AGEOD Forums

Matto wrote:I think this sentence should be corrected to "It will be home before Christmas"

We should all hope for "Home before the leaves fall".

Hint: should be around the date of one of the war's great battles

Any chance for more screenshots/images?

PhilThib wrote:Hint: should be around the date of one of the war's great battles

The Marne!

Greatest victory of the War- Tannenberg? August 26th onwards?? so is that the date?

Or is it First Battle of Marne? 5th September onwards?

Shri wrote:Greatest victory of the War- Tannenberg? August 26th onwards?? so is that the date?

Or is it First Battle of Marne? 5th September onwards?

Probably both at the moment, depending in the end on how well bug-squishing goes...

The Second Battle of the Marne July 15 to August 6

Altaris wrote:The air model is essentially the same as the one in RUS...

The air war in World War I (albeit in its infancy), had, alone in his explosiveness, strong effects.
Should the air war then not be properly implemented in the game to be be appreciated and honored?

I can't remember exactly how the air war was modeled in RUS.
But think that the concept of the air war modeled in RUS would not be an ideal choice for "To End All Wars".

The AIR war in RUS was very basic which was fine for that conflict but it seems like it would be too simple for WWI. I guess with a few tweaks it could work well enough so we will see.

clandini5 wrote:The Second Battle of the Marne July 15 to August 6

Second was in 1918, so centenary in 2018!!!

Maybe, around the 19th December, as the Battle of Verdun?
(hopefully not in 2016 )

Quite so Shri and since its not a battle anniversary we can hope its not the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month - 2018

I think in 1st Marne (5/9) or Tannenberg (26/8) but there are many battles in august-september ... even i can add the Siege of Przemyśl (24/9) the longest siege in war.

I doubt use the date of a battle over 1914 is ok, if game release was in 1918... lets delay 4 years the game to correct this

PD: well, many people think war finish in 2/9/1945

So close... for one day... 25 august, and they are looking for fresh meat to lauch into the no man's land

Ironclad61 wrote:So close... for one day... 25 august, and they are looking for fresh meat to lauch into the no man's land

Indeed! Almost a direct hit!

Couldn't see it on the map but does this game use the map from "The Larger Europe Map Project"?
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?24730-The-Larger-Europe-Map-Project

Altaris wrote:- Ammunition in EAW represents Munitions for artillery, and is only used/consumed by medium, heavy, and fort artillery, and naval vessels. If a stack's Ammunition runs dry, it's artillery stops firing. Artillery is very important in EAW, as it softens up enemy cohesion considerably, and the heavier artillery units have good trench penetration values. But the shells run out quickly, and the player needs to build Munitions Factories (via RGD) to bolster shell production. This is tough for the Russians in particular (who are lacking in War Supply compared to the other sides), and tends to be their Achille's heel.

So is there also one eye on the Resources that a country has? I mean it's simply not done by building more Munitions Factories, you also have to have the resources to feed them so they generate output.

BigDuke66 wrote:Couldn't see it on the map but does this game use the map from "The Larger Europe Map Project"?
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?24730-The-Larger-Europe-Map-Project


So is there also one eye on the Resources that a country has? I mean it's simply not done by building more Munitions Factories, you also have to have the resources to feed them so they generate output.

Quite Historical too. See that stupid HINDERBURG program and the problems it caused to Germany as it neglected supply side issues.

Will I be able to choose to lead Italy in the game, or I will have to lead all the entente nations (I apologise if the question has been already made in the past) ?

Vincentius wrote:Will I be able to choose to lead Italy in the game, or I will have to lead all the entente nations (I apologise if the question has been already made in the past) ?

If you want to lead Italy you will also have to lead France and Britain. The CP is always a single Player and in a three-player game there will be a Russian, Serbian, and Romanian Player. Italy may stay neutral and I think they may even side with the CP in certain diplomatic situations.

So no chance to lead just my Italy ouet: ?

Vincentius wrote:So no chance to lead just my Italy ouet: ?

Sorry, Italy only comes as a package deal because they may not even become a belligerent or could fight for either alliance.

This is great. As said earlier, I will be doing just that... convincing Italy to join the Central Powers or at least stay neutral for the entirety of the conflict. I want to study the feasibility of such an undertaking, whatever the cost for Austria*.

*Well, here we have an issue: will the NM loss affect the Germans as well (ie, all the Central Powers) or is it ethnicity-specific?

Kensai wrote:This is great. As said earlier, I will be doing just that... convincing Italy to join the Central Powers or at least stay neutral for the entirety of the conflict. I want to study the feasibility of such an undertaking, whatever the cost for Austria*.

*Well, here we have an issue: will the NM loss affect the Germans as well (ie, all the Central Powers) or is it ethnicity-specific?

It is my guess that only the AH will take the NM hit since it would be reasonable to assume that Germany put pressure on them to accept the deal in the first place.

This implies that each nation (albeit in the same alliance) has its own NM and thus cohesion factors. This will be nice, but I haven't noticed such a thing in the screenshots so far. We will see.

Kensai wrote:This implies that each nation (albeit in the same alliance) has its own NM and thus cohesion factors. This will be nice, but I haven't noticed such a thing in the screenshots so far. We will see.

They did say that Russian NM would determine when they start to have political turmoil so if the Entente is played by a single player the NM would have to be separate in some way. Not really sure how it will work but I guess we will soon see.

Person of Interest wrote:They did say that Russian NM would determine when they start to have political turmoil so if the Entente is played by a single player the NM would have to be separate in some way. Not really sure how it will work but I guess we will soon see.

As Altaris said there are three factions, CP, Western Entente, Eastern Entente. Therefore NM will be split at least between them. But I believe that there also will be a difference within the factions. Otherwise the decline of the french army after the Nivelle mutinies didn´t hinder the british offensives in 1917. The screenshot of Asia might point to the solution. It shows the german flag and perhaps its the same as with WWI Gold where the flag and stats changed to country currently selected.

That would be a good thing and realistic. Let's hope it's this way.

That is the way it should be, just because Austria experiences troubles in Bohemia shouldn't lead to a panic in Berlin.

Uawcat wrote:As Altaris said there are three factions, CP, Western Entente, Eastern Entente. Therefore NM will be split at least between them. But I believe that there also will be a difference within the factions. Otherwise the decline of the french army after the Nivelle mutinies didn´t hinder the british offensives in 1917. The screenshot of Asia might point to the solution. It shows the german flag and perhaps its the same as with WWI Gold where the flag and stats changed to country currently selected.

That sounds reasonable so hopefully it works somewhat like that.

Interesting point... maybe something that need AGEOD in future games where a side has more than 1 nation is a way to move between diferent nations to control better resources, performance (i am curious about how is the report screen... i want know how many soldiers send my troops from X nation to the other side for example) and political decisions with diplomacy (in the end every nation has his own objetives and how affect neutrals is diferent).

Maybe a total split in nations inside a side could made player select one nation to leave AI control it.

The problem with NM is a strong nation could mantein in war weaker allies paying NM... think in CP wining by time for example.... one thing i dont know is if in political decisions you can send like in real life expeditionary forces to help an allied and this decisions pay a NM penalty.