The Great War

[Sarevok]

Believe me I know lots about WWI, I didnt make this scenario off assumed knowledge. Thats the reason the game "feels" like actual WWI combat with Static defense and the power of defensive innovations. Im not going to write an essay here to convince people that the submarine war was important, Ill leave it to them to read about it. I is unfortunate that it cannot be truly simulated in TGW with the lack of convoys and strategic resources that deplete through usage. I may saound harsh, but I wanted you to know that I am not going to waste any time when it is not neccesary.

 

[jimmygeo]

Play-test report TGW-DIV 1.2
Playing at Brigadier Gen. level in DEBUG mode as the neutral Swiss, with Italy and Rumania neutral.

Week 34, 1914: Arabs again unsuccessfully attack Medina, losing 3 guerillas and 1 cavalry and fail to destroy Turish MG. The Turks counter-attack, killing 1 heavily damaged cavalry unit with a sipahi.

The Brits again bombard Ypres by sea. They sink one Germ. BB, 2 subs and 2 pre-dreads, but lose 1 BB themselves. They are quiet in the East.

Austrian navy loses 3 destroyers attacking some French ones off southern Italy, but they do succeed in sinking a Brit. Lt. cruiser. Their land campaign to the east vs. the Russians is undecisive. They lose about as many units as they destroy. If this keeps up, the Russians will eventually crush them with shear numbers.

French lose 3 inf. divs. attacking Ypres unsuccessfully although they do destroy a German MG and damage some others. They destroy a severely damaged German corps and 2 inf. divs. by Arras.

The Russian Black Sea fleet bombards Sinope, doing some damage. In the Baltic, they sink 2 German Lt. cruisers. They destroy some Austrian units near Krakow, but lose more themselves.

German navy sinks 1 Brit. BB, a Pre-dreadnought, a lt. cruiser and a Russian pre-dread, but they lose 1 BB themselves. On land they again counter-attack around Ypres cleaning up 3 damaged French units, losing 2 divs. attacking a large Brit. land force. This is looking more and more like the real thing - a loooong, drawn-out slugging match in Flanders/NE France, which may not be too good for the Central Powers.

The Greeks wipe out a couple of unretreated Bulgarian units at Salonika, but lose a cav. unit unsuccessfully attacking Dede-Agach. So far the Bulgarians are still getting the worst of it vs. Greece.

Victory Points at end of turn: Central powers - 7409; Allies - 5483 (Central Powers are widening their win)


Comments: In the coastal town (e.g. Iraklion) the AI is building floating mines. They seem to be a 'best buy' since they are fairly strong and very cheap.

jimmygeo

 

[jimmygeo]

Believe me I know lots about WWI, I didnt make this scenario off assumed knowledge. Thats the reason the game "feels" like actual WWI combat with Static defense and the power of defensive innovations. Im not going to write an essay here to convince people that the submarine war was important, Ill leave it to them to read about it. I is unfortunate that it cannot be truly simulated in TGW with the lack of convoys and strategic resources that deplete through usage. I may saound harsh, but I wanted you to know that I am not going to waste any time when it is not neccesary.

Hey, Sarevok, calm down. You made an unsupported statement that I found hard to believe, that's all. I did not accuse you of making this scenario based on assumed knowledge. Nor did I ask you to write an 'essay' for me (although your response is almost an essay). All I asked for was an example or two to support your statement.

As to 'wasting time', your response took longer than supplying a couple of facts would have. Besides, what do you think I am doing, play-testing TGW-DIV. It does take a lot of time and I'm doing it for YOUR sake, not mine. I think you have basically a good thing here or I wouldn't bother with it.

Having been myself a partner in a game publishing company for a number of years, I know what fragile egos game-developers can have and how sensitive they are about their creations, but unless one can defend their decisions before others, they really do not deserve to be taken seriously. Sorry, but that's how the world works.

jimmygeo

 

[Sarevok]

Hey, Sarevok, calm down. You made an unsupported statement that I found hard to believe, that's all. I did not accuse you of making this scenario based on assumed knowledge. Nor did I ask you to write an 'essay' for me (although your response is almost an essay). All I asked for was an example or two to support your statement.

As to 'wasting time', your response took longer than supplying a couple of facts would have. Besides, what do you think I am doing, play-testing TGW-DIV. It does take a lot of time and I'm doing it for YOUR sake, not mine. I think you have basically a good thing here or I wouldn't bother with it.

Having been myself a partner in a game publishing company for a number of years, I know what fragile egos game-developers can have and how sensitive they are about their creations, but unless one can defend their decisions before others, they really do not deserve to be taken seriously. Sorry, but that's how the world works.

jimmygeo

you are implying that I should "Cite" every piece of information I give. I am an future major in military history, and I would not lie about facts, and if I didnt know the answer, I wouldnt give one. You can ask Rocoteh when he comes back, he may give you the same answer except he will have something in addition. That however, it more to an age gap between us as he has the answers and sources ready to be found, most likely on-hand while I have not gone quite that in-depth... yet. If it helps at all, my WWI book is The First World War by Keegan.

 

[Adler17]

Jimmygeo, in ww1 German Uboats sunk 5.234 merchant vessels with 12.284.757 t. Additional 10 battleships, 18 cruiser, 20 destroyer and 9 subs were sunk by them. All figures include mined ships, where the mine was laid by a uboat. 187 Uboats were lost.

Adler

P.S.: Source: Ulrich Elfrath, Die Deutsche Kriegsmarine, Band 1, Augsburg 1994, ISBN 3-89350-699-3, page 9

 

[Arvln]

If I may ask Sarevok, what are the major changes you will make in the TGW v1.7? What features will you keep and let go?

 

[Sarevok]

- Torpedo's Removed
-some changed population figures
- a few minor changes
- Som new graphics
- A new naval unit: The Superdreadnought
- graphic bugs fixed
- and much more

 

[jimmygeo]

Jimmygeo, in ww1 German Uboats sunk 5.234 merchant vessels with 12.284.757 t. Additional 10 battleships, 18 cruiser, 20 destroyer and 9 subs were sunk by them. All figures include mined ships, where the mine was laid by a uboat. 187 Uboats were lost.

Adler

P.S.: Source: Ulrich Elfrath, Die Deutsche Kriegsmarine, Band 1, Augsburg 1994, ISBN 3-89350-699-3, page 9

Thank you, Adler. This is the kind of reply I was looking for. But it sort of makes one wonder why the Central Powers lost the war and had to submit to so humiliating a peace treaty.

BTW the source I had available here at home, Koch, The History of Warfare , quotes the figure as 8 million tons. But there's no indication that this was in the Atlantic as opposed to the North Sea and coastal waters around the British Isles. Moreover, between the sinking of the Lusitania in October 1915 and February 1, 1917, the German Uboats were not permitted to attack neutral (=U.S.) shipping, and much of Britain's supplies came in American ships. Also, we need to determine how big a portion of the total British merchant fleet those 5,234 ships were. If it were, say, a half of the total, this would be significant. But if it were less than one-fourth, it may not have caused too much shortage in Britain.

On the other hand, German merchant shipping was virtually cut off entirely from access to any trade routes other than those in the Baltic. And after the destruction of von Spee's fleet at the Falklands, the threat to Allied shipping on the high seas was insignificant.

jimmygeo

 

[Adler17]

Perhaps the figure of Koch does not include mined ships. Nevertheless the British did starve in many things because of the loss of ships. It is said they would have had only a few months less in 1917 when the US entered the war. Their shortage was getting bigger and bigger the losses higher and higher. If the US stayed neutral the Entente would have made peace. The best consequence of the German victory: No Hitler.

Adler

 

[jimmygeo]

While doing some reading up on WWI, I came across this interesting analysis of the relative strengths and availability of resources for the combatants, from H. W. Koch, History of Warfare, c 1987, p. 496:
"The Allies had at their disposal some 250 divisions, against which the Central Powers could bring approximately 160 divisions. The Allied supremacy was even greater at sea, the oceans being dominated by the Royal Navy. But most important, the Allies enjoyed an unquantifiable superiority in the supply of raw materials. The markets of the world were open to them - naval supremacy ensured that - while they were closed to the Central Powers. This superiority was demonstrated with a vengeance when the Allies carried out the long-range blockade of Germany, showing that fighting from interior line without sufficient raw materials and foodstuffs was hopeless against adversaries with unlimted access to all that they needed. Ersatz (artificial) materials including food, as developed by Germany's chemical industries, could alleviate the situation in some sectors but could not solve the problem."

jimmygeo

 

[Sarevok]

The Germans had 192 divisions vs 178 allied divisions prior to the Kaiserchlacht offensives in 1918, mostly due to the russian withdrawl from the war. They had 40 infantry and 3 cavalry divisions as occupation in the east. If it had not been for the American arrival, the Germans would have won the war in 1918.

 

[Adler17]

These figures must be from middle 1918 after beginning of the Kaiserschlacht. The US were the factor. But even in 1918 the Germans could have taken Paris. This would have lead to a peace in which the status qou ante would have been more or less would have been written. As for the Britains: Yes they had a big fleet, but their ships were not able to supply Britain totally. They couldn´t afford any losses in ships. So the ships they lost were of a high value. Mainly food and oil had to be imported and both became rare. Until the US sent their help.
No Germany would have won in 1918, if the US didn´t declare war or arrive in time.

Ader

 

[Rocoteh]

Sarevok,

I hope you will include the PreDreadnought graphic,
suggested by Adler17 in version 1.7.

Its a very good graphic.

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

Sarevok,

I hope you will include the PreDreadnought graphic,
suggested by Adler17 in version 1.7.

Its a very good graphic.

Rocoteh

yes, I did. It is very good!

 

[Sarevok]

These figures must be from middle 1918 after beginning of the Kaiserschlacht. The US were the factor. But even in 1918 the Germans could have taken Paris. This would have lead to a peace in which the status qou ante would have been more or less would have been written. As for the Britains: Yes they had a big fleet, but their ships were not able to supply Britain totally. They couldn´t afford any losses in ships. So the ships they lost were of a high value. Mainly food and oil had to be imported and both became rare. Until the US sent their help.
No Germany would have won in 1918, if the US didn´t declare war or arrive in time.

Ader

I take it youre reffering to Jimmygeo's stats?. The Americans gave about 80 divisions to the allies (American divisions had 28,000 men rather than 14,000 so it was a bit over 2 million men). It is very true that if the US did not show up the germans would have won WWI.

 

[Arvln]

Sarevok,

I hope you will include the PreDreadnought graphic,
suggested by Adler17 in version 1.7.

Its a very good graphic.

Rocoteh

Rocoteh

I am trying to look for PreDreadnought graphic in the thread but i could not find it.
So do you mind if you show me the preview, a link will do it.
Thank you.

Arvin

 

[Sarevok]

it is several pages back.... somewhere in the late 60's

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler17,

Can you post the link again?

Rocoteh

 

[Sarevok]

the graphic is on CDG...

 

[Rocoteh]

the graphic is on CDG...

That is no problem.

Rocoteh