mdsmall
Posts: 461
Joined: 4/28/2020
From: Vancouver, BC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BillRunacre
Hi all
The reason I didn't make any further changes that would be detrimental to the Central Powers in the recent patches was because a large number of changes were made to reduce or even eliminate the effectiveness of some CP strategies, and I wanted to wait and see how this affected the overall game balance before introducing any more.
So cutting off Poland and going all out in the Balkans are no longer nearly as effective as they were. The big question is then, where does that leave us? Is the game still easier to win in multiplayer for the CP? If so, by how much?
I can think of some easy ideas to make an all out Russia first strategy slightly harder, but really want a better understanding of the bigger picture before embarking on too many, because I don't want to then find that we've effectively made the game too hard for the CP to win.
Bill
Hi Bill - you have opened up a much bigger question with your comment quoted above (one that might be usefully moved to its own thread). I have only played one full PBEM game since the most recent patch was introduced (using my Balkans Variations mod, which is built on the 1.05 version of the game). In that game I was playing the Central Powers and I used a Russia First strategy.
The adjustments that you made in the last two patches made a real difference in my opening moves. For example, I did not try assaulting Cetinje in the first two turns via the Montenegro Gambit, since by making Cetinje a fortified town with a Montenegrin detachment already entrenched, it required more concentrated fire-power to capture than I could muster until I achieved Artillery Weapons One in mid-1915. I also did not try the assault-Grodno opening - pioneered very effectively by Bavre - since upgrading the ground cover and strength of the Russian detachment that starts in Grodno made it very challenging to capture on the first turn. Also, by adding alternate mobilization points for the Russian corps, you prevented me as Germany from pre-empting Russia's ability to mobilize. All these changes were pluses for game balance.
I added two more tweaks to this mod to help the Entente. First, I played with a house rule as described above, to prevent either side from selling chits on the first turn (with the small offset of giving some additional MPPs to start to Germany, A-H and Russia). Second, I eliminated the effect of a surrender by minor or major powers on land and sea units morale - for the reasons I described in past threads.
Even with all of these adjustments - yours and mine - I did not find the game was weighted against the CP. I was able to move most of my armies to Poland on turns 2 and 3 and won significant early victories there against Russia in 1914. The Serbian front was much slower going given that I only used AH units to attack there. But in the end, I won the game by September 1917. And that was against a very experienced opponent.
So my two cents worth are that the vanilla game as it presently stands is certainly not unbalanced against the Central Powers and that there is some scope for further adjustments to help the Entente, in particular in 1914. I think preventing the sale of tech chits on turn one (only) would certainly curb most of the gambit openings, while still leaving a Russia first opening very viable for the Central Powers. I favour dialling back the morale swing when minors surrender, especially against other powers on the same side that are not the controlling power for the minor.
I look forward to hearing other players views!
Michael
|
Printable Version
Suggestion: An easy way to prevent most game breaking '... - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread