calvinus wrote:
How many and which nations have been overwhelmed by Communist revolution????
None...I experimented a little in this game w/ the Lenin event. I played the event and was impatient w/ the results, i.e., NM didn't decrease fast enough for me
. Sooo...I played one of the other White Russian revolution events IIRC. The result was that NM never dropped below 20 and was usually at 27.
The French were down to a -3 NM at game end.
So when did the game finish?
End of Nov.-Dec. 1919 turn??
If so, this is the natural end of the game, let's say the max turn number.
That means nobody surrendered in the end. This would explain the zero VPs.
Indeed the World Domination happens if VPs are below 7 pts, that commonly happens when you have a big penalty caused by communist revolutions.
So I believe you had 0 VPs in the end of 1919 because no power surrendered nor capitulated.
End of Nov.-Dec. 1919 turn??
If so, this is the natural end of the game, let's say the max turn number.
That means nobody surrendered in the end. This would explain the zero VPs.
Indeed the World Domination happens if VPs are below 7 pts, that commonly happens when you have a big penalty caused by communist revolutions.
So I believe you had 0 VPs in the end of 1919 because no power surrendered nor capitulated.
calvinus wrote:So when did the game finish?
End of Nov.-Dec. 1919 turn??
If so, this is the natural end of the game, let's say the max turn number.
That means nobody surrendered in the end. This would explain the zero VPs.
Indeed the World Domination happens if VPs are below 7 pts, that commonly happens when you have a big penalty caused by communist revolutions.
So I believe you had 0 VPs in the end of 1919 because no power surrendered nor capitulated.
Yes..game ended in Nov.-Dec. 1919. Actually, Great Britain surrendered in late 1916 or early 1917.
The French were down to a -3 NM at game end.
Well not sure what shape Britain was in when it capitulated but from my own experience the big boys don't surrender easily. Even after having the 'needle' on France pegged to the left and a NW at -1 for several turns, it wasn't until I took Paris and got it down to -7 that France finally threw in the towel. The rules say something to the effect that when NW gets into the low teens or single digits, that penealties begin to apply. But it seems like you really have to knock to crap out of one of the major countries to bring it down. As for 'not winning" - I agree to some extent. Regardless of the fact that it solved nothing and WWII ensued, historically Germany did in fact surrender. It would seem that the game engine should at least give you that satisfaction at the end if you've really beat the other side significantly.
Flanking barrage from the peanut gallery...
Based upon some limited experiance authoring scenarios for other games, I suspect that when it comes to game design, the least satisfying and most difficult part is determining victory conditions. They tend to be highly subjective and most players come to a game with preconcieved ideas of what should constitute winning. Meeting these expectations in very complex situations like WW1 are near impossible but in my opinion the WW1G developers have managed to hit the high points.
Regardless what the game says I would personally consider most games that run into 1919 a defacto victory for the CP and a defeat for the Entente unless the end result is truly decisive militarily, politically and economically; a very difficult undertaking, but not impossible in game terms.
In the actual Great War it can be reasonably argued that all the Allied belligerents except the United States were worse off in most respects than they were in 1914 so in a war where most everybody loses, expect determining victory to be a problem.
To quote a line from the Cold War era movie War Games, The only way to win is not to play.
If the game results are frustrating and unsatisfactory perhaps it is because the historical results were also frustrating and unsatisfactory and that drives part of the fascination with World War 1, both the event itself and the Game.
Ramp up the difficulty, start a new game and see if you can do better next time. Good Luck.
Based upon some limited experiance authoring scenarios for other games, I suspect that when it comes to game design, the least satisfying and most difficult part is determining victory conditions. They tend to be highly subjective and most players come to a game with preconcieved ideas of what should constitute winning. Meeting these expectations in very complex situations like WW1 are near impossible but in my opinion the WW1G developers have managed to hit the high points.
Regardless what the game says I would personally consider most games that run into 1919 a defacto victory for the CP and a defeat for the Entente unless the end result is truly decisive militarily, politically and economically; a very difficult undertaking, but not impossible in game terms.
In the actual Great War it can be reasonably argued that all the Allied belligerents except the United States were worse off in most respects than they were in 1914 so in a war where most everybody loses, expect determining victory to be a problem.
To quote a line from the Cold War era movie War Games, The only way to win is not to play.
If the game results are frustrating and unsatisfactory perhaps it is because the historical results were also frustrating and unsatisfactory and that drives part of the fascination with World War 1, both the event itself and the Game.
Ramp up the difficulty, start a new game and see if you can do better next time. Good Luck.
Well, I'm not frustrated nor was I complaining about the final result of my game. I lost the other games (one as CP and one as the Entente) I played to completion...so this was actually an improvement 
.
As I stated above, I experimented a little as I played. I also did not play aggressively as the CP and missed some opportunities to put the hurt on the Entente. The end result was likely on target.
BTW, I set the difficulty and AI aggressiveness to max or near max.
.
As I stated above, I experimented a little as I played. I also did not play aggressively as the CP and missed some opportunities to put the hurt on the Entente. The end result was likely on target.
BTW, I set the difficulty and AI aggressiveness to max or near max.
Return to “WW1 : La Grande Guerre 14-18”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests