Slitherine

Confirmed. Convoys do pass through Axis-controlled Brest (if no naval unit is present), and slam right into u-boats if any are in that port!

Not a game-stopping bug, to be sure, but if it can be fixed (to make convoy movement consistent with other types of sea movement) it ought to be. Otherwise, would-be ambushers risk coming up empty-handed unless they know to put a U-boat in port.

JimR wrote:Not a game-stopping bug, to be sure, but if it can be fixed (to make convoy movement consistent with other types of sea movement) it ought to be. Otherwise, would-be ambushers risk coming up empty-handed unless they know to put a U-boat in port.

it can be a bit deadly for the UBoat as a couple of TAC attacks can hurt one that might be in for repairs!

I am so curious that how can USSR use rail in Caucasus after Axis cut off the link from Caucasus to Moscow & Omsk ? When did this rule change ? I still remembered that before when Axis cut off Caucasus from Moscow & Omsk , USSR would not be able to deploy unit & use rail in Caucasus . But at present it 's all ok ?!!

Morris wrote:I am so curious that how can USSR use rail in Caucasus after Axis cut off the link from Caucasus to Moscow & Omsk ? When did this rule change ? I still remembered that before when Axis cut off Caucasus from Moscow & Omsk , USSR would not be able to deploy unit & use rail in Caucasus . But at present it 's all ok ?!!

Concerning the ability to rail units in the Caucasus I think you are wrong. If I remember correctly it was always possible to rail in the Caucasus region even if it has been cut off. I also think this is realistic as the rail system would still work there, even if the region has been cut off. Resources can also brought in via Persia or the Caspian Sea. Gamewise I think suply for the rail system comes from Basra/Bagdad if the Caucasus is cut off.

I'm not sure about deploying new units, this could be a bug, but you could argue that the Red Army could muster units either arriving off map via the Caspian Sea or get resources through Persia LL.

Cheers Zechi

zechi wrote:

Morris wrote:I am so curious that how can USSR use rail in Caucasus after Axis cut off the link from Caucasus to Moscow & Omsk ? When did this rule change ? I still remembered that before when Axis cut off Caucasus from Moscow & Omsk , USSR would not be able to deploy unit & use rail in Caucasus . But at present it 's all ok ?!!

Concerning the ability to rail units in the Caucasus I think you are wrong. If I remember correctly it was always possible to rail in the Caucasus region even if it has been cut off. I also think this is realistic as the rail system would still work there, even if the region has been cut off. Resources can also brought in via Persia or the Caspian Sea. Gamewise I think suply for the rail system comes from Basra/Bagdad if the Caucasus is cut off.

I'm not sure about deploying new units, this could be a bug, but you could argue that the Red Army could muster units either arriving off map via the Caspian Sea or get resources through Persia LL.

Cheers Zechi

Thanks for your explaination !

Regarding to the rail , If this works , why London & Paris was cutoff from their country , UK & France could not use the rail ? I think it is also realistic as the rail system would still work there !

Regarding to the deploy , please check it with my screen shot . I am sure it was not be able to deploy there if it was cut off from Moscow & Omsk . I have experienced it for many times !

You should be able to use rail movement with supply level 3 or higher. We changed that when we introduced minor power rail networks.

Are you sure you can't rail in France / Britain with Paris / London cut-off?

Maybe you're confusing with deployment of new units. The city needs to be in supply level 4 or higher to be able to deploy new units.

Stauffenberg wrote:You should be able to use rail movement with supply level 3 or higher. We changed that when we introduced minor power rail networks.

Are you sure you can't rail in France / Britain with Paris / London cut-off?

Maybe you're confusing with deployment of new units. The city needs to be in supply level 4 or higher to be able to deploy new units.

I am quite sure I can't rail in France / Britain with Paris / London cut-off , please check out the following screen shots :







Regarding to deploying the new unit in Caucasus after be cutoff from Omsk & Moscow , I did remember I couldn't deploy the new unit in Caucasus before . I think to deploy new unit should be related to the link with capital , not depends on supply lvl .

Morris wrote:I think to deploy new unit should be related to the link with capital , not depends on supply lvl .

Why? From my point of view it should be possible to create new units if there are the resources to do it. Resources for creating new units would be enough supplies as well as enough manpower in the relevant area. The capital has nothing to do with it.

In fact I think it should be possible to use the rail system in France/Britain even in areas cut off from Paris/London.

I guess Paris and London happens because they can't trace a link to a major or minor power capital. Both provide rail capability.

Caucasus can trace to Tehran, Baghdad etc.

zechi wrote:

Morris wrote:I think to deploy new unit should be related to the link with capital , not depends on supply lvl .

Why? From my point of view it should be possible to create new units if there are the resources to do it. Resources for creating new units would be enough supplies as well as enough manpower in the relevant area. The capital has nothing to do with it.

In fact I think it should be possible to use the rail system in France/Britain even in areas cut off from Paris/London.

military troops are not people militia . Even you have the human resource & military equipment , you can not set up new formal military unit without a national military system .If it is cut off from the capital ( usually not only political center ,but also economic & communication center ), it should only be able to call on some militia ,just like GARs in our game . It is impossible to set up Mech & arm & airforce !

Regarding to the rail problem , I agree with you .

Stauffenberg wrote:I guess Paris and London happens because they can't trace a link to a major or minor power capital. Both provide rail capability.

Caucasus can trace to Tehran, Baghdad etc.

Maybe you are right ! but it really not make sense ! since no allies troops will be able to go inside Russia , how could Russian use rail by the trace with a long distance minor capital like Tehran & Baghdad ?

Actually I think if Caucasus can deploy new unit & use rail after be cut off from Omsk & Moscow , I have to say( which I do hate to say!) that it is going to ruin the present game balance . Russians will become invincible if I use it !

I don't agree with you on the ruined game balance, Morris. The Germans aren't supposed to get to Baku to win the war.

Russia could get troops across the Caspian Sea to Baku, e. g. from the port Krasnovodsk. This port is off-map. Russia could send troops via Persia (on rail) as well. Besides that, Baku is a very big city that could provide many soldier recruits. Remember that south of the Caucasus you have Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and even part of Russia.

I think that the game balance would become broken if the Germans can simply get to the Caspian Sea and then suddenly neutralize everything south of this line. That is not historical at all. The area south of the Caucasus is HUGE and is bigger than many countries.

It's too easy to get to the Caspian Sea in GS v2.1. If that would cause Caucasus to quickly collapse then something is wrong.

Besides the western Allies could help sending heavy equipment to this region and let the Russian soldiers use it. Similar to the northern lend lease route. Air units could easily fly from Siberia and base near Baku. Oil would certainly not have been a problem.

Stauffenberg wrote:Russia could send troops via Persia (on rail) as well.

Your reasoning is, as usual, impeccable, but on this point I could have sworn that in earlier posts one of our forum 'historians' stated that there did not exist any rail link between Persia and Baku/Caucasus region in WWII. Is that right, or am I suffering from early-onset dementia?

A small issue - was trying to rename the Scapa Flow garrison to disguise it's origin for the defense of Britain and got the message below:



This may relate to that bug about SS units fixed previously?

Diplomaticus wrote:

Stauffenberg wrote:Russia could send troops via Persia (on rail) as well.

Your reasoning is, as usual, impeccable, but on this point I could have sworn that in earlier posts one of our forum 'historians' stated that there did not exist any rail link between Persia and Baku/Caucasus region in WWII. Is that right, or am I suffering from early-onset dementia?

Look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Iranian_Railway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Re ... n_Railways

The rail line from Tabriz to Jolfa (border to Azerbaijan) was completed in 1918. Tabriz to Tehran was completed late 1938.

This shows the rail lines in Armenia around 1920. We see the rail line to Turkey and Jolfa:
http://www.armenica.org/history/maps/23 ... sk1918.gif

Schnurri wrote:A small issue - was trying to rename the Scapa Flow garrison to disguise it's origin for the defense of Britain and got the message below:



This may relate to that bug about SS units fixed previously?

This is because the code is checking for "ss " or " ss" to indicate an SS unit. Fortress Scapa Flow contains "ss " and therefore flagged. I guess we could have added code so only German units could be flagged (like we do when we convert units to SS).

Still this is a very minor issue and most people will rarely see this. Renaming the Fortress Scapa Flow unit won't happen often in games.

Since we have sent the files to Slitherine I don't think it's a good idea to recall that just to fix this bug. We can do that for GS v2.2

Sounds fine to me. Not a biggie, just wanted to point it out. Turns out I didn't need that GAR anyway, but thought I might - opponent did a blitz in October taking out the low countries and headed for Paris. Knew a Sea Lion was in the cards so trying to prepare, but he seems to have backed off.

Stauffenberg wrote:I don't agree with you on the ruined game balance, Morris. The Germans aren't supposed to get to Baku to win the war.

Russia could get troops across the Caspian Sea to Baku, e. g. from the port Krasnovodsk. This port is off-map. Russia could send troops via Persia (on rail) as well. Besides that, Baku is a very big city that could provide many soldier recruits. Remember that south of the Caucasus you have Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and even part of Russia.

I think that the game balance would become broken if the Germans can simply get to the Caspian Sea and then suddenly neutralize everything south of this line. That is not historical at all. The area south of the Caucasus is HUGE and is bigger than many countries.

It's too easy to get to the Caspian Sea in GS v2.1. If that would cause Caucasus to quickly collapse then something is wrong.

Besides the western Allies could help sending heavy equipment to this region and let the Russian soldiers use it. Similar to the northern lend lease route. Air units could easily fly from Siberia and base near Baku. Oil would certainly not have been a problem.

I think Germans have few opportunity to get to Baku to win the war . I agree this with you . My point is Caucasus should not be able to deploy new unit after be cut off from Moscow & Omsk . Even if they can't , Germans also have no possibility to take Baku ! But with it , Axis can weak the power of Soviet so that have a chance to defeat part of them & win the opportunity to hold the east front longer . I also did remember it was not like this about several months ago ,when I play allies , I met the situation & was not able to deploy the unit ! When was it changed ? I checked all patches , but I did not find it . Did I miss anything ?

Also regarding to the rail problem , Do you believe the rail system in Caucasus was better than the southern France & Scotland ?? No ,they were quite backward from France & Scotland ! If we forbid allies enter Russia , how could the supply from Iran transport to Caucasus ? By Donkey ?

At last , I have to emphasize that this will badly effect the game balance . Maybe you think I did care about the victory of the present AARs . No ! Even if without this problem , the Axis also only have around 50% chance to win the game . You had asked me to express my opinion of game balance , I did . But If you don't believe me , I will have to express it by AAR which is a very slow way . Now , I think the Allies gains advantage of the game .

Morris,

Soviet mobilization was not dependant on capital. Mobilization were conducted in Military disctricts based on their MP and equipment assigned by STAVKA. One of the disctric was North Caucasus and it included in general all Russia south of Rostov + Caucasus republics (today independent states) like Armenia, Georgia etc.

So even if cut off this disctrict were fully able to conscript as it had access to MP(local)/supplies (from Middle East/trhough Caspian Sea).

I think the issue here is that you cannot rail in England/France when capitals are cut off. I think for GS2.2 rail rule should be that if city is connected with another one you can rail there.