Altaris wrote:I also don't want to make A/H so strong they can easily hold Russia off by themselves. The risk of Russia getting through the Carpathians into Hungary was the #1 reason the Germans turn east in 1915.
But the garrison situation does need to be sorted out, I've got auto-garrisons in for next version.
steelwarrior77 wrote:Nope it is not only that - rebuilding also goes faster (double speed for all Entente see above) and I had 3k all the time in the East...that is still a balance issue aside from A-H getting mauled...the second game went different, because the Russian player messed up and A-H and Germany is played by the same player - very easy to coordinate...
Just make the maths Russia has about 95% of Germanies CP - GB about 50 and France aboz 60& - A-H only 60% So it starts already unbalanced - the whole Entente starts with 210% CP and the CPs with 160% - then it is just that France and Gb first need to collect their CP - thats why Germany can maul France - but by early 1915 that already chnages plus the double speed of building divisions for the Entente 3 to 1 1/2 for the CPs - then if Turkey enters early Italy will go 1915 already to the Entente which is kinda the end for the CPs...even more CP for the Entente pluzs even faster building of divisions...so something has to be done...I am winning but at the same time loosing - which is annoying...and that would even happen without Italy and the USA which usually always join the Entente...
steelwarrior77 wrote:Yep - just saying already now I cannot substatially attack in the East cause I still need so many forces in the West - even with an ideal line of defense...and that together with the above calculation means I will be outnumbered in time - even without Italy and USA entering for the Entente...
smiljkovic73 wrote:Well, as Russian player that is to blame for A-H collapse , I must say main reason for this is poor strategic decisions made by A-H at start (concentrating on Serbia instead defending on Carpathian mountains). Second reason is his poor tactical conduct where he repeatidly allowed for his armies to be cut-off and annihilated (or badly mauled)...which make his losses extremely high (more than 700k captured!)
Also, German trust on west helped me to focus on A-H ... so I don't think it's problem with mode (our second game kind a confirm that)
I too think there are some minor issues for Russian player (posted already about them) but nothing on game breaking level so far. For now, most frustrating thing is that in almost 10 months siege of Perzesmyl not a single breach was made (and no assault is possible either).
Altaris wrote:I think we're all in agreement on the garrisons. Right now it's too easy for a very small force (or several groups) to severely damage rear communications. Garrisons will resolve this, without greatly impacting regular game balance. They are auto-garrisons, so only get called up when a region is invaded, and it's a 25% chance per size of structure (lvl 1 city has 25% chance, lvl 3 75% chance, etc).
vicberg wrote:Slobodan, you need 2 medium artillery on Premsyl. The CBT you need is 20. Your single medium artillery has a CBT of 17, which is why you aren't breaching. I always use 2 mediums (or heaviies if you've got them) for breaching forts. Premsyl is also a level 4 city with farmlands, so you aren't going to starve it out.
Altaris wrote:So last night I figured out how to turn back on the old .trn file structure so each playable nation has it's own trn file. For a multiplayer game such as this, do you guys think the .trn format is preferable to the one .hst file? IMO, it is, but wanted to see what everyone else thought.
Ace wrote:That is excelent.
Is it easy to do?
I would like it implemented in ever ageod game
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests