What is your bid?

[zanetheinsane]

I feel like Austria needs to start with a submarine. As it is now, once all of the powers merge in the med on the first turn all of the CP warships are pretty much trapped forever.

In one of our games where AH attempted to build a navy they had no hope because France can just drop ships directly out of Marseilles. Britain has nothing to fear bringing up their warships from India because the Ottomans can’t ever hope to get through the Suez canal (yet every ally can get through the Bosphorus straight… nice balance).

Britain can easily match any German navy and France can completely neutralize an AH navy with just a couple ships. The CP can never hope to match navies with the Allies and are doomed to sitting in their tiny sea zones staring out.

I firmly believe that the only reason the CP ships even exist is as a speedbump and minor deterrent so the Allies don’t just amphibiously assault in the first 2-3 turns.

[WILD BILL]

That mirrors what we’ve seen in our games zanetheinsane, the CP navies just delay the inevitable amphibs for a couple turns (does give you a chance to get art to def the coast though w/double shot).

Assuming these figures are accurate for tonnage, dread knots etc…, I would be on board with exploring a reduction to the French fleet. I was thinking in that direction w/o the historical data (just for game play).  I would like to see one of the French battleships reduced to a cruiser, and remove one transport (which one(s) to be determined). Germany can knock out the UK home fleet, but the allies can easily have the French warships move up, and drop a new UK navy in the water w/o worrying to much about the Germans (especially if the Germans also tried to take out the Canadian fleet, (didn’t build any navy), and are now spread thin).

I wouldn’t want to add ships to the Austrian navy at set-up just yet though (I think they need to feel trapped), but I think the UK India cruiser could move to the southern tip of Africa w/o a doubt (sz25). This (along w/French reduction) could help the CP in the Med quite a bit IMO (the UK S African cruiser may go to the Atlantic in a call to arms).  Even if the Austrians build some navy in the early rounds they are still generally stuck in port, or face overwhelming odds in sz17. The allies simply have much navy available in close range to the Med (at least make them think where to go with their over abundance of navy, and delay it a bit).

[Flashman]

It seems something of a consensus is forming regarding naval setup.

Removing/reducing the French SZ15 BB, & removing one French transport seem universally popular.

I would also add:

German cruiser to SZ26, transport to SZ10

Austrian sub to SZ18

German cruiser (Goeben) to SZ18, removing one of the Turkish models.

I’m broadly in favour of Italy being neutral round one (and Turkey being neutral until its own first turn), so the various CP ships in the Med would be able to move around/concentrate on that turn without running afoul of Italian ships and mines.

Unfortunately KH says Austrian couldn’t use this to launch an AA on Libya without the SZ being treated as hostile.

My own proposed map change for the Med is more radical:

[WILD BILL]

Flash regarding neutral powers, I think that G40 was the first game I played that had neutrals powers (similar to US in this game). You’re never been able to float through the navy of a neutral power comprised of surface warships and amphib their territories, or pass through a sz they have surface war ships in to attack their ships in another sz (in the same turn that I’m aware of). Once you declare your intentions in the movement phase you have to fight the navy (if its in your way), there’s no sneak attacks (you basically deliver a DOW as you move your units, and all their units/navy are now hostel, and their mines turned on).

So yeah, if you house ruled Italy in as a neutral before their first turn, but decided to invade one of their starting original territories like Libya then yeah, you would face the mines, and have to fight their ships before you hit the beaches. Now Albania might be a different story though w/neutral Italy, because it is a minor power aligned to Italy (not an Italian original territory). I think you could attack Albania, and not fight the Italian navy/mines, but it would draw Italy into the war (IDK, its your house rule LOL).

[KimRYoung]

It seems something of a consensus is forming regarding naval setup.

Is this for play balance or historical reasons? I’m not convinced that there is enough supporting evidence yet to suggest the game is significantly biased to one side or the other and as such it is too early to make any changes solely on that.

For “historical” reasons, I tend to agree that France has too large a navy, and for sure no way should she have 2 battleships while the Germans have only one. It should be more like England 3, Germany 2 and everyone else no more (if any) than one.

As for giving Austria a sub, she started the war with 7, Germany started with 20, But the British had 74 Subs!! So if you want “historical” then the UK has got to start with some subs.

Italy being neutral makes historical sense, though don’t know how it would effect play balance.

German cruisers (Goeben and Breslau) were actually in Messina in early August, so if Italy is neutral, they should start in SZ 19 if you want to go that route. Making Turkey neutral would allow the Russians to move into the Med, the Turks would never have allowed that even if neutral.

Can’t change the map, sorry.

Kim

[Flashman]

I should have said give Germany a sub in SZ18. I’m not certain British subs were up to much at this time, compared to the German models.

[KimRYoung]

@Flashman:

I should have said give Germany a sub in SZ18. I’m not certain British subs were up to much at this time, compared to the German models.

The Germans were shipping U-boats by rail to Austria, and they assembled them in port. The subs were manned by Austrians though. As for British subs, some of them had to be doing something when war starts, they didn’t need to start building them from scratch.

Kim

[Derek]

I think giving Austia a sub would help with balance, and it seems it would also be historically correct ;)

[Imperious Leader]

In case anybody cares here is the starting naval strength for 8/14. So if you want accuracy you can create ratios of piece and historical number of units

I suggest:
Dreadnought  7.5 to 1
Pre-Dreadnought  7.5 to 1
Battle-cruiser 10 to 1
Armored Cruiser  20 to 1
Protected Cruiser 20 to 1
Other Cruiser 30 to 1
Destroyer 40 to 1
Submarine 25 to 1?

France:
Dreadnought 8
Pre-Dreadnought 14
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser 19
Protected Cruiser 9
Other Cruiser
Destroyer 81
Submarine 70

UK:
Dreadnought 22
Pre-Dreadnought 40
Battle-cruiser  9
Armored Cruiser  34
Protected Cruiser  52
Other Cruiser  35
Destroyer  221
Submarine  73

Italy:
Dreadnought  3
Pre-Dreadnought  7
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  7
Protected Cruiser  11
Other Cruiser  3
Destroyer  33
Submarine  23

Russia:
Dreadnought
Pre-Dreadnought  10
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  6
Protected Cruiser  6
Other Cruiser
Destroyer 25
Submarine  22

USA:
Dreadnought  10
Pre-Dreadnought  23
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  12
Protected Cruiser  22
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  50
Submarine 16

Aus-Hun
Dreadnought  6
Pre-Dreadnought  6
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser  2
Protected Cruiser  3
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  18
Submarine  5

Germany:
Dreadnought  15
Pre-Dreadnought  22
Battle-cruiser  5
Armored Cruiser  7
Protected Cruiser  17
Other Cruiser  16
Destroyer  90
Submarine  31

Ottomans:
Dreadnought
Pre-Dreadnought  2
Battle-cruiser
Armored Cruiser
Protected Cruiser  2
Other Cruiser
Destroyer  8
Submarine

Notes:
German u-boat strength in 1914 never exceeded 34 units ( Dec)
Ottomans got a few battle-cruisers from Germany after the war started
I can post info for Spain and other navies BTW.

[Derek]

So what ships would represent what units in the game?

[xxstefanx]

Ottomans got one BC (Goeben) and on LC (Breslau) from Germany and that tipped the balance in the Black Sea slightly in their favour!

@KimRYoung
The overwhelming majority of UK Submarines were obsolete, unfit for high seas operations. Did you ever see pictures of their older models? They could hardly sail a mile away from the shore! :-D

Again, do not simply count units!

For this game historical accuracy surely was not in the focus!
So at this point I think changing the French Dreadnought to a cruiser and remove one transport should be enough for now to play some games and see how things go!

Apropos historical accuracy: My next big post in my C&E thread will handle that and make some remarks to the setup!

[Imperious Leader]

Well combine the Dreadnoughts for Battleships

Combine all the cruisers

I have no idea why they skipped destroyers. More of them than all the other warships combined.

Ottomans got one BC (Goeben) and on LC (Breslau) from Germany but that tipped the balance in the Black Sea slightly in their favour!

Yea that came latter however, not at start of war.

The overwhelming majority of UK Submarines were obsolete

Almost all the submarines for all nations were coastal subs, they didn’t use them like Germany. Only for defense.

[ghr2]

I would say that Munich should be a production center for germany.  Or maybe even Rhur.

[KimRYoung]

@KimRYoung
The overwhelming majority of UK Submarines were obsolete, unfit for high seas operations. Did you ever see pictures of their older models? They could hardly sail a mile away from the shore! grin

I don’t disagree. But giving them at least one would be nominal. I see a bigger issue in the strength of the French fleet for historical strength, would be curious as to why Larry gave them 2 battleships and Germany one. The Allies certainly do not need another battleship in the Med.

Germany should have the second strongest fleet at the start second only to England. The French should have one less battleship and the Germans one more.

Kim

[Derek]

Well using your numbers IL,

BBs at 20:1
CAs at 20:1
SSs at 25:1
DDs at 40:1
These factors bring the boat count down to respectable game numbers.

France: 1 BB; 1 CA; 3 SS; 2 DD
UK: 3 BB; 6 CA; 3 SS; 5 DD
Italy: 1 CA; 1 SS; 1 DD
USA: 2 BB; 2 CA; 1 SS; 1 DD
Russia: 1 CA; 1 SS; 1 DD
A-H: 1 BB; 1 DD
Germ: 2 BB; 2 CA; 1 SS; 2 DD
Turk: 1 CA*(from Germany)

Id say transports give Germ 1; France 1; UK 3-5

@ghr2:

I would say that Munich should be a production center for germany.  Or maybe even Rhur.

I concur here

[Derek]

Maybe give France and uk each 1 sub and germ 2

[oztea]

Replace the French Atlantic battleship with a cruiser, take away one of their transports.
Give the Germans a transport so Russia can’t be as aggressive.

[xxstefanx]

For conversion take 2 Pre-Dreadnoughts as 1 Dreadnought!

Battlecruisers as a seperate unit or as Dreadnoughts (if you want to skip them for now!)

Cruisers in a 1-2-3 ratio.

@Uncrustable
USA should only get 1 DR.
IT does not reflect actual strength if all that divides G and USA would be 1 Ds!

Subs should get a far lower ratio as they were virtually unmatched for the first 2 years of the war. In fact there were almost no means to fight them.
For example: UK used over 200 destroyers in the Med, North Sea and Atlantic to hunt them and all that this enormous “fleet” managed in 2 years was sinking 3(!) subs (the other German sub losses were caused by mines or accident!). ASW like Hydrophones and Depthcharges were introduced 1916, convoy escort even 1917.

Give Germany 2 or 3.
Give Uk 2 or 3 (but only 1 high seas sub!)
Give France 1 or 2 (if 2 one coastal)

[Derek]

I counted battlecruisers as 2 cruisers and other cruisers as one half. Also as I suggested give France and uk each 1 sub and germ 2. There are no “coastalsubs” in A&A lol so pointless to talk about them. Change UK to 2 BBs and USA to 1

[WILD BILL]

@oztea:

Replace the French Atlantic battleship with a cruiser, take away one of their transports.
Give the Germans a transport so Russia can’t be as aggressive.

This is what I would do w/French BB anyway, from what I’ve recently read the focus of the French navy in 1914 was in the Med, because they feared an Austria/Italian alliance (yeah, I know the game starts w/Italy on the allies side, but the bulk of the French fleet was still in the Med). The French had several cruisers/destroyers off the Atlantic coast/English Channel supplementing the British navy, but the bulk of their fleet (including all their biggest guns) was in the Med. Plus they didn’t have more big ships then the Germans, so this is a good move IMO. I think the French Med BB will venture out to the Atlantic more times then not to bolster the UK fleet rebuild. The Med would still be really rough on the CP, but I think it is intended to be that way.

Link showing where the French fleet was, and its goals in 1914
http://www.naval-history.net/WW1NavyFrench.htm

If you make the French Atlantic BB a cruiser (this should happen), the Germans get a 3rd option/target and could attempt to sink the French Atlantic fleet instead of the Canadian fleet. I think you would probably remove the French Atlantic transport as well leaving the 2 French Med transports (the Med is where the French had the most transport ability, because the bulk of its fleet was there to escort). I don’t think you want the French to end up with just 1 transport (still need to pick up the Portuguese). So that leaves the French Atlantic fleet with just a cruiser, still making the Canadian fleet the Germans second target (after the UK home fleet), which is good for the game IMO.

As far as the German transport, I think that should wait for now. I’m not sure the Germans should have the option to make landings in northern Russia, or Scotland (on the first turn). There’s nothing to counter it w/only a single inf able to counter attack in those territories.

An earlier post suggested an Austrian sub be added to the set up (I too was leaning that way). I changed my mind based on what I read, the Austrians didn’t have many subs. In 1915 the Germans had subs delivered to the Adriatic and sailed under the Austrian flag, but had German commanders (Germany wasn’t yet at war w/Italy). Being this takes place after the game starts (and I know Italy starts the game already at war), I think the Austrians shouldn’t get a sub at set-up (if they want one, build one), because it would give them attack capabilities from the get go they didn’t have as far as game terms. The Austrian navy was a fleet in being, and their big ships didn’t leave port (was a defensive deterrent, as the game shows w/mines etc…). This plus an Austrian sub could sneak under the Italian fleet and hit the UK cruiser/transport in sz 19 so it would have to be moved, or boosted (and boosted wouldn’t be good for the CP).

Edit:
Maybe place a German sub with the Austrian navy, as this would only bolster their defense, but not attack capabilities. Being subs can move through enemy fleets w/o stopping, maybe this would be of some help down there (like slithering over to the Turk fleet)? You would still have the problem w/UK Egyptian fleet (as above)

So at this time I would be against an Austrian sub, and/or a German transport added at set-up, but would definitely be on board with reducing the French Atlantic BB to a cruiser, and removing the Atlantic transport as well (leaving just a French cruiser in sz15 at set-up). This would give the CP somewhat of a chance if they started building navy, or a better chance to control either the Atlantic, or possibly the Med for at least a short period of time (and would also be cool to test).

Edit: Maybe also look at a German sub placed w/Austrian fleet at set-up? But now you would have to chip subs at set-up LOL, unless you also removed one of the starting Germans Atlantic subs too, and then there’s the UK Egyptian fleet (German sub could take a shot at it) .