AGEOD Forums

I have ordered a physical version of the gold version of the game, but I have not yet received it.
I'm reading the Bornego AAR to better understand the game.
I have never played the campaign with the old version.
I have some questions while waiting for the game.

1 - Can the global amount of supply limit the size of the red army (by supply, I don't mean war supply to build new units, but general supply to feed the troops in operation) ? Apparently, if your army exceeds a certain number of recruits, in the old version, you won't be able to maintain them operational in some (or a lot of) areas. Is this really the case in the gold version ?

2 - In the forum, I have readen that the red army can play offensively sooner now. What allows this ? Is there a boost in recruitment ?

3 - The red leaders have historically chosen to build a numerous force. Can the player build a smaller army with better units in the gold version ? Is this a strategy that is worth exploring ?

4- I have seen pictures of the french boardgame "Rossiya17". Apparently the red player tried to create a continuous front with the red army. But, when I look at the screenshots of RUS, the front is not continuous and the players insist very often on the necessity to use mobile operations. Why is there such a difference ?

The new game is very intriguing, but there are few infos about it in the forum. I have readen the old messages in the forum and I have the feeling that the changes are very precise and well thought.
I have plenty of other questions, but I will wait to have received the game.

Gribeauval wrote:I have ordered a physical version of the gold version of the game, but I have not yet received it.

I have received it exactly 3 weeks after buying.

3 - The red leaders have historically chosen to build a numerous force. Can the player build a smaller army with better units in the gold version? Is this a strategy that is worth exploring?

You can explore this, but the Whites should not allow you the time to train enough your conscripts. For this you have to play against a very bad AI, or even against absent human players! And, even, your better units should be worst than the better units of the Whites, so here you play bad in the White strategy. You must have some good units, but I think you can't have only that.
Like the Whites can't have only elite units, he must have cheap fighters as sponge for the losses, but like for the Red the game in theory allows him to train all.

4- I have seen pictures of the french boardgame "Rossyïa 1917". Apparently the red player tried to create a continuous front with the red army. But, when I look at the screenshots of RUS, the front is not continuous and the players insist very often on the necessity to use mobile operations. Why is there such a difference ?

The front is continuous, but distantly... In the boardgame you could imagine the big counters are few small dots on their hexagone...
so at the scale of the boardgme, I imagine the counters have no Zone Of Control (think that the counter already shows the ZoC of the unit..), so there must have the fewer holes between counters.
And maybe the boardgame does not simulate well enough the importance of the rails.

The new game is very intriguing, but there are few infos about it in the forum. I have read the old messages in the forum and I have the feeling that the changes are very precise and well thought.
I have plenty of other questions, but I will wait to have received the game.

Yeah, you'll have some pdf to answer some of your questions.

... Still waiting for the missing patch ...

Bornego was a good player it can help to read some of his AAR.
But the game changed quite a bit.

-Amount of supply for Reds are adequate to maintain sizeable army even with slightly extra extended pool in game options. But you have to watch where it is deployed and ammunition levels in this version. For that and building large stacks Red player should not turtle too much and perform limited offensives and try to protect key locations early game. Some those good supply source&hub and contruction locations are Kazan, Simbirsk, Izhevsk, Kharkov and Kiev. If game goes badly in early years there won’t be free reinforcements to help Reds.

- Building all the factories helps construction limit of units. In this version Red player can do it even in competitive Pbem game.

- Defense always much better than offense and can outweight troop quality frequently. By forming combined units such as corps and divisions it is important what to put into. Engineer is the first priority to increase entrenchment. Higher tier artillery and armoured cars also helps. To increase cohesion and discipline it is also required to put some special regular elements along line units.

-As ERISS said it is not hex game but with some experience and anticipation of moves it is possible to form some stable front and possible to know after a while where the chokepoints are. Good operational usage of armed trains and railroad capacity in game can quickly change tide; turn before massing troops in the location.

Gribeauval wrote:1 - Can the global amount of supply limit the size of the red army (by supply, I don't mean war supply to build new units, but general supply to feed the troops in operation) ? Apparently, if your army exceeds a certain number of recruits, in the old version, you won't be able to maintain them operational in some (or a lot of) areas. Is this really the case in the gold version ?

It should also be possible in the Gold. But after all for forces isolated from the main big depots network, in remote areas where there is not enough towns. In the Gold version, all towns provide now a similar amount of food supply (towns are considered as places where the supply is gathered and packed and ready to be used for military purpose). So the control of areas with many small towns (like Ukraine, Volga, central Russia) can become strategical, just because of food production. But all this should not be a problem for the Reds which start the game with big full depots in central Russia. You may only wonder if this beautiful stocks are raided and destroyed by cossacks behind your lines

Gribeauval wrote:2 - In the forum, I have readen that the red army can play offensively sooner now. What allows this ? Is there a boost in recruitment ?

I would not say that Reds can really play offensively in a large scale in 1918. But few different kind of parameters make it now simply possible for the Reds to perform a counter attack on the Volga till the Urals like in the History. In the Vanilla, it was almost impossible to perform this historical situation. Of courses, with your first counter-attack forces you can always chose to give up the Volga and focus elsewhere.

Gribeauval wrote:3 - The red leaders have historically chosen to build a numerous force. Can the player build a smaller army with better units in the gold version ? Is this a strategy that is worth exploring ?

The Red leaders have historically chosen to do a massive conscription system, but only few of the recruits could be on the fields with enough weapons, proper command and supply. In AGE game terms, it could means only that the Reds should rarely have a lack of conscripts. The total in game (campaigns scenarios) of units available to be build are an estimation of the historical maximum number of units the Red command was able to manage.
This said, you can try to build only a small force, but there will be only few GHQ places where to train them well (for most of them, you will need to make it fight and survive to get experience for them). And besides this, you will then have plenty of resources you will not use if not to build a basic regular army and Red Guards forces to garrison and protect your rears.

Finally, the Reds political state of mind and lack of military professionalism could not allow such an option during the RCW.
The choice you describe is more on the White side : they could try to keep to have a small better force instead of trying to build a big army like the Reds (like they historically tried) but then with also desertions, which are more painful for them.

Gribeauval wrote:4- I have seen pictures of the french boardgame "Rossiya17". Apparently the red player tried to create a continuous front with the red army. But, when I look at the screenshots of RUS, the front is not continuous and the players insist very often on the necessity to use mobile operations. Why is there such a difference ?

I don't know about the boardgame "Rossiya17", but in RUS, the simulation of the RCW fronts try to stick to the historical situation. That means that the Reds and the Whites armies are far more smaller than the Russian, Austrian or German imperial armies fighting in the East during the WWI. It was no more long fronts but little fronts (here only of few game regions) which appear and disappear on the main rail-road axes and strategic places/towns.
Forming this little fronts in RUS is still very useful, using Corps forces in different neighbouring regions so that they can help each other with the reserve movement feature. But you will never have enough Corps commanders and troops to place in long fronts like in the WWI. And what for : partisans or cossacks are always behind you .

andatiep wrote: the Reds which start the game with big full depots in central Russia. You may only wonder if this beautiful stocks are raided and destroyed by cossacks behind your lines
: partisans or cossacks are always behind you .

At least Moscow was protected by White pride: those cossack mujiks were forbidden to put a shoe in Moscow, death threat! Entering Moscow first would be the privilege of the True White big chief.
I wonder how it could be ingame ruled (there's already the end sentence in White objective text to know what white side has won).
Maybe: If a White enter Moscow with some Cossack unit, then the next turn all these units are disbanded, and then all the Cosacks suffer -50 cohesion per turn when out of Don region (they no longer want to fight after the death sentance on their successful heroes).

Thanks to all for these answers.
I'm still waiting for the game and I'm really impatient to discover it !