The Great War

[BkGreatWarnut]

BkGreatWarnut,

"(the first one haulted because of failure for turns to send...)"

I am not sure I understand you right. Can you clarify?
Where there a bug that crashed the game?

Rocoteh

We are guessing that it was a problem with sending the game by e-mail... That and Detlef has sort of disappeared (he was the Ottomans) has caused the game to conclude as a majority ruled Entente Victory.

I don't think it was a problem with the game as much as it was with the encoding in e-mail and decoding...

 

[Adler17]

I came to this site a few days ago: http://www.worldwar1.co.uk
There are all losses of the Navies in ww1 listed. Here is a list:

Germany: 1 BC, 1 PDN, 6 AC, 19 CL, 108 DD = 135 ships
Austria: 2 BB, 1 PDN, 2 AC, 6 DD= 11 ships
Turkey: 2 PDN, 1 CL, 3 DD= 6 ships

Britain: 2 BB, 3 BC, 11 PDN, 12 AC, 6 CL, 6 Monitors, 3 CV (sea plane carrier), 75 DD= 118 ships
France: 4 PDN, 4 AC, 13 DD
Japan: 1 BB, 1 PDN, 2 AC, 1 DD= 5 ships
Italy: 1 BB, 2 PDN, 4 AC, 2 Monitors, 14 DD= 23 ships
USA 1 AC, 1 CL, 2 DD= 4 ships
Russia: 2 BB, 1 PDN, 4 AC, 21 DD= 28 ships
Rumania and Greece a DD each

All in all the Central Powers lost 152 big war ships while the Entente lost 201 ships. It is surprising that Germany lost more ships in total in contrast to the British. However Germany was the main actor against the Entente. Also most of these losses are destroyer and light cruiser. Nevertheless only the CL were negative in the bilance of the Central powers in contrast with the allies. Remark: Protected cruiser are here in the list with Armoured cruiser. The bilance for the Entente is especially bad with the Capital ships (AC to BB). Here they lost 55 ships, while the Central Powers lost only 14! In this list included are also losses because of sabotage or accidents. Of all 8 BB only one was sunk in the battle, the Austrian SMS Szent Isthvan (Sp.?), which was torpedoed by Italian FAC. The others were mined, scuttled or sunk after accidents. But how is the bilance in total of all warships
According to Januz Piekalkiwicz, Der Erste Weltkrieg, p. 589:
Britain: 197 warships, 555.000 ts
France: 54 ships, 111.000 ts
Italy: 29 ships, 76.000 ts
Japan: 9 ships, 50.000 ts
USA: 4 ships, 17.000 ts
Total: 243 ships, 809.000 ts.

Germany: 354 ships (including 205 U- boats), 350.000 ts
Austria: 25 ships, 65.000 ts.
Total: 379 ships, 415.000 ts.

Summary: Excluding the Uboats and the Entente lost twice the room the Central powers lost.

I think this figures are interesting.

Adler

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler,

Very interesting stats and link.

Thank you!

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

New record for TGW!

156 individuals have posted in in the TGW-thread.

That is a new record.

No other scenario-thread have so many posters.

Rocoteh

 

[LouLong]

You mean you counted / checked that ????

 

[Rocoteh]

You mean you counted / checked that ????

I count and also remember most things........

Rocoteh

 

[kafkaesk]

Hello, just registered to congratulate the creators on this great scenario.

However, I´d like to make a few remarks on some minor things I noticed.
1.) The A-H flag should rather look like one of these: A-H flags (from left to right: war flag, national flag, trade flag)
2.) The Austrian Emperor´s name should be "Franz-Joseph I.", not "...-Jozef...".
3.) How about naming "Ljubljana" Laibach instead? For further reference on contemporary A-H city-names, this map isn´t bad, I think.
4.) Austria-Hungary wasn´t an absolute monarchy, rather a quite special construction called "Doppelmonarchie" (= "Dual Monarchy") which, among other things, featured two separate parliaments - not all that efficient, actually. To make my point: adding unique forms of government to the main powers would be great.
5.) Which leads to my last point: how to represent the Russian Revolution.
I don´t know if the following has been proposed already (and I have next to no experience with the editor), but how about representing the inner struggles that led to the Tzar´s downfall by giving them an unique form of government with really high corruption, unit upkeep and war weariness while, at the same time, providing a wonder (in St.Petersburg or perhaps a more remote city) that negates these effects.
Now the Central Powers should have two options to trigger the "revolution": either by capturing the city the wonder is located (which should be rather well-defended and hard to reach, of course) or by researching a certain tech (only available to them) that makes said wonder obsolete.

No idea if this could work, but it´s a formidable scenario even without it.
Thanks again for sharing it with us!

 

[Rocoteh]

Hello, just registered to congratulate the creators on this great scenario.

However, I´d like to make a few remarks on some minor things I noticed.
1.) The A-H flag should rather look like one of these: A-H flags (from left to right: war flag, national flag, trade flag)
2.) The Austrian Emperor´s name should be "Franz-Joseph I.", not "...-Jozef...".
3.) How about naming "Ljubljana" Laibach instead? For further reference on contemporary A-H city-names, this map isn´t bad, I think.
4.) Austria-Hungary wasn´t an absolute monarchy, rather a quite special construction called "Doppelmonarchie" (= "Dual Monarchy") which, among other things, featured two separate parliaments - not all that efficient, actually. To make my point: adding unique forms of government to the main powers would be great.
5.) Which leads to my last point: how to represent the Russian Revolution.
I don´t know if the following has been proposed already (and I have next to no experience with the editor), but how about representing the inner struggles that led to the Tzar´s downfall by giving them an unique form of government with really high corruption, unit upkeep and war weariness while, at the same time, providing a wonder (in St.Petersburg or perhaps a more remote city) that negates these effects.
Now the Central Powers should have two options to trigger the "revolution": either by capturing the city the wonder is located (which should be rather well-defended and hard to reach, of course) or by researching a certain tech (only available to them) that makes said wonder obsolete.

No idea if this could work, but it´s a formidable scenario even without it.
Thanks again for sharing it with us!

kafkaesk,

Thank you for the positive words.

On your suggested changes: They are interesting. However with regard
to the Russian Revolution the game-engine will not allow it.

I do not think there will be any more versions of TGW.
Its possible there will be one more version of TGW-DIV.

Rocoteh

 

[tentakl]

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

 

[Klyden]

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

Not to derail the thread, but the vast majority of history books that I have seen record this event as an assassination by a terrorist.

It sort of depends on what your view point of what is a terriorist and what is a rebel because the lines can become blurred and open to interpretation and opinions of each person.

Just because someone belongs to a group does not mean they may or may not be a terrorist or the group is either a rebel group or a terrorist group. Few terrorist groups seem to give themselves the label of terrorist.

 

[Rocoteh]

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

tentakl,

Sarevok wrote the text and I assume he will make a comment
on your post.

So will I:

The Bolsheviks used terror. Remember all the political killings.
Vietcong used terror. Remember Hue.
ANC used terror. Remember "necklazing".

They all thought "the cause" justified it.

The assasination of Franz Ferdinand was no doubt a political murder
and thus an act of terror.

Conclusion: I think Sarevoks description is correct.

Rocoteh

 

[Adler17]

Gavrilo Princip was without doubt a terrorist.

Adler

 

[tentakl]

Austria took Bosnia from Yugoslavia , they were provoking local population with milittary trainings ,they wanted Balcan teritory , Austria was trying to find a reason to declare war on Serbs and that murder was perfect reason to attack Serbia. That was political murder no dobt. However u can't say that he is terrorist like Osama bin Laden.He was rebel , rebels fiht for a freedom or
against ocupator , they don't terrorize innocent people.

Gavrilo Princip was without doubt a terrorist.

You said that just to be "patriot".You should better learn history instead of sayig stupid things.Let's stop this disscusion here.OK?
Peace!

 

[Adler17]

Tentakl, I know about different history poin t of views in Europe (for instance Franco- German war is seen as an agression in France but a justified one in Germany (mostly)). Nevertheless I have to correct you that there was no Yougoslavia in 1914. It was developed at first after ww1. Also some facts: Bosnia was Ottoman before it became Austrian. There was a big Serbian population living. And in Serbia there was a right wing government demanding (with Russian aid) a Great Serbia. They supported the Black Hand movement in AH and it was so dangerous for the Serbian Prime minister for his own life he couldn´t give further detailed infos to the Austrians when he got to know what was planned. The Black Hand was an organization to fight against the Austrians even with assassinations and the murdering of own people who collaborated. Don´t get me wrong but this is the classical definition of a terrorist. Although I admit that the difference is very fluent to a freedom fighter. It depends on the point of view. But assassinating someone is in no way legitimized. I mean murdering not killing in combat. So take your own conclusions but for me he is still a terrorist.
However peace also with you. Shalom and As- Salem Aleikum. _\\//

Adler

 

[Erster.Heiler]

I would also say he was a terrorist even if he was of a serbian group (with a name I even can't speak). The Al-Quaida is also a group and they are also called terrorists and not rebels.
I would say a rebel in this view is a person who fights against an enemy in his homeland(!) (for example the "Resistance" in France while the German occupation) and I would say he didn't fought for the freedom oh his homeland because the serbians wanted an "Great Serbia" and these also includes an occupation of non-serbian territority...
Also a rebel wants a peace at the end and a terrorist only wants to kill and to destroy the others - the murder of Franz Joseph wasn't an act to reach peace because he wasn't the ruler at this time - only the crownprince - and for everybody it has to been clear that the assassination of him would cause a war a not a peace at the end...
I would say: don't discuss with a German about the reason of the first world war because we have to inform ourselfes about this theme after "Versailles" (There was said that only Germany caused the war!!! - That is still hard and so we wanted to inform all the others that it isn't right and to inform them about the real cause -> so our knowledge is a result of the history.)
A political murder is always something terroristic - there are special cases you could say it was an act of a rebel but in this case?! No.

But everybody can see the history as he or she wants. So everybody has to decide hisself/herself about the question: rebel or terrorist. I have only wrote the reasons why I think he was a terrorist.

 

[tentakl]

This is my last reply on this topic.Austria "anexied" Bosnia from Yugoslavia.Bosnia was part of Yugoslavia.There is no Big Serbia , Austria wanted to have Balcan territory and thats that. Peace!

 

[Adler17]

Tentakl, there was NO Yougoslavia before 1920 or so. Only a kingdom of Serbia and one of Montenegro. Bosnia was part of the Ottoman Empire when it was annexed! It was no part of Serbia. The Black Hand also had the aim of a Great Serbia, which they want to achieve with terror provoking a war with Austria in the hope the Russians would help. So in no way Princip and company were freedom fighters but terrorists.
You should read a non biased and non rewritten history book.

Adler

 

[iliekater]

Guys , I am sorry to bother you with this question of mine , but I need help . What files should I download in order to play the game ? It's always dificult to find the right files when updates have taken place . Up to now I have downloaded the 55 Mb file from the 1st page of this topic ( which actually redirected me to page 42 ) and I also got the file called "TGW2.1.zip" which I got it directly from page 1 . It's this ok , or should I download something else ? Should I also use the file called "TGW-DIV 1.4.zip" and which I can get it from page 42 ? Please help me . . .

 

[Adler17]

The first download are the files for the units etc. The second is the scenario. The third is another version of the scenario. Try it if you want. There are less infantry units but enhanced naval combat IMO.

Adler

 

[iliekater]

Could you please provide me some links ?