Individual officer units (the ones which are capable of being built) will be removed for next game. All corps will have officer elements when built, and Officer/Elite replacements will be used to backfill if they get destroyed in combat. The Officer Factory structures will grant XP to existing Officer units each turn, in addition to generating Officer assets for building Engineers/Medical Units/etc. Having higher XP officers makes a big difference in how well their troops will train up and get XP, so nations with fewer officer structures (like Russia) will tend to be subpar.
This is meant to help streamline the officer situation a bit.
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
My British and Belgian units won't stay inside a French town. You can put them in it by dropping the stack on to the town, pressing "H" doesn't work at all. The unit will stay in the town until you select another unit or move round the map a bit, it then returns to being outside the structure.
Am I right in thinking that the artillery factories give 5 artillery per turn? Most of the time this is what it looks like. There are some turns though when I swear I have been getting only 2, or none at all.....
Am I right in thinking that the artillery factories give 5 artillery per turn? Most of the time this is what it looks like. There are some turns though when I swear I have been getting only 2, or none at all.....
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
Ebbingford wrote:My British and Belgian units won't stay inside a French town. You can put them in it by dropping the stack on to the town, pressing "H" doesn't work at all. The unit will stay in the town until you select another unit or move round the map a bit, it then returns to being outside the structure.
Am I right in thinking that the artillery factories give 5 artillery per turn? Most of the time this is what it looks like. There are some turns though when I swear I have been getting only 2, or none at all.....
There's some slightly odd behavior with friendly structures, from what I've seen. If you go into a harbor, you can no longer select the unit unless going to F1 screen and selecting it from there. I'll have to see if this is capable of being changed. Don't know if I really consider it a bug though. I think the likelihood of British troops allowing themselves to serve as a garrison to be put under siege in French territory would be low to non-existent.
Yes, 5 artillery. It may appear less in some turns due to replacements.
I'll add some text to help clarify what factories produce for next version.
-
Highlandcharge
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:44 am
-
deathsheep
- Conscript
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 6:06 am
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
Strange goings on with artillery pool. Playing as GB.
In the backup turn that is attached here I have 4 artillery in the pool. I spend all four of these on 1 light replacement. I have 2 artillery factories, one in Birmingham and the other in Leeds. I should have 10 available the next turn. I don't I have 2.......See the attached save.
I'm also seeing a message every turn about 5 points of war weariness added, it's not getting added though, or if it is I'm also losing 5 points each turn as well. My total war weariness is 5.
My munitions train in Lille is not taking any more replacement elements either, despite being in passive posture in a region with a depot. It looks like it should take more elements, there is only one munitions train at the moment and there is also a white chevron which usually means elements are missing. It won't take any though. French town the problem? Although Calais depot was working for taking on new elements and that was also a French town.....
I was also allowed to play my objective RGD on a town, Lille, that was already controlled by France.
In the backup turn that is attached here I have 4 artillery in the pool. I spend all four of these on 1 light replacement. I have 2 artillery factories, one in Birmingham and the other in Leeds. I should have 10 available the next turn. I don't I have 2.......See the attached save.
I'm also seeing a message every turn about 5 points of war weariness added, it's not getting added though, or if it is I'm also losing 5 points each turn as well. My total war weariness is 5.
My munitions train in Lille is not taking any more replacement elements either, despite being in passive posture in a region with a depot. It looks like it should take more elements, there is only one munitions train at the moment and there is also a white chevron which usually means elements are missing. It won't take any though. French town the problem? Although Calais depot was working for taking on new elements and that was also a French town.....
I was also allowed to play my objective RGD on a town, Lille, that was already controlled by France.
- Attachments
-
- Artillery.rar
- (777.87 KiB) Downloaded 441 times
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
Actually, it looks like it is an issue with being in a French town. I sent it to Calais as well, and it still refused to draw replacements. BUt sending it to London allowed it to pull more. Definitely an issue, I'll have to research further.
Somewhat similar for the other one. The parameters for the RGD are supposed to account for allies in the checks as well, but don't seem to be doing so. Will research further.
Somewhat similar for the other one. The parameters for the RGD are supposed to account for allies in the checks as well, but don't seem to be doing so. Will research further.
I am still having that issue with my diplomats not sticking, I put my major on the OE, other 2 on Bulgaria and Holland and they were all unsuccessful.
I didn't even recruit first round to make sure it was not a money issue. Austria managed to get theirs in Romania and some other eastern country. What am I doing wrong or is it a dice roll?
I didn't even recruit first round to make sure it was not a money issue. Austria managed to get theirs in Romania and some other eastern country. What am I doing wrong or is it a dice roll?
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
I have just had the message that level 1 infantry research has been completed and all my troops have upgraded. Well, they have after a fashion. None of the stats have changed but my British and Canadians are now using the portrait with the tin hat. Scots, South Africans and ANZACS are all using the earlier portrait still. The British marines haven't upgraded either, but the regular infantry that make up the rest of the elements in the unit have. They are the only troops who now have level 2 protection, all the other reserve elements that make up the British army are still on level 1 protection. (I still think the BEF should be made up of these regular elements and not reservist ones like the rest of the army.)
On the F6 page of the ledger though there is now an option for Level 1 infantry. I take it this is not needed now. If you select it nothing happens and it is still there the next turn.
On the F6 page of the ledger though there is now an option for Level 1 infantry. I take it this is not needed now. If you select it nothing happens and it is still there the next turn.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
I noticed certain changes to the maps in France were made, but I still think the French fortification system is not very well displayed in the game. I come from the alsace-lorraine region so I know the geography and it's fortification system pretty well.
The main problem is that the game does not properly display the French fortress system and the logical paths for German advances, mainly the Oise Gap, the Stenay Gap and the Charmes Gap (the Belfort gap being not really practical). See for example: http://www.fortiffsere.fr/secteurmaubeuge-verdun/index_fichiers/Page628.htm
The Fort lvl 2 at Longwy makes the least sense right know, neither the citadel of Montmédy nor the one of Longwy were modern fortification and barely allowed support to field armies. Making it a strong-point is illogical and ignores the Stenay Gap. Nancy wasn't well protected and is in no way a lvl 2 fortification. Moving it east was interesting but does not go well with the geography of the area.
Here is what I would consider a historical accurate fortification system: (red dots marking changes)
[ATTACH]34126[/ATTACH]
Creating the historical gaps:
[ATTACH]34127[/ATTACH]
Changes explained:
-Adding Montbéliard as lvl 1 fort completes the Place forte de Belfort and strengthens the Belfort Gap for the French.
-Moving Epinal one region up places it better geographically, especially in respect to Toul. Between Belfort and Epinal lvl 1 fort representing the Rideau de la Haute Moselle adds to the defensive line.
-Adding Blamont with the Fort de Manonvillier (one of the most modern French forts at the start of the war) makes the lorraine plateau between Nancy and Saarburg more realistic.
- Moving the Charmes region up and renaming the old one Rambervilliers is more geographical accurate and makes Charmes the true gap it was.
- Toul back at it's place at the Meuse crossing and in line with the Hauts de Meuse fortifications.
- Nancy back to it's place as a lvl 1 fort for the Fort de Frouard that was a stopping position protecting Nancy.
- St Mihiel and the Fort du Camp des Romains as the strategical important position south of Verdun. Verdun itself pushed one region up (might need a road connection between verdun and argonne)
- Longwy loses forts and creates therfor the stenay gap.
- Maubeuge and Paris getting their lvl 1 forts back
On the german side:
- german names for elsass-lothringen region
- Diedenhofen (Thionville) was not a strong fortress, is at best a lvl 1 fort.
- Adding the citadel of Neu Brisach as a lvl 1 fort is important since it was the third frontier fortified region (alongside (Metz-Diedenhofen, and Straßburg), it guarded the main bridge in southern elsass (it is a beautiful vauban city-fortress that is still intact to this day (the 1880-1890 outer forts having been dismantled), a real must see if you are in southern alsace)
Would be in my humble opinion the more realistic geography, maybe an element or more of these changes can interest you altaris.
The main problem is that the game does not properly display the French fortress system and the logical paths for German advances, mainly the Oise Gap, the Stenay Gap and the Charmes Gap (the Belfort gap being not really practical). See for example: http://www.fortiffsere.fr/secteurmaubeuge-verdun/index_fichiers/Page628.htm
The Fort lvl 2 at Longwy makes the least sense right know, neither the citadel of Montmédy nor the one of Longwy were modern fortification and barely allowed support to field armies. Making it a strong-point is illogical and ignores the Stenay Gap. Nancy wasn't well protected and is in no way a lvl 2 fortification. Moving it east was interesting but does not go well with the geography of the area.
Here is what I would consider a historical accurate fortification system: (red dots marking changes)
[ATTACH]34126[/ATTACH]
Creating the historical gaps:
[ATTACH]34127[/ATTACH]
Changes explained:
-Adding Montbéliard as lvl 1 fort completes the Place forte de Belfort and strengthens the Belfort Gap for the French.
-Moving Epinal one region up places it better geographically, especially in respect to Toul. Between Belfort and Epinal lvl 1 fort representing the Rideau de la Haute Moselle adds to the defensive line.
-Adding Blamont with the Fort de Manonvillier (one of the most modern French forts at the start of the war) makes the lorraine plateau between Nancy and Saarburg more realistic.
- Moving the Charmes region up and renaming the old one Rambervilliers is more geographical accurate and makes Charmes the true gap it was.
- Toul back at it's place at the Meuse crossing and in line with the Hauts de Meuse fortifications.
- Nancy back to it's place as a lvl 1 fort for the Fort de Frouard that was a stopping position protecting Nancy.
- St Mihiel and the Fort du Camp des Romains as the strategical important position south of Verdun. Verdun itself pushed one region up (might need a road connection between verdun and argonne)
- Longwy loses forts and creates therfor the stenay gap.
- Maubeuge and Paris getting their lvl 1 forts back
On the german side:
- german names for elsass-lothringen region
- Diedenhofen (Thionville) was not a strong fortress, is at best a lvl 1 fort.
- Adding the citadel of Neu Brisach as a lvl 1 fort is important since it was the third frontier fortified region (alongside (Metz-Diedenhofen, and Straßburg), it guarded the main bridge in southern elsass (it is a beautiful vauban city-fortress that is still intact to this day (the 1880-1890 outer forts having been dismantled), a real must see if you are in southern alsace)
Would be in my humble opinion the more realistic geography, maybe an element or more of these changes can interest you altaris.
- Attachments
-
-
-There is safety in numbers.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
@Metatron
Were the forts of Maubenge and Paris maintained in the 20th Century? hadn't Paris outgrown the fortified areas?
Maubenge also wasn't considered a big stronghold by the French war-planners.
On the other hand, Mulhausen fell very easily in early August 1914.
Were the forts of Maubenge and Paris maintained in the 20th Century? hadn't Paris outgrown the fortified areas?
Maubenge also wasn't considered a big stronghold by the French war-planners.
On the other hand, Mulhausen fell very easily in early August 1914.
Rascals, would you live forever? - Frederick the Great.
Maubeuge was categorized as a 2nd category fortress, slightly modernized, which should provide support to the field armies operating in the area. At the beginning of the war it still had a rather strong garrison and was actually besiege during 11 days at the end of august. In game I think that would be the equivalent to a lvl 1 fort with an infantry garrison, maybe a few light guns. As a lvl 1 you can assault it immediately but still functions as a stopping point.
In the case of Paris the older fortifications were indeed obsolete but not outgrown by the city yet. The Thiers wall, pretty much useless, was only dismantle after 1919. The first ring of fortification from the 1840s at around 5 km from Paris were pretty much useless but still intact. The fortifications that would have been useful in WWI were the second ring of fortifications build int the 1870s and 1880s at 20km from paris. They were also pretty much obsolete but like other obsolete forts of the time they still had to be reduced or destroyed. Obsolete doesn't mean useless. Making Paris a Fort lvl 1 is considering that the French would have continued a trench warfare at the very gate of paris, not giving it a lvl 1 fort is considering France would have made Paris a open city like Lille (which technically could also be a lvl 1 fort ingame). Both sides have merit, I think that for 1914/early 1915 (the mobile phase pretty much) Paris deserves a lvl 1 fort, after that maybe the fort could be disbanded by an event.
Mülhausen itself wasn't defend true, but the german fortifications in the alsatian plain did not aim at defending the plain ut the river crossings over the Rhein river. In upper alsace you had the forteress of Straßburg with the Kaiser Wilhelm Feste blocking the saverne gap and the Bruch valley. South of that you had the fortress of Neu Brisach covering the main bridge (+ railroad bridge) from Neu Brisach to Alt Brisach. The two smaller bridges south of Brisach at Neuenburg and Hüningen (like 5km from swiss border) would have been blown, making Neu Brisach the most important town in southern alsace. (In central alsace the germans could either defend the vosges mountain passes or go back behind the Rhein). From a French perspective the conquest of southern alsace would only have been completed if Neu Brisach was taken, since if they wanted to attack north into central alsace towards Straßburg the german bridgehead at Brisach would be a constant threat in their right flank, and if the French wanted to cross the Rhein they needed to take Neu Brisach. Since it wasn't as strong a fortress a lvl 1 with small garrison would be enough to simulate it.
In the case of Paris the older fortifications were indeed obsolete but not outgrown by the city yet. The Thiers wall, pretty much useless, was only dismantle after 1919. The first ring of fortification from the 1840s at around 5 km from Paris were pretty much useless but still intact. The fortifications that would have been useful in WWI were the second ring of fortifications build int the 1870s and 1880s at 20km from paris. They were also pretty much obsolete but like other obsolete forts of the time they still had to be reduced or destroyed. Obsolete doesn't mean useless. Making Paris a Fort lvl 1 is considering that the French would have continued a trench warfare at the very gate of paris, not giving it a lvl 1 fort is considering France would have made Paris a open city like Lille (which technically could also be a lvl 1 fort ingame). Both sides have merit, I think that for 1914/early 1915 (the mobile phase pretty much) Paris deserves a lvl 1 fort, after that maybe the fort could be disbanded by an event.
Mülhausen itself wasn't defend true, but the german fortifications in the alsatian plain did not aim at defending the plain ut the river crossings over the Rhein river. In upper alsace you had the forteress of Straßburg with the Kaiser Wilhelm Feste blocking the saverne gap and the Bruch valley. South of that you had the fortress of Neu Brisach covering the main bridge (+ railroad bridge) from Neu Brisach to Alt Brisach. The two smaller bridges south of Brisach at Neuenburg and Hüningen (like 5km from swiss border) would have been blown, making Neu Brisach the most important town in southern alsace. (In central alsace the germans could either defend the vosges mountain passes or go back behind the Rhein). From a French perspective the conquest of southern alsace would only have been completed if Neu Brisach was taken, since if they wanted to attack north into central alsace towards Straßburg the german bridgehead at Brisach would be a constant threat in their right flank, and if the French wanted to cross the Rhein they needed to take Neu Brisach. Since it wasn't as strong a fortress a lvl 1 with small garrison would be enough to simulate it.
-There is safety in numbers.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
Thanks for the suggestions Metatron, they are much appreciated. I will re-evaluate what you've posted. I'm from USA, so European geography certainly isn't my area of expertise 
I moved Nancy based off of a map I found online, but I'll research this further based on what you've posted.
Thanks again, helps to have some knowledge from local perspective. My main goal is keeping the game balanced, but these look like changes which could accomodate this.
I moved Nancy based off of a map I found online, but I'll research this further based on what you've posted.
Thanks again, helps to have some knowledge from local perspective. My main goal is keeping the game balanced, but these look like changes which could accomodate this.
Happy to help altaris.
They are some problems with the original map made for TEAW so geographical perfection is difficult to achieve, for example in regard to the vosges mountain. Nancy is on the left bank of the Mosel river and directly south of Metz so there is not much regions in game it can be located.
If you want to look at the geography here are some nice maps made by french and german military you can study.
The Karte des Deutschen Reiches in 1:100 000 (which is beautiful) made between 1893 and 1910 for elsass lothringen:
[url]http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~216867~90040001:Composite--Sheets-1---674--Germany-?sort=pub_list_no_initialsort%2Cpub_date%2Cpub_list_no%2Cseries_no&qvq=q:Karte%2Bdes%2BDeutschen%2BReiches;sort
ub_list_no_initialsort%2Cpub_date%2Cpub_list_no%2Cseries_no;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=0&trs=1367[/url]
The carte d'état major (a bit older) made from 1820 to 1866 for France.
http://geoportail.fr/url/7Fcmc5
They are some problems with the original map made for TEAW so geographical perfection is difficult to achieve, for example in regard to the vosges mountain. Nancy is on the left bank of the Mosel river and directly south of Metz so there is not much regions in game it can be located.
If you want to look at the geography here are some nice maps made by french and german military you can study.
The Karte des Deutschen Reiches in 1:100 000 (which is beautiful) made between 1893 and 1910 for elsass lothringen:
[url]http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~216867~90040001:Composite--Sheets-1---674--Germany-?sort=pub_list_no_initialsort%2Cpub_date%2Cpub_list_no%2Cseries_no&qvq=q:Karte%2Bdes%2BDeutschen%2BReiches;sort
ub_list_no_initialsort%2Cpub_date%2Cpub_list_no%2Cseries_no;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=0&trs=1367[/url]
The carte d'état major (a bit older) made from 1820 to 1866 for France.
http://geoportail.fr/url/7Fcmc5
-There is safety in numbers.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
Playing as GB.
As reported in an earlier post there seems to be a problem with artillery. Every so often in my test game I see the artillery pool only go up by 2 instead of the 10 it should go up by. Doesn't seem to be any reason for this either. It will work OK for several turns, you get your full compliment, then you get a couple of turns of getting only 2....
From April or May 1915 I am now allowed to build tanks. I am only on 5 for tank reearch though. Is this WAD? I have been able to build tank factories for a while though.
As reported in an earlier post there seems to be a problem with artillery. Every so often in my test game I see the artillery pool only go up by 2 instead of the 10 it should go up by. Doesn't seem to be any reason for this either. It will work OK for several turns, you get your full compliment, then you get a couple of turns of getting only 2....
From April or May 1915 I am now allowed to build tanks. I am only on 5 for tank reearch though. Is this WAD? I have been able to build tank factories for a while though.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
I asked this in the Paradox thread and got a response which is not that useful (As colonial elements have 1 weight as opposed to reserves 10). So I thought to ask here: How is one supposed to transport troops now that dedicated transports no longer exist? Merchant Marine has high capacity but only for merchant points or whatever it is that they do. Light cruisers would be fine but I only have 70 points of them as GB in my entire navy and a corps has 83 weight. As I said elsewhere, I would be fine if I could build new transports or have a decision turn commercial vessels into troop transports but insofar as I can see there is no way to do so.
teep wrote:I asked this in the Paradox thread and got a response which is not that useful (As colonial elements have 1 weight as opposed to reserves 10). So I thought to ask here: How is one supposed to transport troops now that dedicated transports no longer exist? Merchant Marine has high capacity but only for merchant points or whatever it is that they do. Light cruisers would be fine but I only have 70 points of them as GB in my entire navy and a corps has 83 weight. As I said elsewhere, I would be fine if I could build new transports or have a decision turn commercial vessels into troop transports but insofar as I can see there is no way to do so.
Use the Naval Transport option (right beside Rail Transport). Each faction has a limit on how many naval transport points they can use.
Ebbingford wrote:Playing as GB.
As reported in an earlier post there seems to be a problem with artillery. Every so often in my test game I see the artillery pool only go up by 2 instead of the 10 it should go up by. Doesn't seem to be any reason for this either. It will work OK for several turns, you get your full compliment, then you get a couple of turns of getting only 2....
From April or May 1915 I am now allowed to build tanks. I am only on 5 for tank reearch though. Is this WAD? I have been able to build tank factories for a while though.
Are automated replacements on by any chance? AI might be buying up some replacements for you. For next version, I'm adding some messages to help clarify when and where resources are being gained/used. I'm also going to make structures produce only once a month, but quadruple their output. This way, the alternating turn lengths won't result in some months have smaller output than others.
teep wrote:I asked this in the Paradox thread and got a response which is not that useful (As colonial elements have 1 weight as opposed to reserves 10). So I thought to ask here: How is one supposed to transport troops now that dedicated transports no longer exist? Merchant Marine has high capacity but only for merchant points or whatever it is that they do. Light cruisers would be fine but I only have 70 points of them as GB in my entire navy and a corps has 83 weight. As I said elsewhere, I would be fine if I could build new transports or have a decision turn commercial vessels into troop transports but insofar as I can see there is no way to do so.
Ben has already pointed it out. But i will provide some more details.
You can find your SEA pool right next to the rail pool and Sea transport icon next to the Rail icon.
It will take some time for those units to transport but they will arrive.
Also if any naval battle happens in the sea zones during transportation, the corps will lose strength or even get wiped out.
Rascals, would you live forever? - Frederick the Great.
Altaris wrote:Use the Naval Transport option (right beside Rail Transport). Each faction has a limit on how many naval transport points they can use.
Shri wrote:Ben has already pointed it out. But i will provide some more details.
You can find your SEA pool right next to the rail pool and Sea transport icon next to the Rail icon.
It will take some time for those units to transport but they will arrive.
Also if any naval battle happens in the sea zones during transportation, the corps will lose strength or even get wiped out.
Thankyou. I thought it was riverine transport as in CWII.
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
Altaris wrote:Are automated replacements on by any chance? AI might be buying up some replacements for you. For next version, I'm adding some messages to help clarify when and where resources are being gained/used. I'm also going to make structures produce only once a month, but quadruple their output. This way, the alternating turn lengths won't result in some months have smaller output than others.
No automated replacements. I have even gone in to other allied sides and removed any artillery replacements they might be buying just in case they are coming off my total, didn't change anything.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.
Did some more research on the GBR replacements not occurring in FRA territory. This is indeed a problem. Hits can be recovered, but full element replacements cannot occur when on another faction's territory, even if they are friendly. I've notified Pocus, but he's tied up right now with the new incoming games, so not sure how quickly he'll be able to do much about it. I'm going to have to rethink this a bit in the meantime, that's a pretty big issue for GBR (which will likely be spending quite a bit of time in France).
-
Ebbingford
- Posts: 6162
- Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
- Location: England
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest