Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread
-
@schulz The problem with subs, is that they were a strategic weapon, which is hard to handle in TripleA. They decreased allied production (and diverted resource in counter-measures). What they did not do is prevent invasions. There were plenty of German subs around when Operation Torch was executed.
A flaw of TripleA is that amphibious invasions are as easy as movement to friendly ports. Give a big penalty to amphibious invasions by using the isMarine property would be a way of handling it.
-
@schulz said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:
@kurtgodel7 German military production was very inefficient before speer took in charge and they didn't even exert total war economy until 1943. Thats how they could double-triple their productions in 1944 despite constant Allies strategic bombings. Of course Axis players wouldn't make these fatal historical mistakes.
Germany is a net importer of food and raw materials. To pay for those imports, it is a net exporter of manufactured goods. During the 1920s, the Western democracies did several things to cripple the German economy. They demanded very large reparations payments. Also, Britain and France closed their empires to German imports, making it significantly more difficult for Germany to obtain the foreign currency it needed to make its reparations payments, the interest payments on its government debts, or to pay for the food imports it required to feed its people. During this time productivity increased at a much faster pace in British and American factories than in German factories, because German companies were not in a position to buy the same expensive machines British or American companies were buying.
After coming to power, Hitler used Germany's enormous debts as a weapon with which to get other nations to accept German imports. If a nation refused to accept imports, Germany would default on the entirety of its debt to that nation. If the nation allowed German imports, Germany would repay its debt in part. In part as a result of defaulting on most of the debts with which the victorious Entente had saddled Germany, the German economy boomed. The first several years of the economic boom were devoted mostly to increasing the wages and vacation time of German workers, while reducing their workweek to 40 hours. But after several years of this, German workers had been brought to what Hitler believed were reasonable conditions and fair wages. At that point additional economic gains were channeled mostly into increasing corporate profits. The amount of those profits which could be paid out in dividends was restricted. So, the one option left to German firms was to reinvest those profits into new machinery and increases in productivity, which they did. From the standpoint of industrial capacity, the late '30s saw Germany begin to make up the ground it had lost in the '20s, during the stagnant years of the Weimar Republic.
Why did it take until 1944 for that increase in industrial capacity to result in large scale military production? Certainly more could have been done earlier, to go to a total war economy. But it's also the case that, compared to Britain, the United States, or even the Soviet Union, the increase in German industrial capacity was delayed. A nation which had finished industrializing before the war started could reach peak military production sooner than a nation such as Germany which was industrializing during the war itself. Japan's situation was similar: Japanese industrial capacity increased greatly during the war.
For example I just came with the idea of the German subs which being spammed in N.Atlantic randomly each round. (German power should be decreased to rebalance of course).
German subs were very effective early in the war. Then Allied advances in radar and sonar technology made it much easier to hunt them down. The German response to that was to invent the technologically advanced Type XXI U-boat. It had built over 100 of them by the end of the war, but none saw combat. This sub could run for days on its batteries before needing to run its diesel engines to recharge. Being electric-only made it very quiet, very stealthy. The outside of its hull was lined with rubber, making it much harder to detect with radar or sonar. It fired electric torpedoes, which were likewise silent and nearly impossible to detect. (Everyone else in WWII used diesel-powered torpedoes.) It also came equipped with (for the time) very advanced electronics.
This is one example of the type of technological struggle present in the war, with each side attempting to get a leg up on the other.
-
@rogercooper I think they could be more effective to interdict Allied naval operations if there was a good cooperation with Lutwaffe.
Submarines are probably the least realistically represented units. I have no idea how could they be implemented differently within the engine.
Naval invasions are unrealistically very easy too. I would like the idea giving penalt to the invasion forces.
-
@kurtgodel7 The German leadership was reluctant to go to total war economy eariler because they though they are already going to win.
Total war economy means having harder times for civilian population which means having a potential home revolutions and mutinies.
-
@majesticfeet said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:
A few other silly lamentations that are outside of the restrictions of the game. I wish there were a few Japanese battlecruisers and cruisers to represent the help the Japanese were giving to British in the Pacific and I wish you could build the Japanese cruiser/destroyer squadron that was on anti-submarine duty off of France in 1917.
The game sort of represents stuff like that. Sort of.
Often, the Entente (and specifically the U.S.) will neutral farm Japan. The extra income the U.S. receives from this could be viewed as Japan's contribution to the Entente war effort.
Likewise, it is possible for Germany to neutral farm Mexico City on turn 3. It then builds trenches, infantry, and heavy guns in an effort to hold Mexico City for as long as possible against American invasion. That (sort of) represents the war the U.S. fought against Mexico during early WWI.
-
@kurtgodel7 I always love seeing what happens with this one. At first the Domination map was supposed to cover the period roughly from the Mexican-American war to the Spanish-American war since I had just read "Habits of Empire" and was all interested in the Polk Presidency and like nascent American Empire stuff from the second half of the 19th century. Mainly because that period is usually eclipsed by like the Napoleonic Era, or the US Civil War and not taught very much in secondary school. But I thought it would be cool to have a world map that included stuff like the Taiping Civil War (which still seems to me a major watershed, usually ignored in World History) and the Meiji Restoration too, to do the rise of Japan in addition to the European Colonialism angle with the rise of Germany/Prussia which is more familiar. I also liked the idea of map that could do the rise of Russia as almost like a mirror or inverse of the rise of the United States. The one moving West, the other moving East.
I almost called it 'Manifest Destiny' to highlight the focus, but it seemed a little too jingoistic. Anyway, that's why you get some of those weird artifacts especially in the Pacific and around China, cause I sort of changed my mind and went more for a 1900 anachronistic start, basically to have a start at the Spanish-American war/Boxer Rebellion/Morocco Crisis, essentially 1898-1901 and ending with WW1, rather than setting it more 1850 and end at 1900, which was the initial idea. All the little coaling station islands in the Pac, and the Africa scramble and such. But there were really no tools for politics or tech or the kind of units in tripleA at the time to do it up in any way that made much sense for the period hehe. I still think a map like that would be fun though, just because it's never really treated much in games, even though that's when so much of the modern world or the modern world map comes into shape. Anyhow, cool to see it still going in some form.
-
ps. just a random follow on thought, but it always seemed to me that the big maps worked well when there was a "scramble" region at the start that serves as a kind of randomizer, sort of the way Africa worked in Classic A&A. Anyhow, I thought the Taiping Rebellion and the Opium Wars would make for an interesting swing region on the Pacific side of the board for game set like second half of the 19th century. Like where you have the Qing weakened by the civil war, and so you could have the ascendant Britain, France, Russia, competing with the US and a newly emergent Japan in that region. But the engine was missing a way to do like settlement or commerce in addition to armies and navies on the move. I also liked the idea of an earlier game along a similar theme, but where it was more Britain taking over the Dutch overseas empire and before the Anglo-American alliance really took shape, so there could be like factional counter balance there. The A&A model was kind of tough though, because it works best when there are just two main alliances more 20th century style, WW1 WW2 and the cold war I think. But I still like the idea of an A&A game that sort of works as a prelude to WW1. Or like where Empire Total War or Napolean Total War ended, but before the period of the World Wars. The Taiping idea seemed interesting, cause it was like the bloodiest civil war in human history, and roughly concurrent with the US-Mexican and US Civil War. Also the Crimean Wars, and just a whole lot happening globally with expansion and conflict, so I think the period could capture a lot of the "paint the map" appeal that these games rely on. Not sure I've really seen a global war game set in that period yet. I've seen more Civ style or Universalis type games go there, but more in the 4X genre than like an A&A toy soldiers type vibe. But I still think it would be a fun one just for the history
-
@black_elk One of the ideas I have had for an Axis and Allies style game was to start it at the time of The Great Pig War. I see a lot of potential for a fun game then. I was thinking of doing the research and get some college credit for it but haven't had time to yet.
-
I love that! Just those little details. Like an ironclad stare down over the BC, when the northern border was still on shaky ground, and no guarantees that Britain and the US wouldn't light it up in the North Pacific! Haha
Just seems like a great period with a lot of material to mine. And the flags and many factions with just a hint of the modern war on the horizon towards the end. Hepster had been reworking the base map and made something that I think would hold up pretty well, even if going backwards in time by like a generation. It hasn't been updated in a while, but I'm interested to see where he takes it, cause it looked like it might include some pretty clutch politic'n and play up the naval trade angle. Also I think because the period is kind of lost in this haze of historical forgetfulness that it's probably more flexible imagining different ways its might have gone down with a sprawl or a big powder keg at the end.
Anyhow not to get too off topic in this thread. I love WW1 games too. But yeah that lead up period, especially the last half of the 19th century, there's just so much there to work with. I think maybe a 4 way split could work, but it's always hard to think how to best pair off the factions. That's why I like the ideas introduced with like Bolshevik Revolution or partisan features, and new production units, and convoys and such, cause those could maybe provide the architecture to make an Ironclad Era game set in the previous generation. That'd be pretty cool
-
I have been playing "Domination 1914 No Man's Land". I love this game, but there are 2 changes I would make. 1st Communists should not be allowed to venture outside the Russian borders [much like China in "WW2 Global series"]. 2nd Russia needs to be slightly weaker militarily at game start.
-
Communists would be rendered useless after defeating Russia.
-
@jtmayes1963 said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:
I have been playing "Domination 1914 No Man's Land". I love this game, but there are 2 changes I would make. 1st Communists should not be allowed to venture outside the Russian borders [much like China in "WW2 Global series"]. 2nd Russia needs to be slightly weaker militarily at game start.
Historically, the Communists had plans to venture outside of Russia. There is an even game called Freikorps dealing with a hypothetical Communist attack on Germany in 1920.
-
@rogercooper Yes, they had plans to spread communism beyond their borders, but here are some historical facts. The revolution was the reason the Russians withdrew from the war. Lennon's 1st speech when arriving in Russia was "Stop the war". Communist aggression did not begin until the invasion of Finland under Stalin. This was because they needed time to build their forces before beginning their expansion.
My point is Russia should be on the verge of collapse when America is finally able to land an effective force in Europe.
-
@jtmayes1963 I don't think that is quite right. The Communist were fighting in the Ukraine and Estonia. They fought the local forces and German Freikorps. I agree it was more a case of not being strong enough yet. They would have spread their influence over more territory if they could have.
-
@schulz You are aware the US and GB sent troops into Russia to fight the Communist, right?
-
@majesticfeet Oh yes, they sure would have, but they weren't ready yet. That's my point.
-
@jtmayes1963 Yes, not sure what that has to do with if the Russians should be allowed to venture outside of the Russian borders though.
-
I'd like to mention the Polish-Soviet War, which took place from 1919 - 1921. From the article:
In General Tukhachevsky's words, "The path to the world conflagration passes over the corpse of Poland. On Vilnius-Minsk-Warsaw march" and "onward to Berlin over the corpse of Poland!".
Had Poland fallen to the Red Army, the conquest of Germany would have been very achievable. The German Army had been limited to a token size by the Versailles Treaty, and it's likely the Western democracies would have done as little to help Germany as they'd done to help Poland. (The help Poland received from the West consisted of 400 advisors.)
Soviet attempts to conquer Poland (with Germany to possibly follow) demonstrate Soviet willingness to opportunistically expand beyond Russia's traditional borders.
-
@majesticfeet Revolutionaries, not Russians
-
@jtmayes1963 Correct
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login