The Great War

[vlad1917]

Ok.

 

[Sarevok]

so if you have demand, i suppose they could come up.

 

[Rocoteh]

Originally posted by mungman
glad I could be of service.

a couple other things i noticed. even though i have the pentagon i can only place 3 units into a division, is this on purpose and is there a way to add a 4th. also i saw earlier in the thread that someone said they had 10 armies, how? i ask because once i have 4 i can no longer use a leader to create another army and i can't build them. must i wait longer to be able to get more?

mungman,

In the editor "transport capacity" for a division is set
to 2 units (brigades) however since all Major powers
have "The Pentagon" de facto "transport capacity" is 3.
That is the reason one not can increase to 4.

With regard to Army-type units this is detemined by
settings in the editor.
Current setting is 1 Army-type unit requires 5 cities.
Thus a CIV with 25 cities can have 5 Army-type units.

I have send Sarevok a PM which suggests a last minute
change of this in version 1.1.
I hope I and Sarevok can agree on the change.

Best Regards

Rocoteh

 

[Adler17]

We do have a scenario in which historically was a stalemate war, a fortress war. Infantry was the most common land unit. Land gaining was costly paid with blood for every centimeter land. But the game isn´t prepared for such a war. Perhaps if you have HUNDREDS of infantry units. But is it historically so unreal to beat France within a few turns?
I mean if the Russians didn´t invade East Prussia or Motke didn´t send his 3 reserve corps to East Prussia, Paris would have fallen in 1914 forcing France to surrend ending the war. And ww1 would have been a war in the tradition of the German unifying wars- unbloody (compared to the millions of dead in 1918), short, victorious.
So I think it is not unreal but a bit against the flair of a scenario to have not this kind of war on the western front. But I think that´s not possible with the game.

Adler

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler17,

I agree with you, the war could have ended in six weeks,
forcing a peace.

Maybe that is one of the most interesting "what-if"
situations in history. Then The Great war had been
remembered as short mobile war.

The American Civil War had probably instead
been the symbol for stalemate and trenches.

Best Regards

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

unfortunately AI is notmy strongpoint. dreadknought said something about doing dtuff with the AI, but he never actually did it.

 

[Rocoteh]

I do not think the load time for TGW is long,
but anyway, if you want saved games for version 1.1
post here so I know if there are demand for it.

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

indeed, its not long for me at least.

 

[Sarevok]

Changes are now ready. Are there any last minute chages?

 

[Rocoteh]

Sarevok,

Not what I can see.

It should be ready to launch.

Best Regards

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

either way, Im going to be adding a few things.

 

[Sarevok]

TGW 1.1 is a day early!

New Features:
- Cities moved around for better accuracy
- Many cities re-named
- Rails improved, paticuarly in the Ruhr
- Some units added
- Battleships re-named
- Some minor unit stats changed, AT prices went up by at least 1/5th for each unit except the Field gun and Field Howlitzer.
- And many more!

 

[Rocoteh]

Sarevok,

TGW version 1.1 looks great!!!

Best Regards

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

Ive put it up with the announcements thread... along with TOE 1.9. I hope everyone likes the new version!

 

[Rocoteh]

Sarevok,

I am sure TGW 1.1 will get an positive response.

Its the best and most accurate scenario so far done.

Best Regards

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

Im glad to Hear it

 

[Metacomet]

Sarevok,

You must be really proud of your scenario, is the best historical scenario that I know.

 

[Sarevok]

I am, Have you looked at Version 1.1?

 

[Metacomet]

Yes just now, and I'll play this night. Or I hope so. Again your scenario is a "primus inter pares"

 

[Rocoteh]

Sarevok,

I say The Great War 1.1 rank high even when
comparing to classical wargames done on the subject.

Best Regards

Rocoteh