Feedback on the latest version

[FOARP]

1) Small garrisons shouldn't cost maintenance - you can't build them, you can't manoeuvre them strategically, so players just disband them to regain the maintenance.

2) Fighters are still OP. You can basically stack your rear area full of them and attack infantry into the ground in 1917 - even at this point they were never anything but a nuisance historically, and certainly didn't cause significant losses.

3) Armoured cars are still pretty OP as well.

The game still doesn't allow a historical play-through in MP. If you try to play even semi-historically in MP you'll get your arse kicked very quickly.

[nehi]

if aircraft is overpowered then artilleries are underpowered, result = its maybe not historically right, but its fine

sg no doubt, its a great flaw

whats op in armored cars? its a useless unit when u can have cavalry im calling it volkswagen, same fighting value

[Robotron]

That's all well and sound what you both propose for MP play, but consider, that the AI is harcoded and tuned for current unit strength values and things like "battle value" and whatnot and would have to be modified as well and to a much greater extent too. And since the AIs coder has left long ago and noone(!) can decypher what's been hardcoded in the AI all your musings have to leave the single player option out.

So, what you are aiming at is a playerVsplayer-mod, I guess.

[Egge]

Air force is only OPed as long as you have not researched any AA capabilities. Once your ground units can actually shoot back, air units become very weak. They will still inflict losses, but air units are more expensive than ground units so it's a net loss for the attacker. This is of course ridiculous as historically it was the other way round. Air units became stronger as the war progressed not weaker.

Why do you think they are still OPed even in 1917?

[nehi]

when massed they are still very dangerous, u have to repair them from time to time, but in 1.6x its cheap

[FOARP]

Please note that the above picture comes from turn 15 of the 1917 scenario - every Entente front is similarly stacked with fighters. I started out building infantry, artillery etc. in historical proportions but literally got curb-stomped by every one of my front line units getting blasted by fighters. The repair cost is cheap enough that the Entente can afford to lose 1 or 2 points of fighters in every attack, since the infantry unit attack needs only have ~4 fighters attack it and it is then incapable of resistance and can be destroyed easily. The result is that I'm trying to defend Berlin after only ~six months of play. I'm a noob at MP, but I'm not that bad.

[nehi]

tbh in the east i have just few fighters, 4+bomber or so, its a large front + kavkaz just for russia, not enough pps for a real storm, its just a thunder from the east

but as i said, in general its problem of superior entente production, not fighters

cp can fight one front, entente all fronts

although im progressive player, i will be most likely raped as cp in 1915-1916-1917 scenarios

1917 is the hardest for cp at all, added to mentioned above they have to face tanks in the west

[FOARP]

tbh in the east i have just few fighters, 4+bomber or so, its a large front + kavkaz just for russia, not enough pps for a real storm, its just a thunder from the east

but as i said, in general its problem of superior entente production, not fighters

Afraid I have to disagree with you there: if you're on the defensive in ground combat you have an advantage that can over-turn that of having greater production. The attacker has to expend more than the defender to take the defender's territory. However, with the fighters being as powerful as they are, you can simply attack defending ground units until they are incapable of holding their territory and then destroy them.

Historically, the CP could simply stay on the defensive in the west and absorb the Entente's attacks, but not with the current set-up.

cp can fight one front, entente all fronts

although im progressive player, i will be most likely raped as cp in 1915-1916-1917 scenarios

1917 is the hardest for cp at all, added to mentioned above they have to face tanks in the west

Fighters are just OP, this makes it impossible to fight on the defensive as the CP historically did.

[nehi]

historicaly the didnt know how to use new weapons properly (combined warfare), i know how to

fighters are just the only weapon able to break stale mate (maybe u should play more mp to see it)

they have just switched roles with arts (unhistoricaly poor support)

[FOARP]

historicaly the didnt know how to use new weapons properly (combined warfare), i know how to

Historically they could not deliver enough ordinance from the air, nor co-ordinate enough aircraft, to actually make much of a difference to the situation on the ground. Artillery bombardments required weeks of preparation and planning.

fighters are just the only weapon able to break stale mate (maybe u should play more mp to see it)

they have just switched roles with arts (unhistoricaly poor support)

This kind of stale-mate breaking is simply ahistorical pre-1918.

[nehi]

historicaly = boring

im playing not to repeat history, but to change it

i used fighters, arts, tanks and infantries all together = combined warfare

fighters can just weaken units not destroy them

[FOARP]

historicaly = boring

im playing not to repeat history, but to change it

i used fighters, arts, tanks and infantries all together = combined warfare

fighters can just weaken units not destroy them

I can play Panzer Corps if I want to play a WW2 game. Fighters can weaken ground units to the point where they simply cannot defend, and put simply this should not be possible since the technologies for allowing this did not exist.

I'm all for changing history - but I enjoy games where this is done in a plausible way. It's plausible that the war might spread into Scandinavia, for example. It is not plausible that you can simply blitz through the German front line in a matter of weeks using massive fighter strikes.

[nehi]

plausible germans did a mistake in the first year of ww1 (they let french units entrench) and entente many mistakes later

im tryin to avoid any mistakes, thats the most plausible way u can even imagine, especially when u know history

[FOARP]

We're getting away from the main point here: WW1 fighters simply weren't capable of doing what they do in this game.

[nehi]

they cant do like anything alone, when they are massed, they can weaken units, but they still cant destroy anyone

arts are so limited, that they are useless, so fighters just take their role

in 1917 scenario have entente so great production advantage, and i know it, that they can mass aircraft from begining and smash cp

that u had keep small garisons and couldnt replace weaken units with fresh ones just hasten it all

u shouldnt judge one aspect of the game after one mp game, the game is a complex of many mechanics

in extreme, every disbanded small garrison means, u can feed/upkeep one fighter
britain 20
france 19
russia like 50 (im too lazy to count it exactly )
germany 20
austria 10

all other nations are minor, but as u see entente almost 90 vs cp 30

without this insane boost entente cant keep so many fighters and they are far from op in small numbers

more fronts = more desperate cp

so in 1914 u can suprise entente as cp when u are quick as blitz, 1918 is even and in all other scenarios are cp doomed by theirs production disadvantage, not by fighters

[FOARP]

It doesn't matter that fighters can destroy units by themselves - they can batter units until they can't resist (i.e., they turn red), which I something that no amount of WW1 fighters could have realistically pulled off. This was something that WW1 fighter were incapable of. If you're seeing ~20 fighter units with the Entente in 1917 blasting a path for the Entente advance in 1917, then something's broken.

[nehi]

economy is broken (production, small garrisons upkeep), but not fighters, u can replace weaken/ineffective units

btw i lost just few games and it was in another way, but even more weird

when i was cp in 1914 it went stalemate on all fronts later, then entente massed zeppelins and bombarded my cities, then i couldnt refill my units

u cant break entrenched line of infantries with just arts or few air units, especially when they have commander with +4D in their back

[FOARP]

Zeppelins destroyed your war industry? All I'm getting from this is air power is OP.

[nehi]

they have range 16, so they can bombard like any cp city when they are just behind front lines

in 1.6x any attack of zeppelin on city means -1 production of that city until nulified, in 1.5x it didnt work on visible cities (strange anyway, but not so devastating)

op is ententes production, with lower production they couldnt keep as many (air)units as they can now, it left just 2 meaningful scenarios for mp 1914 and 1918, ai is harmless even in 1915/6/7

maybe when someone tried to set up "historical" rules, its better to keep sg on both sides, then economy will be more balanced and wont let airpocalypse happen

fighters are not op

anyway rules are same for all players, better one wins or lasts longer

[FOARP]

Sure, but do the rules create a WW1 game?