Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command: World War I



Message

stockwellpete -> Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/7/2020 10:32:29 AM)

It is something that I have been wondering about. Were there any other historical events (with "Yes" and "No" options) that were considered for the game, but did not make it into the release version? Why were they excluded?

The only event I can think of at the moment that is included, but could do with a bit more "oomph" is Gallipoli 1915. What are the negatives about making this a higher profile event than it currently is?



mdsmall -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/7/2020 4:59:37 PM)

I can't think of more military/political decision events to add that have not been already included in the game. But there is lots of scope to add to the historical information notes at the end of each turn that give the game so much of its historical flavour. Here are a few ideas:

- The opening of the 1914 campaign could begin with a brief montage of photos covering the events that led to the war, starting with the assassination in Sarajevo through the various ultimatums and then the declarations of war;

- It would be important to record the first use of poison gas by the Germans and then subsequently by the Allies. Fritz Haber deserves a mention.

- It would be fun to have a few information notes to remind players that history did not stop in Russia after the Bolsheviks signed the Treat of Brest-Litovsk. I would be fascinated to read a bit more about events following the creation of the various breakaway republics in the East in 1918. Hello Nestor Makhno!

- In terms of scientific events, Shackleton's Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition deserves a mention. It left Plymouth on August 8, 1914 and news of its fate only reached Europe when Shackleton reached the Falklands on June 2, 1916. It was completely obscured by the war, but has become justly famous in modern times.

- This list is almost infinitely expandable. The developers might offer a toggle in the game settings for players who want to turn these kinds of notifications off. But I enjoy them and am always surprised when a new one that I have not seen before appears.

Michael





MVP7 -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/7/2020 6:33:28 PM)

One event I miss would be picking between the Gallipoli landing and the competing Alexandretta landing plan. The biggest problem with that choice would be that landing at Gallipoli is a terrible idea, while taking the lightly defended Alexadretta would make it fairly easy to cut the Ottoman railroad to the south. With Alexandretta being an option, there would be even less reason to attempt Gallipoli than there currently is.

Taking Alexandretta without an event is pretty tricky as there are very few marine units (and landing ships) available; it does not have a port; there's usually an Ottoman detachment in the town; and holding Alexandretta itself doesn't effect the supply of Ottoman forces in the south like it would have in reality. Ottomans also rapidly respond to any attempts against the railway due to how operating works in the game.

Here are couple articles on the Alexandretta landing plan.
http://mideasti.blogspot.com/2014/12/war-plans-and-strategies-1914.html
http://mideasti.blogspot.com/2015/01/january-1915-alexandretta-landing-idea.html



BillRunacre -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/8/2020 1:27:23 PM)

Shackleton nearly made it in there, I think I just ran out of time.

As to having a bigger event for something like Gallipoli, I have thought about it but we can't really auto-generate a landing on an enemy held coastline. Not to say that we couldn't in theory script something, but it would be rather complicated and I've not thought of a way in which it could be done satisfyingly to both parties work in game.

That said, if your opponent doesn't fear a landing then surprising them with one later in the game might be a good idea. In force of course, it's not something that can be done half-heartedly, but that in itself is risky as it requires surprise and a concentration of force that could leave other fronts a bit weak.



mdsmall -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/8/2020 1:56:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

The only event I can think of at the moment that is included, but could do with a bit more "oomph" is Gallipoli 1915. What are the negatives about making this a higher profile event than it currently is?



Perhaps a little bit of music and sound could pop up if the Entente player lands in Gallipoli, as happens when the Allies in War in Europe first carry out an amphibious invasion of occupied Europe (you hear Eisenhower's voice announcing D-day). I doubt if there is a sound recording of Churchill from 1915 announcing this brilliant move, but perhaps the devs could add a little bit of sound-track from the Peter Weir movie "Gallipoli'!



stockwellpete -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/10/2020 8:47:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

As to having a bigger event for something like Gallipoli, I have thought about it but we can't really auto-generate a landing on an enemy held coastline. Not to say that we couldn't in theory script something, but it would be rather complicated and I've not thought of a way in which it could be done satisfyingly to both parties work in game.

That said, if your opponent doesn't fear a landing then surprising them with one later in the game might be a good idea. In force of course, it's not something that can be done half-heartedly, but that in itself is risky as it requires surprise and a concentration of force that could leave other fronts a bit weak.


I was wondering whether it could be added as one of those "Yes" or "No" options (like when the A-H have the choice to deploy armies against Russia in Galicia or against Serbia). There would a certain cost of MPP's over a number of turns and then maybe there would need to be an Entente naval presence in certain hexes to fire the event sometime in 1915. You would have to decide how many Corps/detachments would land there initially and whether there might be a reinforcement event and then a withdrawal (evacuation) event. At the moment it is relatively safe (against the AI anyway) to transfer some Corps and the Sanders HQ unit to the Caucasus front in 1914 because you know Gallipoli is going to be a bit of a damp squib. Basically just one Corps unit and a couple of detachments can cover any amphibious landing at the moment. In reality the area around the Dardanelles should be heavily defended, not least because Turkey had lost a lot of territory in the Balkans just prior to 1914 and the Russians had a long term aim of taking Constantinople.

In my games against the AI now I keep the Sanders HQ and at least 2 Corps and 2 Detachments in the west throughout the game as I think this is more historically realistic. They can also be useful when Greece joins the entente in 1915.



BillRunacre -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/10/2020 10:35:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stockwellpete

I was wondering whether it could be added as one of those "Yes" or "No" options (like when the A-H have the choice to deploy armies against Russia in Galicia or against Serbia). There would a certain cost of MPP's over a number of turns and then maybe there would need to be an Entente naval presence in certain hexes to fire the event sometime in 1915. You would have to decide how many Corps/detachments would land there initially and whether there might be a reinforcement event and then a withdrawal (evacuation) event.


It would be technically feasible to script, not a landing as such but the moving of Entente units from somewhere else on the map to hexes around Gallipoli.

However, it would be rather complicated to add because really it requires not just for these units to be deployed by script somewhere else on the map, but also for checks for a) Entente naval forces being present in the vicinity of the landing b) no Central Powers naval units being present that could have prevented such a landing c) unguarded hexes where the units can be "landed".

Though in typing the above, I think the units would arrive at their destination with no supply, as it would not be an amphibious landing as such, but instead (in game terms) they would have been moved using a LOOP script.

As to an evacuation, that could be scripted too, but again it would require checks for the presence of Entente and absence of Central Powers' naval units in the vicinity.



stockwellpete -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/10/2020 11:46:45 AM)

Would you consider releasing the idea as a small mod to see what we can make of it at some point? Easy for me to say, of course, as I have no idea how much work might be involved.



BillRunacre -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/11/2020 12:12:04 PM)

It would involve a fair amount of work, but if someone wants to mod the idea and see how it works then yes, why not. I have no problem with that at all. [:)]

One other issue is where the forces involved would come from. The current Decision deploys a British Marine unit, and the French can send one of their own, but it would presumably require several more units and a British HQ.

It would be fitting for the ANZACs to be involved, but I'm not sure they would suffice, and if more units are provided to the Entente for the landing then either they need to pay a significant MPP price for them, or there is a risk of giving them too much.



Khancotlette -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/13/2020 9:12:47 AM)

I think the game still needs a vast improvement in victory/surrender events. Current Austro-Hungarian ones, for example, are pretty weird. For example, if Imperial Russia is still alive and fighting, it doesn't get Galicia (Western Ukraine), and even more, independent Poland appears (while most of Poland is still under Russian control, so we have independent Poland with minority of Polish territories and Russian Poland with majority of it. That's really weird) and takes Galicia for its own, while it was the main Russian territorial claim in WW1. Independent states like Hungary and Czechoslovakia could be okay, but I've never seen a proper creation of Yugoslavia in my single or multiplayer games. Even more, when Austria-Hungary surrenders, all Italian or Serbian units on Austrian soil can't reach Germany anymore, or even worse, they could be stuck forever if they reach German soil and Austria capitulates, so they become landlocked, and more. Treaty of Brest-Litovsk seems to be oversimplified, but it works at least, while Austrian surrender events definitely need to be improved, I think. Same with the Ottomans, for example, they don't cede Greater Armenia to Russians, nobody gets the Straits and so on. I think that's really important for a plausible historical gameplay.



Chernobyl -> RE: Which historical events 1914-18 missed inclusion in this game and why? (12/14/2020 3:04:54 AM)

I don't think there is any decision whether to implement convoys or not.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.21875