I don't understand why the game has to automatically end in January 1919. Seems really stupid to me. Can you extend another year and a bit, to say, November 1920? I would also like to see a scenario for the Russian Civil War, and also the possibility of Austria bribing Italy and Romania with territo...

Beligium would mostly have been annexed by Germany, with maybe the French speaking parts as an autonomous state. Poland would have been split with Austria-Hungary, with the latter taking most of it. I'm currently playing as the CP in a game stating in 1914. Currently I'm in January 1917 and coping w...

This issue may be dead, but further reading, on German plans for the East, shows that autonomous States were probably not part of the plan. The 'productive empire' was to be achieved by moving German settlers into the Eastern territories, the plan (Generalplan Ost) recognised that this initial sett...

Casualties also cause morale to drop, so if the Central Powers are inflicting heavy casualties on the Russians, this contributes to morale plummeting. What it actually is though is shrouded in FOW, so you just have to keep battering the Russians. EDIT: Grammar. The trouble is that to 'batter' the R...

This seems plainly stupid to me. Why is American entry automatic and the Russian revolution only dependent on a hypothetical calculation of national morale? It doesn't seem right to me. The entire game is weighted excessively against the central powers - another example is the exaggerated strength o...

Umeu wrote:there is a kill/casualties list per nation in the game. you have to go to management iirc.

There is, but it's meaningless. What would much more interesting would actual numbers, not meaningless strength points. What the hell is a strength point? It has no military or historical definition.

Is it at all influenceable? Diplomacy can only be influenced by your actions on the field. Some examples: Sink too many British and French convoys and the American's will join the Entente faster. Be the first nation to use the gas technology, and all nations which are considering joining your enemi...

I like the idea of not recieving PPs from captured cities unless you have a garrison. It would be a perfect job for understrength garrison units. Given that a garrison costs 10 PPs this is an expensive way to hold a territory. I don't see the point. Once the Brest-Litovsk treaty was signed there wa...

Playing as the CP, I had Russia surrender. I either transferred or disbanded all of my eastern units. I had advanced and taken St. Petersburg and Rostov. That's a huge expanse of territory, inhabited by people of several nationalities, and not a single soldier keeping an eye on them. No body is in ...

The only way to raise enough PPs is to sell research labs - I don't see any other way. Keep a minimum of labs, only aiming at areas essential to winning the war. As the Central Powers I ignored naval and air research as it's too expensive - it helped me to perform much better as I was able to buy mo...

Well, at least noone is complaining that the AI is too easy! :twisted: I can never win in this game except in 1918. The biggest obstacle is Russia, because in the 1918 I won a minor victory as the Central Powers, thumping Italy to death and nearly getting to Paris. I also wasted the Americans like s...

I've only done a couple of hours of play - I'm sure (and hope) I'll improve as I learn more.

I still don't like the idea of a post WW2 game, especially when there are interesting periods before WW1.

After a few hours of playing I can't help feeling that the game is biased in favour of the allies. The Serbians seem much too strong and the Russians already have a huge army in 1914 - leaving just two corps in East Prussia would lead to the Russians arriving in Berlin before Christmas 1914. Other t...

We normally try to release for US/Canada(Matrix) and Europe(Slitherine) markets at the same time, so when the East Coast is well awake, usually that is late afternoon for us so around 17.00h GMT. Could be a bit sooner or later, depending on the agenda. Surely you mean the West Coast? 17:00 GMT is 1...

We are considering adding an alternative history option with free open technology to an expansion. Let us release the main game first. Just like what we did for the Panzer Corps series, the Commander series will be well supported and this release is a first mayor step, but there is more to come... ...

How can you say that modern warfare is "total by nature" when every single instance of warfare for the last 67 years has been limited? What's the fun into playing small scenarios like Korea, Vietnam, the middle east wars etc? The fun lies in playing global wars involving the major powers,...

Hi marklv, the last thing I want to do is to appear arrogant! I'll send you a modified file which allows you to play with a neutral Belgium (unless you declare war). For the majority of players however, offering an option which leads to a one-sided game is not going to lead to happy customers. You ...

You can still choose to not invade Belgium, but Belgium will declare war regardless. I can only hope to persuade you that this does make the game more fun. Without the Belgian declaration of war, the game becomes very one-sided very quickly. As the Entente player, it wouldn't be much fun if the CP ...

Modern warfare is 'total' by nature. Vietnam and Korea were 'controlled' wars that avoided developing into full scale world wars, but that is only because the USA didn't want to. It's hard to imagine NATO and the Warsaw Pact having fought a limited war in Europe, with conventional weapons only; if N...