World War One PBEM Playtest

[Nilat]

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)

[Historical Atze]

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

[Palaiologos]

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.

[Nilat]

I agree with Historical Atze!!

[Historical Atze]

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]

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

[Palaiologos]

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.

[Palaiologos]

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?

[Historical Atze]

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

[Nilat]

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]

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]

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

And I didnt say im germanys ally

[Historical Atze]

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]

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

[Historical Atze]

I'm confused, you are allied with Germany?