it

I also think you have excellent ideas. But your missing a dimension of this title that only could be experienced by actually doing a PvP...possibly you should consider doing a 'friendly' one in the future..house rules in particular if you prefer.

Also, I took your ideas and suggestions about the Trento deal and the Alta Adige and spent time running tests on it. You were definitely onto something there. If there is a change made by the dev's regarding that...you should get the credit.

< Message edited by OldCrowBalthazor -- 1/18/2021 9:11:02 AM >

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 23
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 10:19:29 AM   
stockwellpete

 

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor


I did read it

I also think you have excellent ideas. But your missing a dimension of this title that only could be experienced by actually doing a PvP...possibly you should consider doing a 'friendly' one in the future..house rules in particular if you prefer.

Also, I took your ideas and suggestions about the Trento deal and the Alta Adige and spent time running tests on it. You were definitely onto something there. If there is a change made by the dev's regarding that...you should get the credit.


But your long post was very rude. And it is the second time that you have snapped at me. You need to stop doing it please.

I think most players who play any game, not just SC:WW1, only play SP. It is certainly true of the game I know the most about - Field of Glory 2 Ancients - where something like 80%+ only play SP. Despite this the most vocal people on the forum are overwhelmingly those who play MP and sometimes there is a danger that the SP experience is overlooked to a certain extent. So my post that you found so objectionable was just explaining how a player who so far has just played SP felt about making the transition to MP in SC:WW1. It may not be of interest to you, but I daresay Bill and Hubert might be able to match it up with what other players have said in the past about their games.


(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 24
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 2:19:57 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete


quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor


I did read it

I also think you have excellent ideas. But your missing a dimension of this title that only could be experienced by actually doing a PvP...possibly you should consider doing a 'friendly' one in the future..house rules in particular if you prefer.

Also, I took your ideas and suggestions about the Trento deal and the Alta Adige and spent time running tests on it. You were definitely onto something there. If there is a change made by the dev's regarding that...you should get the credit.


But your long post was very rude. And it is the second time that you have snapped at me. You need to stop doing it please.

I think most players who play any game, not just SC:WW1, only play SP. It is certainly true of the game I know the most about - Field of Glory 2 Ancients - where something like 80%+ only play SP. Despite this the most vocal people on the forum are overwhelmingly those who play MP and sometimes there is a danger that the SP experience is overlooked to a certain extent. So my post that you found so objectionable was just explaining how a player who so far has just played SP felt about making the transition to MP in SC:WW1. It may not be of interest to you, but I daresay Bill and Hubert might be able to match it up with what other players have said in the past about their games.




All right, I apologize.

I interpreted what you had posted earlier as some kind of indictment of the way most of us that do PM actually conduct the game. Most of us that do play PM's actually don't like 'gonzo' or exploitive moves. When we see something that's 'way out there' or out right not in the spirit of things, those actions show up on the forums. So to someone that only does SP, when they read what happens in MP that's off the wall, it looks like that's all that's going on.

I should of approached this differently...again, sorry for offending you.

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 25
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 3:08:51 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4514
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

Are you able to provide any examples of the weird diplomacy you've mentioned here?

Thanks

Bill


In one of my games against the AI I was able to buy 2 chits (300 MPP's) for Germany and this kept USA out of the war quite easily even though I had been doing unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1917. I thought that was far too easy. Nearly every knows not to send the Zimmerman telegram too - maybe that shouldn't be a DE? Just make it so it happens 2 times out of 3 and USA belligerence rises correspondingly.

Really - "weird" means ahistorical diplomatic things like getting Switzerland into the war, or preventing Bulgaria from entering. Things that a new player to MP would not really cotton on to. I expect there are plenty of others.



Thanks for the explanation.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to stockwellpete)
Post #: 26
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 3:14:09 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4514
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: online
Stockwellpete and OldCrowBalthazor

You both provide very valuable feedback on the game, from different perspectives it is true, but both are valid and you will both be seeing your name in the credits against some changes in a future patch.

Please continue, keep it friendly, have fun and post away!

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 27
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 3:26:14 PM   
Bavre

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 12/5/2020
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl

The manual makes it seem like your chance for a breakthrough depends on the # of chits invested. I assumed this means if I had 4 invested in one tech, I would get like a 20% chance per turn instead of like a 5% chance.


If that is the case then they are indeed equivalent (different variance, but same expected value).
But even if this is not the case, would the effect of stacking chits I described in post nr 3 (if correct!) not far outweigh that? How do you beat a 4th chit's quadruple effect?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chernobyl
In any case even if that's not true (you only get a certain chance per tech type being researched) I wouldn't change my research strategy very much.

I don't really care very much about the seasons very much because usually there's a clear winner for a unit or a research you want to pick regardless of how fast it will come. I think I might try to sneak in buying an artillery piece or two in late 1914 (at the expense of some tech) just to get their shell supply increasing a little earlier.


Hehe, yeah, the only thing I would even consider rerouting MPP to while I'm not fully invested in Arty and trenches is buying the actual cannons.
Imho even delaying Inf tech a bit is not that problematic either. Lvl 0 inf with good entrenchment can easily stand up to Lvl 1 inf assaults and Lvl 0 inf with proper arty support can overcome Lvl 1 inf defense. Just make sure you don't delay it too long.
Bottom line I would say Chernobyl's research plan is pretty much the way to go for Germany.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tanaka
I agree that these are some of the most frustrating aspects of the WW1 game. These are big reasons why new MP players will get shredded...

Well I agree to the second part, but honestly, is there any MP game where a noob just casualy trying out things will not get shredded by a veteran playing an efficient meta?
I have not played the WW2 games yet, but is a good research focus really that unimportant there?

(in reply to Chernobyl)
Post #: 28
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 3:42:21 PM   
Patrat


Posts: 107
Joined: 11/17/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

(France's research is more robust but for security reasons I don't want to use her as an example)






Interesting. Your research is not much different from mine when I play against the AI.

Biggest difference I see is no additional research in infantry warfare. When playing against the AI at the highest level, I find that infantry warfare is very useful against the highly experienced AI units that start the game with 2 bonus experience.

I assume that it's not so useful in PVP matches?

< Message edited by Patrat -- 1/18/2021 3:57:37 PM >

(in reply to OldCrowBalthazor)
Post #: 29
RE: WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! - 1/18/2021 4:15:34 PM   
OldCrowBalthazor


Posts: 747
Joined: 7/2/2020
From: Republic of Cascadia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patrat

quote:

ORIGINAL: OldCrowBalthazor

(France's research is more robust but for security reasons I don't want to use her as an example)






Interesting. Your research is not much different from mine when I play against the AI.

Biggest difference I see is no additional research in infantry warfare. When playing against the AI at the highest level, I find that infantry warfare is very useful against the highly experienced AI units that start the game with 2 bonus experience.

I assume that it's not so useful in PVP matches?


Good eye...and actually, having infantry warfare is a must.The thing is, I had to spend enormous MMP's on replacing losses.

What happen in this match is that the Germans (Tanaka) absolutely ripped up my British Forces in NE France and W. Belgium. I had a line holding Lille and Ypres in late 1914..and he continually attacked on this sector...until there were almost no UK units left. This went on in 1915..back and forth, than back. 1916..back and forth..then he took Boulogne. 1917, He pushed again and briefly took Amiems.

On top of this, the British were spending money on Greece, Kuwait and the a hugely expensive invasion of Western Anatolia..which isolated Istanbul finally. It was the only thing that turned in my favor..mid 1917.

So this is what I could muster in research as the British. There were hard choices to make..and the British chose a risky invasion of the Ottomans while they leaned on the broad shoulders of their French and Russian brothers to tie up the Germans..who even then, when their morale was down to 65%..were monsters.

This whole campaign was done with the newest patch..and the artillery chit nerf helped to keep this match relatively historical. My 'Galipoli' worked...but at enormous costs to the men of the British Isles in Flanders Fields o7

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I >> WW1: Research, Spying and Intelligence: Help me out! Page: [1] 2   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

0.273