World War One PBEM Playtest - Page 13

academia · October 2, 2003, 18:00

666

Palaiologos · October 2, 2003, 18:44

I just realised that monoplanes can't attack aircraft in flight!

I think you'll all agree that this is most inapropiate.
Most propably Jim forgot to put the "fighter" flag on them.

Historical Atze · October 2, 2003, 19:22

Now FiGu is to play the Entente and then it's my turn, or is FiGu supposed to play another italian turn?

Nilat · October 2, 2003, 23:40

yeah, FiGu will play this Italian turn then its all yours

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 00:01

I have been thinking that in this scen the defender has a bigger chance of winning, cause when a MG position is fortified in a city, its really really really hard killing it!! (ok, the germans have no problem with MG positions) (without a navy)

But can bombers kill them? (i havent played so far)

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 07:51

Bombers can destroy MG's. I'd say the chances are even yet Russia can't build any bombers

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 08:15

But cause the germans can give zeppelin constuction to its allies, I can have english bombers! You too!

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 08:48

I'm confused, you are allied with Germany?

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 08:53

no... Im russia and Im allied with the Entente cordiale

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 08:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Stalin II
But cause the germans can give zeppelin constuction to its allies, I can have english bombers! You too!

So why should the germans give Zeppelin Construction to you?

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 08:59

"But cause the germans can give zeppelin construction to its allies"

And I didnt say im germanys ally

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 09:23

Hmmm, well if that's the case ...
And if this means that england can exchange its bomber construction, too. Well then you are right!

But I find it strange that russia is supposed not to build bombers and despite can exchange the knowledge ...

Well but this is up to the creator.

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 09:26

The creator: jim panse is playing the ottomans and has zeppelins so no problem

And in reality if England gives Russia the blueprints of the planes, why couldnt the russians make them?!

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 09:42

They could ... of course. But I don't think that the Russians should be able to build English bombers

... but if the creator doesn't mind ... ok, then it's np

Palaiologos · October 3, 2003, 09:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Stalin II
I have been thinking that in this scen the defender has a bigger chance of winning, cause when a MG position is fortified in a city, its really really really hard killing it!! (ok, the germans have no problem with MG positions) (without a navy)

But can bombers kill them? (i havent played so far)

Well, WW1 was the apotheosis(cool greek word) of defensive warfare..

Napoleonic tactics against MGs.

As for the MGs when in trenches(not in cities) they ussually require 2-3 infantry attacks-German infantry that is.Acceptable and realistic enough i say.

BTW do you all agree that monoplanes must be able to attack aircraft in flight?

Palaiologos · October 3, 2003, 09:55

As for the bombers:There are really many worthless units in the scenario(like the subhunter).
Perhaps if Jim would replace it with a generic bomber buildable by Russians,Italians, Austrians,Turks,Yankees and whoever else doesn't have access to the bombers.

It could be available via the bomber construction tech and be obsolete with the a not independant tech.

BTW just checked it.Russians CAN NOT build bombers.They have the not allied tech which makes them obsolete.

Of course this is a PBEM and we could change that pretty easily provided all agree.

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 10:50

Russia cant build english bombers?!
Pretty unfair...

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 13:27

And i suppose the italians cannot build bombers either

I don't think it is fair that italians can build no bombers at all but german or english ones they shouldn't be able to build as well as the russians. Just my personal opinion.

Nilat · October 3, 2003, 14:22

I agree with Historical Atze!!

Palaiologos · October 3, 2003, 16:57

Look, if we all agree i can easily replace the subhunter unit with a generic bomber.It is no big deal espesially as nobody has built either bombers or subhunters and we can continue to play on as normal.

But if i am going to tweak Jim's scenario we must all agree.It would be better if Jim did it himself but he is away untill Sunday.

Or we could simply remove the obsolesence tech from the two bombers(German and Allied) and agree to an obvious house rule that Germany's allies build only the Gotha while England's allies build only the Hardley.

Historical Atze · October 3, 2003, 18:25

I prefer removing the Subhunter, yet, will be happy with any solution

Nilat · October 4, 2003, 00:31

Quote:

Or we could simply remove the obsolesence tech from the two bombers(German and Allied) and agree to an obvious house rule that Germany's allies build only the Gotha while England's allies build only the Hardley

I agree (only this thing)

jim panse · October 4, 2003, 18:53

Hmmmmm, do you all think a generic bomber would be useful?

Historical Atze · October 4, 2003, 19:46

Well ... it would make the scen more fair I'd say. Actually the Italians and Russians had bombers, too, in WW1.

Palaiologos · October 4, 2003, 21:10

The Russians had bombers in WW1?.Never heard that before.

Any more info?

Galvatron · October 5, 2003, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
The Russians had bombers in WW1?.Never heard that before.
Any more info?

The Russians and Bombers?

Come on. They were happy enough when their double-decker so-called fighters were able to stay in the air longer than a few seconds. Yes they experimented like the other nations but weren’t even able to produce a good fighter and from bombers they could only dream.

The Italians on the other hand didn't even bother to test planes, they used English and French one under licenses.

academia · October 5, 2003, 15:34

mmm... perhaps you could include a specific unit for the americans...

Nilat · October 5, 2003, 15:42

I think it would be realistic if England could give the italians, americans and the russians their bombers and the tech, cause is it impossible in reality not to give a nation blueprints of a plane?

Historical Atze · October 5, 2003, 15:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Galvatron
The Italians on the other hand didn't even bother to test planes, they used English and French one under licenses.

Well, actually I don't know about the Russians, but the Italians had bombers. If they produced them themselves is something else I do not know. But if you know it

...

jim panse · October 6, 2003, 04:41

Well, I will reconsider all thses things for the major update on the game, scheduled around X-mas. For that I would know as much as possible about bugs, gameplay problems, units which should be included/excluded, etc.

@ all: Keep those comments coming but please game on, Gentlemen that we could discover even more of those facts.

@ all Playtesters: I propose that it is allowed to give units via the Diplomacy Screens to other nations but Tech trading is forbidden. I would also propose a Gentlemen´s Agreement that if someone has received a unique tech from another civ you should not use the possibility of building the unit.

If we all agree on this I would say we play on (and you could be looking forward to the update .....)