Unit Lineup speculation/wish list

But I’m including the White Russians, who were still in effect Allied.  Moreover, the Allies should have the option of intervening in greater strength; they may see it as a better way of winning the war.
All those valuable tts like Ukraine just falling into CP hands, at the very least force the CP to have to defend those areas.

they may see it as a better way of winning the war.

The only war they were concerned with was the one where Germany occupied north east France and almost took Paris in the spring of 1918. The other war for stopping the Bolsheviks was an ancillary war at best and has no effect on the treaty they signed to end the war in the east.

Bringing in the Bolsheviks in the turn sequence for like 1-2 turns at the end of the game is not really adding anything to a game based on the Great War. Not to mention the Germans and Bolsheviks were not on the same side whatsoever.

So, you’re saying that in November 1917 Russian goes off and fight its own civil war, so we just ignore it?

G&A kept large forces in the east to occupy Ukraine, Belarus etc - what happens to them?

What if the Whites had succeeded in regaining power (they still did hold power in many places) and reopened the eastern front? To ignore the possibility distorts the game because it fundamentally changes the situation in the east. With no threat from a White revival, the CP has no need to garrison the east at all.

The Bolsheviks were de facto German allies, as they would be again in 1939-41. They would be limited to operating within Russian proper, and probably couldn’t produce new units other than inf & cav (though still using anything they got in the revolution.)
Whites can still be supplied by the Allies, and attack the CP as well as the Bolshies.

It a little like the Chinese in WWII: a Red faction supplied by the USSR, a Nationalist faction allied to the USA, and a national government controlled by Japan. Although nominally allied to the powers fighting the wider world war, they continued to fight each other for control of China. A war within a war, but not an entirely separate one.

So, you’re saying that in November 1917 Russian goes off and fight its own civil war, so we just ignore it?

The Russians were in control of affairs relating to the fighting against Germany until the time they folded and effectively surrendered. The Bolsheviks concluded peace with Germany and Russia had no further part of the Great War.

You only need rules dealing with when Russia falls, and that is hastened by German occupation of key areas. The Bolsheviks didn’t want any part of the war, they just wanted to be out of international wars and maintain control of the government.

To include them as a allied faction fighting with the central powers is a complete misguided connection; the Russian player is either fighting Germany or not. Once they are not they are out of the game to fight their own internal divisions. The analogy regarding China is only partially plausible. IN China’s case, both factions fought the Japanese. The Bolsheviks had no interest in fighting Germany and being part of that war. I don’t know of any historian who links the Great War with the Russian Civil War. They are separate conflicts and to bring them into the Great War is just adding stuff to have “more pieces to play with for craps and giggles” type of thing.

why wouldn’t Germany barge in?

Because France and England were considered the main enemy. Germany didn’t want a two front war and to rationalize its possible existence, the Schlieffen Plan was designed to knock out France and BEF in 6 weeks based on exact rail timetables and troop movements on major roads to take Paris, and then follow with a leisurely push against the Czar whom they considered would not mobilize for war so soon. Germany facing the coming of ever increasing replacements from America, knew the eastern campaign had to be wrapped up and the bulk of these forces transferred to the western front before the combined allied armies would prove too strong.

If Germany took Paris and also knocked UK out of the war, they would have moved eventually after the Bolsheviks but certainly not before the main enemy was defeated.

My guess for art, tanks and fighters

Artillery
Attack: 2
Defense: 3
Move:1
Cost: 5
Note: no support ability

Tanks
Attack: 4
Defense: 1
Move: 1
Cost: 8

Fighters
Attack: 2
Defense: 2
Move: 3
Cost: 8

I wish zeppelins and destroyers were included. Maybe they will be in a 2nd edition or pacific expansion. Also why no chemical or biological weapons? :cry:, not PC maybe
I hope Larry makes a Pacific map with Russo-Japanese and Spanish-American War scenarios. I remember reading France and Germany would have sided with Russia in the Russo-Japanese War had they not thought the UK and US would have sided with Japan. Who knows if that is true, but it would make for an interesting game US, UK, Japan vs France, Germany, Russia. Kinda like a modern version of Athens vs Sparta!

You refer to “The Russians” as thought he Bolsheviks simply staged a coup and took over the whole of the Russian Empire.

In fact “Whites” still held large areas of the south and Siberia, and the Allies wanted to help them keep the war going.

The Bolsheviks did want to get out of the war, but not at any price. Hence the treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

The simplest way to represent this is that the Bolsheviks evacuate the areas ceded to German influence (essentially those areas which are now independent of Russia), and the Germans and their Allies are free to move into them. In effect the partition of 1939 is pre-created, though the line is father east.

But non-Bolsheviks had no part of the treaty, and should be free to continue attacking the CP and Bolsheviks at will. The Allies should have the choice of supporting the Whites as much or as little as they wish. Full support might aim at restoring Imperial Russian authority by capturing/liberating Petrograd and Moscow and so restoring Russia as a full Allied partner; partial support simply at threatening German gains in Ukraine etc; no support would accept the Revolution as a fait accompli, and concentrate on the battle in the west.

So… a full set of “Red” pieces, representing revolutionaries in any country that breaks down according to certain criteria. Whatever conditions apply to Russian order collapsing should apply to all the beligerent powers. Revolts might occur in individual tts, if the local population is largely of a different nationality, placing “Blacks” (nationalist) factions in power. Almost all countries had to face rebellions of some kind.

In Russia, then, we might end up with Red Bolsheviks controlling Moscow and central Russia; Germans and Austrians occupying the Baltic States and Poland; Black Nationalists in power in the Ukraine; White Russians in the south and Siberia; and forces from 5 Allied powers occupying coastal provinces in the North. All very interesting, and totally historical.

If the Central Powers crack first, there could be a German Soviet government in Bavaria (reds); an independent Poland carved out of provinces from 3 falling empires(blacks); French troops occupying the Rhineland; and the emergence of extreme nationalist Germans fighting the reds on the streets. Again, not entirely unhistorical.
But this then becomes a little complicated; who controls the Bavarian communists?

All we need to accomplish this is new sets of “Red” and “Black” units; the Whites will be the original Russian Imperial units.

@Imperious:

So, you’re saying that in November 1917 Russian goes off and fight its own civil war, so we just ignore it?

The Russians were in control of affairs relating to the fighting against Germany until the time they folded and effectively surrendered. The Bolsheviks concluded peace with Germany and Russia had no further part of the Great War.

You only need rules dealing with when Russia falls, and that is hastened by German occupation of key areas. The Bolsheviks didn’t want any part of the war, they just wanted to be out of international wars and maintain control of the government.

To include them as a allied faction fighting with the central powers is a complete misguided connection; the Russian player is either fighting Germany or not. Once they are not they are out of the game to fight their own internal divisions. The analogy regarding China is only partially plausible. IN China’s case, both factions fought the Japanese. The Bolsheviks had no interest in fighting Germany and being part of that war. I don’t know of any historian who links the Great War with the Russian Civil War. They are separate conflicts and to bring them into the Great War is just adding stuff to have “more pieces to play with for craps and giggles” type of thing.

Regarding Stormtroopers;

I don’t like the suggestion of being able to “buy” elite infantry, rather that they are promoted with battle experience.

That is;

Whenever you win a battle as the attacker in which basic infantry survive, those infantry can be promoted to Elite/Veteran/Storm-Trooper units at the cost of 1 IPC per unit (modern equipment). You can never promote more infantry than the number of enemy units eliminated in the battle.

I would like to see Tech make an actually usefull apperance. Stuff like Strom Trooper tactics, creeping barrages and what not to make your units more effective.

Regarding Stormtroopers;

I don’t like the suggestion of being able to “buy” elite infantry, rather that they are promoted with battle experience.

Stosstrupen were extensively trained troops in infiltration tactics. It is not the case that soldiers that “won battles” would be promoted. It was not the SS. The rules do allow Germany to promote one infantry per turn into Stormtroopers, any more than that they need to buy.

“Stormtroopers in 1918
With the withdrawal of Russia, Germany moved troops from the Eastern Front to reinforce the Western Front. This allowed them to take units out of the line for retraining as storm troopers.”

Potential tech units:

3 types of fighter as discussed

Bomber

Flying Boat

Aircraft Carrier

Tank

AA Gun

Armoured Train

Germany presumably starts with Zeppelins, but can they do SBR immediately? Airships possibly a tech for other powers

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wwi+in+colour&oq=wwi+in+colour&gs_l=youtube.3..0l3.2865.5521.0.5756.13.9.0.4.4.0.291.777.8j0j1.9.0…0.0...1ac.1.8fubkHP2lbw

3 types of fighter as discussed

Bomber

Flying Boat–-seaplane

Aircraft Carrier— no such thing, it was sea plane carrier, and the planes were only for forward observation and spotting for warships

Tank

AA Gun—no such thing, not developed to the extent where they can be represented.

Armoured Train—well very marginal, this is nothing but trains with guns—certainly not a major combat unit

Germany presumably starts with Zeppelins, but can they do SBR immediately? Airships possibly a tech for other powers—yes that was the entire intention from the start–terrorize the population and have capacity for good load.

Larry said no tech

Oh that game… well yes

He hasn’t seen this, then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZT6TCcIGGWg

@Yavid:

Larry said no tech

I have those DVD’s

Haven’t seen parts 7 & 8 before; don’t think they were broadcast.

HMS Ark Royal was the first ship in history designed and built as a seaplane carrier.
HMS Anne was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy used during World War I.
HMS Argus was a British aircraft carrier that served in the Royal Navy from 1918 to 1944 Only had her start in Sept 1918, war was over in two months so no.
HMS Ben-my-Chree (Manx: “Girl of My Heart”) was a packet steamer and a Royal Navy seaplane carrier of the First World War.
HMS Campania was a seaplane tender
HMS Empress was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Engadine was a seaplane tender
Furious was recommissioned on 15 March 1918, and her embarked aircraft were used on anti-Zeppelin patrols in the North Sea after May. In July 1918, she flew off seven Sopwith Camels which participated in the Tondern raid, attacking the Zeppelin sheds there with moderate success.
HMS Hermes was a seaplane tender
TSS Manxman was a seaplane tender
HMS Nairana was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Pegasus was an aircraft carrier/seaplane carrier bought by the Royal Navy in 1917 ( no missions against other ships was ever flown)
HMS Raven II was a seaplane carrier of the Royal Navy
HMS Riviera was requisitioned by the Admiralty on 11 August 1914 and converted by Chatham Dockyard to carry and operate four seaplanes.
HMS Slinger was an experimental catapult ship ( another seaplane tender)
HMS Vindex was a Royal Navy seaplane carrier

So no “Aircraft Carriers in world war one”

I am very disturbed by the fact that tanks will be available from turn 1. The whole no tech thing requires it be that way but this is a massive miscarriage of history to a rather revolting degree. Depending on how the initial set-up is and what the starting economies are, we are facing a scenario where some of the better off nations, like Germany and Britain maybe, will not need to buy anything else but tanks from the word go. If there starting forces are large enough they might only need to buy tanks to augment their existing forces. Given that Germany only produced around 20 tanks during the war, having any by the end of turn one would be ridiculous.

Dose this not bother anyone else?