Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
I will comment on that later, I am at a crossroads.
Originally posted by Rocoteh
Sarevok,
I request a PM from you within 16 hours from
now, where you define your position.
If I not get any PM, this will be my last post.
I will then de facto leave CFC for ever.
Rocoteh
Originally posted by grumpylad
The reasons for the negative vote :-
The British navy is incorrect, as is it's level of re-inforcements for its army
For example RK Massie in his seminal book "Dreadnought" quotes UK Dreadnought strenght at the outbreak of WWI as follows :
Dreadnought, Bellerophon Class (x3 Bellerophon, Superb & Temeraire), StVincent Class (x4 St Vincent, Vanguard, Collingwood & Neptune), Colossus Class (x2 Colossus & Hercules) Orion Class (x4 Orion, Conqueror, Monarch & Thunderer) King George V Class (x4 King George V, Ajax, Centurion & Audacious) Iron Duke Class (x4 Benbow, Emperor of India, Iron Duke & Marlborough). I have ignored both the Queen Elizabeth Class and The Royal Sovereign Class as their keels had been laid but they were not in service until after the outbreak of the war.
Massie gives British Battlecruiser strenght as 11 at the outbreak of the war in 3 Classes (Invincible {Invincible, Inflexible & Indomitable} Indefaitigable {Indefaitigable, New Zealand & Australia} & Lion { Lion, Princess Royal, Queen Mary & Tiger}. At the time their was a degree of arguement over the design of the BC's Fisher aimed for faster, but heavier armed ships at a cost to armour. Jutland showed the faults of the BC concept.
Whilst on the subject of the Bristish Capital ships, it's perhaps worth noting that perhaps the Germans should have a tougher defence (better armour, sights, under water protection) when fighting againest the UK.
On the UK's lesser ships I have a figure of 221 destroyers (Source Janes Fighting Ships WWI), of which 42 were with the Home Fleet at Scapa Flow. The remainder were scattered around the country on defensive duties or protecting the Empires shipping lanes and Colonies. A Couple of urls to check out http://www.naval-history.net or http://www.worldwar1.co.uk. You could also check out Amazon's book view facility to help confirm my other sources.
The UK army was an exception to the rest of the major European Powers being a professional (rather than conscript) organisation it was also one of the smallest (Not counting the Dominion forces and of course the Army of India), however the British public volunteered in huge numbers 11/8 to 21/8 over 100,000 voulnteered for the colours. You may be aware of the famous Kitchener poster. In additon there were many adhoc units formed called "Pals" where factories, unversities etc joined as a whole. Sources for these figures includes John Keegan "The First World War", JH Priestlys 1914. Some urls' www.iwm.org.uk www.bbc.co.uk/history and www.1914-1918.net
The Russian navy is incorrect(way to few) as it's reinforcements for it's army (way to many).
After it's decisive defeat in the Russo-Japanese war the fleet had to be rebuilt sources indicate the following :-Russia's aging Baltic Fleet consist of five pre-dreadnoughts with four dreadnoughts completing, six old armoured cruisers, four light or protected cruisers, destroyers, torpedo boats and a few small submarines. Sources are as above. Additionally the Black Sea Flotilla which according to www.navy.ru had 5 Battleships, plus supporting light ships appears under strenght.
With regard to the Russian Army I'm sure you have already considered that the Germans implemented the "Schlieffen" Plan because they believed that they would have time to crush the West whilst the Russians mobilsed this initself should convince that intially Russian reinforcements would be slow in arriving. Remeber that Russia was still primarily agriculturally bassed (less than 33 since the edict of emancipation) and dependent upon getting in the harvest (the very time the Germans struck). As a country it had a very poor infrastructure check Paul Kenndey's "Rise and Fall of Superpowers" for some figures on railways when compared to other more developed nations.Their performance at Tannenberg suggests a slow cumbersome army not used to manonvre. Given a choice I would probably prefer them to be rated as consripts and be unable to build barracks if you decide to get the level of reinforcements. After a few weeks you will have enough using "meatgrinder" tatics to take most cities.
The Russian army is way to strong when compared with the Germans and Austrians. I was able to destroy Germany and Austria by the end of 1914
Should you wish to see my game save let me have your email address and I'll mail the game. That should should you how I destroyed the Central Powers by Late 1914.
In general artillery is far too strong, given a little planning it's possible to have a high speed break thru.
If you would like to look at any of the later battles they demostrate the limited use of artillery for instance the Somme, a six week bombardment firing over 1,500,000 shells had remarkably little affect againest an entrenched foe. That said the German bombardments of the very late war had an impact because of their speed and the troops which they used to attack the entrenchments (which incidentally I rate your description quite highly)
If the game is set for a VP win it ends within 3-4 turns and without it it never ends ( todate Austria, Germany, Bulgaria, Turkey, Holland and Sweden have all been eliminated) but I am still short of the land for a domination victory despite having a population of over a billion.
Again I can provide you a copy of my two game saves to verify these factors should you wish them.
The tech-tree needs work, both over the time it takes to recieve a tech and the starting techs (i.e Britian unable to build Dreadnoughts or Russian Light Artillery)
We can argue the time it takes to recieve a tech, but not who can build what, the UK already had 22 dreadnoughts in service and another 8 under construction surely this should mean that they start with the tech? Likewisde for the Russians the Artillery was their most professional service, techically adept and with a long history (check the Crimea, Napoleonic, seven Years and Great Northern Wars) only the Cavarly (Noble connections) was held in higher regard, even during WWII and afterwards the Artillery was King of the battle field.
As I said in my earlier post I found your work interesting and still look forward to playing the completed work.
Originally posted by Chieftess
Moderator Action: Please read the warning a few posts above.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889