WW1 and civ4

[Shackel]

You seem to have overlooked the part where i mention that the artillery is attacking units at a distance. Obviously if the units are no longer at a distance then that is a different story.

You have seemed to have overlook the entire first paragraph of my post.

 

[mystikmind2005]

Except the minor little point that Austria actually DID defeat Serbia in WWI, and without the distractions from the Russian and Italian fronts would have surely done so much quicker if it was just Austria vs Serbia alone.

But that's neither here nor there... I was just glad to add a bunch of WWI units to Civ4 in my Wolfshanze Mod.

I dunno where you got that information? Well, according to the documentory i just watched, Austrias initial invasion of Serbia was a dismal failure once they met the main serbian army fortified in the high ground.

Only when they had German and Bulgarian (well one of those countries that the name starts with 'B') help later on in the war, did they succeed.

However, I have no reason to insist that documentory is correct and you are wrong, after all, i didn't make the documentory, i just watched it!

 

[mystikmind2005]

You have seemed to have overlook the entire first paragraph of my post.

Ok lets take a close look at your parragraph -

"Really? I know that if artillery is found, it's screwed. You see the artillery, and an army of swordsmen rush in, so you are shooting at swordsmen, more are rushing in. Soon their probably past the point where they would harm their own men, the fight is finished. The game isn't going to be super realistic unless you mod it, or it would be boring, and once you hit the Modern Age, all you can do is bomb people because super realism won't allow your troops to go anywhere."

If i'm overlooking something, i don't see it??

In reality, artillery is typically protected by frontline forces that stop anything getting through, and there is no reason why a well organised advancing army would let its artillery come under attack by melee forces, i mean it is just soooo stupid, so i really don't know what your doing with those swordman running around? I mean in civ4 you can have 20 tanks and 10 infantry in the same tile as your artillery and yet one squad of swordsman manage to magically run past all that and attack the artillery, i mean it is just so rediculous i am stunned anyone would try and defend it!

 

[Shackel]

You overlooked "rushing in". Also, getting 20 tanks and 10 artillery in one army is nearly impossible without cheating.

Anyway, think. Once you get artillery, on most difficulties, they have Riflemen or Modern Infantry. If you want the artillery in the back, put the artillery in last YOURSELF. If you just clump together a bunch of things in real life, have the artillery right behind the front line, then you are going to be OWNED. BADLY.

 

[Artie]

HHMM Artillery is screwed when found? I find that rather interesting, guess that german anti aircraft artillery unit that learned just how effective the venerable 88 was against armor might need you to explain why they were screwed. Honestly though that is generally the truth.

 

[Artie]

Ah a documentary.. You do understand that many times the truth is colored by the bias of the producer of such documentary. Thus Mr Moore's documentaries are generally anything but.

I think the one use of artillery I most enjoyed learning about was how the Russians used it against the German Blitzkreig. There are many things about CIV that can't be as realistic as we may want.

 

[Wolfshanze]

I dunno where you got that information? Well, according to the documentory i just watched, Austrias initial invasion of Serbia was a dismal failure once they met the main serbian army fortified in the high ground.

Only when they had German and Bulgarian (well one of those countries that the name starts with 'B') help later on in the war, did they succeed.

However, I have no reason to insist that documentory is correct and you are wrong, after all, i didn't make the documentory, i just watched it!

Okay... I don't know if I saw the 1-hour television special you saw, but I do have a Major in History that took me several years of college to obtain, plus a backlog of over 30 years of reading history privately... I might know one or two things about the first World War compared to what you learned in an hour or two of the boob-tube... Obviously you seem to (wrongly) think the following:

1) Serbia beat Austria's initial invasion in a vacuum outside all outside interference. The fact Austria was also at war with Russia had no impact what-so-ever on Austria's ability to bring war to Serbia.

2) Serbia brushed-off Austria's assault like it was nothing, taking little to no casualties.

3) You assume Serbia could only be defeated when Austria gained outside support from tiny Bulgaria, but you do not assume the opposite, that Serbia without Russia's 3,115,000 men in the front lines when war was declared on Austria and shared a common border with them did not help Serbia. Austria diverted huge resources to counter the Russians, but that doesn't matter, I suppose.

In fact the Serbian Army was decimated towards the end of the war, falling from about 420,000 at its peak to about 100,000 at the moment of liberation (after it was conquered). The Kingdom of Serbia lost 725,000 inhabitants during the war (both army and civilian losses), which represented over 17% of its overall population.

You had stated in your initial hypothesis based on a single documentary that Serbia alone (population 4.7 million), in a vacuum could defeat the Austro-Hungarian Empire (57 million) without either nation having outside influence. I state, with a lot of history to back me up, that's a very preposterous assumption.