Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread
-
@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
-
Yes, but they were just a token force compared to other major fronts.
-
@kurtgodel7 Yeah but after Germany I am certain the other powers would notice and try to stop them
-
@board-3659 I've played Russia several times against some very good strategists. It's easy to go after Germany when the communists are busy going after neutral countries and Alaska. The other powers should still be able to go after the Communists when they can. Historically, there were British and American troops in Russia fighting Bolsheviks. Although, they were pulled out due to lack of support on the homefront. In the WW2 series this is the case against China. By the way, I like this game. I'm just saying I'd like to see a game where the communists are confined to stay within the Russian borders. I guarantee it will be more challenging to play Russia.
-
@jtmayes1963 The reason why the British and Americans gave up was that the whites were pathetic tbh. They had low morale and had to deal with desertion often. (also the reds had the industry so that hurt)
-
@board-3659 said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:
@jtmayes1963 The reason why the British and Americans gave up was that the whites were pathetic tbh. They had low morale and had to deal with desertion often. (also the reds had the industry so that hurt)
The Reds had the advantage of the central position against powerful but uncoordinated White attacks.
-
This is a chart of global naval units prior to 2014. I broke this down to percentage and edited to game accordingly. -
@jtmayes1963
What is the number of figures per number of ships for each class?I also have wondered (particularly for Germany circa World War II) how many land units the Germans could have fielded per capital ship they built.
-
@majesticfeet Since the game doesn't make distinction between class, I don't worry about that. I simply go by battleship, battle cruiser, cruiser, destroyer.... as the game does. As far as land percentage, I'll leave that research to you, What caught my attention when I first started playing this game is Serbia has a cruiser on the board while the US nothing navel. America had the famous White Fleet in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.
-
@jtmayes1963 I am not looking at the map right now but I think the Serbian cruiser represents the Greek navy since as I remember it Greece is lumped in with the Serbians.
-
@jtmayes1963 By class I meant BBs, BCs, C, DDs, and subs.
-
@jtmayes1963 said in Domination 1914 No Man's Land - Official Thread:
@majesticfeet Since the game doesn't make distinction between class, I don't worry about that. I simply go by battleship, battle cruiser, cruiser, destroyer.... as the game does. As far as land percentage, I'll leave that research to you, What caught my attention when I first started playing this game is Serbia has a cruiser on the board while the US nothing navel. America had the famous White Fleet in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.
This map is sometimes a bit . . . figurative in how it interprets history.
When WWI began, the U.S. started off as neutral. It gradually became more pro-Entente, and provided Entente nations with weapons. Eventually it entered the war. Based on that track record, America's contribution to the Entente war effort could be viewed as close to zero at the start of the war, but increasing over the war's duration.
The U.S. starts off with no navy, no air force, and only a small army. The small army is not in a position to venture outside Entente borders, unless it wants to invade Mexico. Also, the U.S. starts off with only a small amount of cash. Its initial contribution to the Entente war effort is pretty much zero, just like the real war.
A number of U.S. players, including myself, do a lot of neutral farming. That decreases the U.S.'s short-term contribution to the Entente war effort, because the U.S. is pouring a large share of its resources into farming neutrals instead of fighting against the Centrals. But it increases the U.S.'s long-term contributions, because it will have higher income. That also is a reasonably good proxy for what actually happened: namely escalating levels of American involvement.
-
CP would lose all its navy very quickly which didn't happen in WW1 despite being outnumbered due to several reasons. I would suggest finding some ways to prevent CP losing all its navy within rounds.
Making some naval units default more defensive, giving Germany a bit bigger navy (their navy was overall newer than the British), introducing sea mines etc... might be solution.
Also there is a lack of the Battle of Atlantic maybe someone would want to address it in their mods.
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