RE: MULTIPLAYER (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Commander - The Great War



Message


operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (4/27/2014 5:53:13 PM)

Kirk, (where are you)[8D]

The password function for MP challenges, does not work. Twice have chosen to be a host, twice typed in a password (to be sent by pm or email) to be used by a future designated opponent to enter into a match, however it did not secure those challenges from others to take up the challenge. It's not a major problem, but might send a wrong signal to a unsuspecting challenger, who thinks they are selecting an open match.

(still here), Bob[:)]




kirk23 -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (4/28/2014 2:19:53 PM)

I'm here and I come with a gift to the forum,see my new thread.[:D]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (4/28/2014 2:55:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

I'm here and I come with a gift to the forum,see my new thread.[:D]

Kirk, not going to spoil your new thread by writing over it. Usually I like gifts that are wrapped in a new patch, so I can see what I am getting....(hint-hint)....

Bob[:D]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/1/2014 6:15:11 PM)

Have come to the conclusion in MP: That if your Entente opponent has bombers before or near the end of 1914; "CP is toast"! CP zeppelins, airships, fighters and artillery will get annihilated! The more bombers, the more destruction of these CP machine type units to the point where it is not even worth it to have artillery near the Eastern or Western Fronts. CP fighters are not even capable of interception or interdiction till much later in 1915, even then with class 2 fighters, they in turn will be targeted by a smart Entente Player for destruction, until moved out of enemy LOS. Occasionally CP air can fight back if it has a LOS, However, it does not take an ingenious Entente player long to neutralize these attacks, for production favors their side. CP will not even get a sniff of bombers well into 1916 to 1917, by which time they are broke or near broke and have more than likely dropped the air labs just to survive and replenish existing units. During this time period, it would be very difficult for CP to come up with the 50PP to buy 1 (ONE) bomber, never mind the cost of upkeep for such a unit. It' not impossible to do, but unlikely. Of course in the meantime, Entente has dominance of the battlefield with air power "for years", and will continue to have it's way for the remainder of the war.

Going to do research on the subject. Especially on who had bombers and when they were developed. In this post I focused on bombers, did not go into bombers working in conjunction with airships (6 hex LOS), a lethal combination, never mind adding fighters to the mix, puts CP at a severe disadvantage.




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/2/2014 3:54:26 PM)

Kirk,

In more than 1 MP match, my opponent appears, or is "more than 30 hexes" from their Capital City (typically in Russia). According to page 58 of the Game Manual about Supply, units more than 30 hexes from their Capital should be at half supply, which happens in SP regularly, but does not appear to be the case in MP. I'm pretty sure that the 30 hex requirement is not ; "As the crow flies". In other words: supply cannot be traced through enemy hexes or across bodies of water (since nobody owns water hexes), only connecting friendly land hexes. I cannot post a SS to show this without exposing unit positions at this time in ongoing match. You stated before, you do not use MP at this time, so if you could pass this inquiry onto someone who does, please do.

The question is: Is the 30 hex Supply rule in effect with MP?

Thanks, Bob




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/2/2014 9:12:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Have come to the conclusion in MP: That if your Entente opponent has bombers before or near the end of 1914; "CP is toast"! CP zeppelins, airships, fighters and artillery will get annihilated! The more bombers, the more destruction of these CP machine type units to the point where it is not even worth it to have artillery near the Eastern or Western Fronts. CP fighters are not even capable of interception or interdiction till much later in 1915, even then with class 2 fighters, they in turn will be targeted by a smart Entente Player for destruction, until moved out of enemy LOS. Occasionally CP air can fight back if it has a LOS, However, it does not take an ingenious Entente player long to neutralize these attacks, for production favors their side. CP will not even get a sniff of bombers well into 1916 to 1917, by which time they are broke or near broke and have more than likely dropped the air labs just to survive and replenish existing units. During this time period, it would be very difficult for CP to come up with the 50PP to buy 1 (ONE) bomber, never mind the cost of upkeep for such a unit. It' not impossible to do, but unlikely. Of course in the meantime, Entente has dominance of the battlefield with air power "for years", and will continue to have it's way for the remainder of the war.

Going to do research on the subject. Especially on who had bombers and when they were developed. In this post I focused on bombers, did not go into bombers working in conjunction with airships (6 hex LOS), a lethal combination, never mind adding fighters to the mix, puts CP at a severe disadvantage.


Open,

Did find this site http://www.firstworldwar.com/airwar/bombers_intro.htm that covers what countries had bombers and at what periods of the war did these countries use them. What I did find interesting: was the early development of bombers in Russia, also to some degree France and Italy, later in the war other countries. So there is truth to the game with the use of bombers in 1914 and 1915. Included in these articles are the size of bomb loads and a number of other stats. It should be pointed out, that anti aircraft defense played a role here too. One of the most numerous units in CTGW is garrisons, which throughout a campaign never attain anti aircraft capabilities for the length of the war (game). This I see as a problem, for they suffer the most from air to ground attacks, as well as other units without anti air defense. CTGW appear to have corps size units, I find it hard to believe that a corps size units would not have anti air defense. Also, combing through this air research was there any evidence of corps size air attacks on ground troops, Yes there were attacks, however, nothing on the scale that CTGW presents. When playing in MP, many times it is brought up as a point of discussion the strength of air units during matches. Give the above site a read and post an opinion if you feel up to it or perhaps a suggestion, we all play the game, so you might as well have some input.

Bob




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/3/2014 1:49:27 AM)

Found this page on Anti air craft guns.... http://www.bulgarianartillery.it/Bulgarian%20Artillery%201/T_Flak/TF_BaK.htm Keep in mind when reading this, that there is no mention of certain ground units, having or not having these anti air guns, except in some locations where the guns were not mobile or independent units, beginning prior and early into the war. CTGW techs do not develop anti air till later in 1915 or 1916, yet units are under air attack for a long period of time, before they can defend themselves. It's question of balance.... When I say a question of balance: I mean that airships, bombers can be built in a 4 to 8 turns, fighters 7 turns, however, techs may not produce anti air for no less than 24 turns to upwards of 48 turns or so (a guess) and that is solely for infantry, all other ground units have to learn is "Duck", or "Moon" the aircraft for the rest of the war.

quote:

Antiaircraft Artillery







Germany was the first country that examined the opportunity of having guns especially designed to combat balloon, dirigibles and planes. In 1906 at the Berlin automobile exhibition Rheinmetall showed a 5cm L/30 pivot gun mounted on a lightly armoured motor car, while Krupp choose a 6.5cm L/35 gun. The tactic suggested was to deploy these vehicles in likely places and, on the appearance of an aircraft, to drive them rapidly to some point of interception, and open fire there.

At that time the War Ministry believed that there were no need for special guns, and in 1907 the German Army tested as anti-aircraft guns the guns then adopted by field and foot artillery : 7.7cm field gun, 10.5cm light field howitzer and 10cm heavy gun. In spite of the lack of interest shown by the Army, studies went on. Between 1908 and 1910 a lot of new guns appeared. Krupp produced a 7.5cm L/35 gun on wheels and a 7.1cm L/30 gun on a motor car, while Rheinmetall a 6.5cm L/35 pivot gun. This time the War Ministry was more interested to, and laid down the rules for the Ballonabwehrkanone (Bak = anti-balloon gun). These demanded the calibre and the ammunition of the 7.7cm L/27 field gun, and devices for a rapid change in azimuth and elevation. The gun had to be transported by a field carriage or mounted on a motor car with a pivot. Between 1911 and 1914 both Krupp and Rheinmetall produced some different models of Bak.



It was only from 1910 to 1914 that the military leaders of the other major European countries began to examine the prospect of anti-aircraft weapons. In Great Britain Vickers produced a 3-pdr quick-firing gun mounted on a Daimler car chassis, while in France a high-angle mounting was developed to place the 75mm Mle 1897 field gun on the back of a De Dion Bouton car chassis. But at the beginning of the World War 1 only Germany could field a little number of anti-air guns.



In August 1914 Germany had available 6 motor Bak with a 77mm L/27, 2 wheeled 77mm L/27 with pivots, and 10 mixed older models of experimental guns dating back to 1910-1914. The horse drawn Bak were emplaced near bridges over the river Rhein at Dusseldorf and Mannheim, at the Zeppelin wharf at Friedrichshafen, and at the dirigible hangar at Metz. The six motorized Bak went to the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th (two) and 8th Army. They were emplaced to protect areas and objects important for mobilization. The development of anti-aircraft artillery in German Army was very quick.



In October 1914 there were 9 motorized and 27 horse-drawn Bak.



In January 1915, thanks to a great use of captured guns, there were 97 Bak, mostly armed with Belgian, French and Russian field guns transformed into anti-aircraft gun.



When World War 1 ended German Army had 2576 Flak (Fliegerabwehrkanone = anti-aircraft gun, from 31th May 1916 the new name of Bak).

There were :

- 116 heavy motorised batteries

- 39 light motorised batteries

- 168 horse-drawn batteries,

- 166 fixed batteries,

- 3 railway batteries,

- 183 motorised sections;

- 49 horse-drawn sections;

- 173 fixed sections;

- 80 individual motorised veihicles.



In September 1918 the German Army had in Macedonia :

- bespannte FlakBt. 523 : horse-drawn Flak battery with 7,62cm RäderFlak L/30 (russ. 00);

- bespannte FlakBt. 549, 550, 556 : horse-drawn Flak batteries with 7,62cm RäderFlak L/30 (russ. 02) ;

- bespannte Flakzug 97 (Saxon) : horse-drawn Flak section with 7,62 Ortsfeste-Flak;

- bespannte Flakzug 165 : horse-drawn Flak section with 7,7cm l.F.K. L/35 (franz.);

- bespannte bayer. Flakzug 119 : horse-drawn Bavarian Flak section with 7,62 Ortsfeste-Flak;

- bespannte bayer. Flakzug 148 : horse-drawn Bavarian Flak section with 7,7cm L.F.K. L/35 (franz.);

- 9cm FlakBt. 338 (9cm improvised Flak Battery - Saxon);

- KraftwagenFlak 38, 85 (Flak on motor vehicles).

These units were assigned to the Flak Command of Army Group Scholtz (Kommandeur der Flak der Heeresgruppe Scholtz). There were also two Flak officers, one for German 11th Army and one for Bulgarian 1st and 2nd Army).







operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/3/2014 5:22:33 PM)

It should not be ignored that ground troops used anti air machine guns, such as the Brittish one pictured below, thought to be the weapon that shot down the "Red Baron". Any corps size units, more than likely would of had weapons of this style.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7DFB09BB6BC44666BB7DD35029AAD9A6.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/3/2014 6:37:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

It should not be ignored that ground troops used anti air machine guns, such as the Brittish one pictured below, thought to be the weapon that shot down the "Red Baron". Any corps size units, more than likely would of had weapons of this style.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7DFB09BB6BC44666BB7DD35029AAD9A6.jpg[/image]


World War 1 Maxim Pom Pom anti air craft gun.





[image]local://upfiles/43885/2F42203D36044704B94C8FCE0A8D2416.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/3/2014 11:03:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: operating


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

It should not be ignored that ground troops used anti air machine guns, such as the Brittish one pictured below, thought to be the weapon that shot down the "Red Baron". Any corps size units, more than likely would of had weapons of this style.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7DFB09BB6BC44666BB7DD35029AAD9A6.jpg[/image]


World War 1 Maxim Pom Pom anti air craft gun.





[image]local://upfiles/43885/2F42203D36044704B94C8FCE0A8D2416.jpg[/image]


German WW I Pom Pom, take note: these guns were in use prior to WW 1.




[image]local://upfiles/43885/B3F5C991525A4821993FF8097ABE1AD1.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 3:16:43 PM)

Below is an example (poor generalship) about the anti air dilemma. It's turn 31, CP has no air defense tech, just getting pounded by at least 15 Entente air units on the Western Front, a minimum of 5 or more Russian air units in the East, a total of at least 20 enemy air units punishing my CP, who has little to show to defend against this onslaught. My infantry tech has had just 1 lab since the beginning, even if I had 2 or more labs, there still is only one focus in this tech. Granted, my game could have been better, however my opponent has out classed my strategy, Kudos to him. The problem is: A Balance between Air power and Anti air defense, it's not even close to matching up.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7C2235EEF389409FA9FB1FB0D9BF270B.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 3:20:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Below is an example (poor generalship) about the anti air dilemma. It's turn 31, CP has no air defense tech, just getting pounded by at least 15 Entente air units on the Western Front, a minimum of 5 or more Russian air units in the East, a total of at least 20 enemy air units punishing my CP, who has little to show to defend against this onslaught. My infantry tech has had just 1 lab since the beginning, even if I had 2 or more labs, there still is only one focus in this tech. Granted, my game could have been better, however my opponent has out classed my strategy, Kudos to him. The problem is: A Balance between Air power and Anti air defense, it's not even close to matching up.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7C2235EEF389409FA9FB1FB0D9BF270B.jpg[/image]

In game chat.

Can count # of air strikes during Replay, 2 of which are from the Suez area.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/6A6FA998BB13474A96CEEA21DE750A90.jpg[/image]




Orm -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 3:49:39 PM)

There are some ways for CP to mitigate the effects of the ridiculously strong effects of air superiority. But, with that said, it doesn't really matter since the CP are so outgunned anyway that defeat is almost certain if the CP have not had a much greater success compared to history during the first year.

At the moment air power and shore bombardment cost to little ammunition to use and has to great power. Also that they can bombard at will is, in my humble opinion wrong. Artillery, for example, should be able to hurt ships in a coastal hex. The art should even be able to hurt ships in enemy ports.




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 4:31:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

There are some ways for CP to mitigate the effects of the ridiculously strong effects of air superiority. But, with that said, it doesn't really matter since the CP are so outgunned anyway that defeat is almost certain if the CP have not had a much greater success compared to history during the first year.

At the moment air power and shore bombardment cost to little ammunition to use and has to great power. Also that they can bombard at will is, in my humble opinion wrong. Artillery, for example, should be able to hurt ships in a coastal hex. The art should even be able to hurt ships in enemy ports.


AHhhh! exactly my point about air superiority! In the above site http://www.firstworldwar.com/airwar/bombers_intro.htm different countries had various size payload (weight) of bombs, fighter ammunitions and such. Let me hear more about "mitigating air effects"....

Yes, in 1.30 artillery could damage (step loss) a BB anywhere, now even if this same ship is in "your" green dot hex, your results more than likely will cause a drop in BB efficiency (waste of ammo) , tried it recently with a class 3 German gun that had 8 steps. With cost of increasing ammo from a 9 to a 10 costing 80 PP, is purely out of reach of Germany, not to say it is impossible, but unlikely in MP.

Yes, have had CP MP matches with great early successes, but the only way to keep things going is for Bulgaria to enter and save the day. A current match I am in, Bulgaria is 8 to 10 turns from entering, but just went RED.




Orm -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 4:43:05 PM)

-Set researching "air defence" as first priority from turn one.
-CP can counter air strike. Build some zeppelins and bombard any air unit you see. If you see no air unit then you can harass their art or land units instead. Making him see the same fun of air power as you do.
-Try to avoid garrisons as front units as they have no air protection.
-If opponent focus on air power then he has less land units so if you can make the war mobile then that might cause trouble for him.

----

Would you be interested in a MP game or two?




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 5:11:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

-Set researching "air defence" as first priority from turn one.
-CP can counter air strike. Build some zeppelins and bombard any air unit you see. If you see no air unit then you can harass their art or land units instead. Making him see the same fun of air power as you do.
-Try to avoid garrisons as front units as they have no air protection.
-If opponent focus on air power then he has less land units so if you can make the war mobile then that might cause trouble for him.

----

Would you be interested in a MP game or two?


Orm,

Yes, I would be interested, passwords do not seem to be working, you pick a side, I will pick up the challenge. Down to the bitter end! My biggest problem is: I have 5 matches that are in the CTD state, if they get fixed in the interim, I feel obliged to finish them, as you know this is time consuming. Like you, I have other matches on the MP list, where the opponent feints at the sight of blood. [:(] The work ethic is lacking, everything is supposed to come easy style of play. But, I tell ya, there are some tough opponents out there, that are a lot better than me.

I'll keep a lookout, Bob




Orm -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 5:17:33 PM)

I'll start one game of each side at once. You can pick the one you prefer or both. Game on. [:)]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 5:42:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

I'll start one game of each side at once. You can pick the one you prefer or both. Game on. [:)]

I'll pick Norway![:D]




Orm -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 6:00:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

I'll start one game of each side at once. You can pick the one you prefer or both. Game on. [:)]

I'll pick Norway![:D]

Did you actually get to pick any of the games?

They both had a, different, opponent within two minutes.




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/4/2014 6:32:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating


quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm

I'll start one game of each side at once. You can pick the one you prefer or both. Game on. [:)]

I'll pick Norway![:D]

Did you actually get to pick any of the games?

They both had a, different, opponent within two minutes.

No, Did not see the offers, this is why password should be functioning. Plus this is a public conversation and I am glad that others want to jump on board. I'll be around, go ahead with beating each other up. I'll pm ya. If you have deadbeats I'll let you know.[:-]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/7/2014 11:53:21 PM)

What scares me:[:(] Is that I am into a MP match that is it's 86th turn, that anytime now the match could go CTD. As it has the last 7 games, all of which are in Limbo.




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/9/2014 1:38:06 PM)

Finally! Kirk has come up with a common sense improvement, that should become part of the integral playing aspects of the game. I f you want to read more about this: Go to the MOD thread: Tech Improvements. RE: Technology enhancement! ..

Take note: In the picture below, that garrisons are enabled to have "anti aircraft defense", as well as other tech improvements, NOT included in the stock game package, however should be.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/8C0574B160DA4281BF129F83B2DF6246.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/9/2014 2:25:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

What scares me:[:(] Is that I am into a MP match that is it's 86th turn, that anytime now the match could go CTD. As it has the last 7 games, all of which are in Limbo.


2 more matches went CTD, the above is just about the last to survive, in that match: Russia surrendered, 87th or 88th turn, might be able to pull off a Victory, or at the very least a Draw, however, The BIG question is: Will the match survive the game?




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/10/2014 6:58:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Finally! Kirk has come up with a common sense improvement, that should become part of the integral playing aspects of the game. I f you want to read more about this: Go to the MOD thread: Tech Improvements. RE: Technology enhancement! ..

Take note: In the picture below, that garrisons are enabled to have "anti aircraft defense", as well as other tech improvements, NOT included in the stock game package, however should be.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/8C0574B160DA4281BF129F83B2DF6246.jpg[/image]


Kirk is on a roll here, with this latest enhancement: Artillery anti air defense. Again, he has posted this under Mods...


[image]local://upfiles/43885/FE8610B67F6D4AAA859A14A28DBB955A.jpg[/image]




kirk23 -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/10/2014 7:33:17 PM)

Hi Bob,
Lord Zimoa has asked for bug fixes,well I have been working hard for the last 3 days doing just that,these latest Garrison & Artillery game play fixes are included in that,so is the Free Upkeep game play fixes,I can't say anything about your crashes via Multiplayer,because I'm not a software wiz kid,so that is outwith my current ability.[;)]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/10/2014 8:11:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Hi Bob,
Lord Zimoa has asked for bug fixes,well I have been working hard for the last 3 days doing just that,these latest Garrison & Artillery game play fixes are included in that,so is the Free Upkeep game play fixes,I can't say anything about your crashes via Multiplayer,because I'm not a software wiz kid,so that is outwith my current ability.[;)]


Kirk,

The bug fixes, are they assigned to you from the "Fearless Leaders", or are you picking them up from the forums? I'm having a terrible time figuring out how to save MP games with bugs to be forwarded to the Bug Police". Can find SP games, but not MP saves.

Are you saying: that the new enhancements are going into the 1.50 patch?

Thanks, Bob




kirk23 -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/10/2014 8:30:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: operating


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Hi Bob,
Lord Zimoa has asked for bug fixes,well I have been working hard for the last 3 days doing just that,these latest Garrison & Artillery game play fixes are included in that,so is the Free Upkeep game play fixes,I can't say anything about your crashes via Multiplayer,because I'm not a software wiz kid,so that is outwith my current ability.[;)]


Kirk,

The bug fixes, are they assigned to you from the "Fearless Leaders", or are you picking them up from the forums? I'm having a terrible time figuring out how to save MP games with bugs to be forwarded to the Bug Police". Can find SP games, but not MP saves.

Are you saying: that the new enhancements are going into the 1.50 patch?

Thanks, Bob


I'm listening to all the gamer's problems,and I'm trying to fix them.

Yes if the powers that be, want me to fix things,then they need to be in the next patch,that's for sure![;)]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/11/2014 6:23:00 PM)

Open,

There are some open MP challenges for those interested..

Bob



[image]local://upfiles/43885/B8ED9816E1314074AA1DB1916A4DE596.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/16/2014 9:52:21 PM)

3 open challenges in MP, a good time to have Entente!



[image]local://upfiles/43885/B5B2ED7BFE5F4022976C685593E27CC3.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: MULTIPLAYER (5/28/2014 6:15:53 PM)

There is open challenges in MP....


[image]local://upfiles/43885/FD315452152D44E9B48205E3B94608B0.jpg[/image]




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.75