A couple of questions

[poweraxe]

hey all,

I bought the original WW1 a while back, didn't really get into it at first. To be honest, I was taken aback a bit by the complexity of the game.

When I heard the gold version was coming, I decided to give it another go, and as a fan of the period, I'm glad I did! I really love the improvements made by the gold version, the new map and the army roster/management make keeping track of things much easier.

To start off I decided to read the manual extensively first before playing a 2-player campaign with the Entente. While playing I sometimes switch to it to help explain things I didn't understand.

I do have a couple of questions though.
1 I accidentally placed a Russian(Polish) corps in the French GHQ. Is there any way to get that corps back as a reinforcement in a following turn so I can place it back on the Eastern Front?
2 When escorting units on an amphibious landing/transport, should I use the control, or transport convoy mission and what exactly is the difference between them when it comes to escorting transports?
3 I read something in the manual about the creation of an InterAllied GHQ that removes the -2 coordination penalty the Allies have, does this appear later in the war by event?
4 In the game aide for France, it is stated that starting in September 1914 there is a possible misunderstanding between Lanrezac and Joffre that might lead to the former's replacement with Franchet and the placement of Foch on a French army, however I noticed that in all warplans except XIII(which replaces Joffre with Michel), Lanrezac is not in the game, and instead Franchet starts in command of the V army. Is this rule no longer applied or is this a bug I encountered?

Aside from these minor issues, the campaign has been going really well. I've also been playing a CP campaign for a bit already, which is also progressing well so far. All in all, this is a great game and I've had a lot of fun with it so far. Thanks for this wonderful game!

[calvinus]

1 I accidentally placed a Russian(Polish) corps in the French GHQ. Is there any way to get that corps back as a reinforcement in a following turn so I can place it back on the Eastern Front?

Aarghhh! Bad mistake! You can not redeploy the corps during the Redeployment phase (Jan.-Feb. turn), because the destination would be located in another Front! Grrr...
Also, moving it by sea is too long and dangerous...
I suggest you to keep it there or to disband the unit...

2 When escorting units on an amphibious landing/transport, should I use the control, or transport convoy mission and what exactly is the difference between them when it comes to escorting transports?

Control mission is of fundamental importance because it guarantees the supply in the beach-head area. But only in the beach-head area, then you have to conquer neighboring cities...
Instead, Naval transport mission gives protection during movement.
Remember that Control mission requires the employment of large fleets.
When planning major landings, my advice is to employ two fleets, one for Control, one for Naval Transport. If you don't have two fleets, at least one for Control is fundamental.

3 I read something in the manual about the creation of an InterAllied GHQ that removes the -2 coordination penalty the Allies have, does this appear later in the war by event?

The inter-allied GHQ does not exist in WW1 PC game. Can you please report here where you found this mention in the manual, so that I can remove it?

4 In the game aide for France, it is stated that starting in September 1914 there is a possible misunderstanding between Lanrezac and Joffre that might lead to the former's replacement with Franchet and the placement of Foch on a French army, however I noticed that in all warplans except XIII(which replaces Joffre with Michel), Lanrezac is not in the game, and instead Franchet starts in command of the V army. Is this rule no longer applied or is this a bug I encountered?

Well, the initial deployment of Generals depends on the War-Plan you adopted.
Lanrezac is present in the game (see leader FRA_L09 in Leaders.xls file).
Also, I see that Lanrezac is present in all French warplans, always as commander of French V army.

You write:

...and instead Franchet starts in command of the V army

Well I understand what happened!
The "Leaders Misunderstanding" rule between Lanrezac and Franchet rule is in effect until the end of turn #4 (October 1914). When a random test is successful, Lanrezac is replaced by Franches as commander of V army!!!!

The only way to avoid such effect is to adopt the "Gallieni" war-plan option.

[calvinus]

I checked the manual:

Lanrezac, Foch and Franchet
Conflict with Joffre: in September 14, a test is carried out during the
Reinforcement Phase (D6): on a 4+, a conflict breaks out.
Lanrezac is dismissed and replaced by Franchet. In addition, Foch is
appointed to an available HQ.
The French may disregard this and keep Lanrezac in exchange for an
immediate loss of NW -4.
The same in October, a new test is carried out.

Indeed the game does not work exactly so and it should be changed as follows:

Lanrezac and Franchet
Conflict with Joffre: in September 14, a test is carried out during the
Reinforcement Phase (D6): on a 4+, a conflict breaks out.
Lanrezac is dismissed and replaced by Franchet.
The same in October, a new test is carried out.

Now I search the inter-allied GHQ rule and produce an Errata as soon as possible.

Many thanks,
Calvinus.

[poweraxe]

The inter-allied GHQ does not exist in WW1 PC game. Can you please report here where you found this mention in the manual, so that I can remove it?

It is mentioned twice, on p.157 and on p.215-216.

Well, the initial deployment of Generals depends on the War-Plan you adopted.
Lanrezac is present in the game (see leader FRA_L09 in Leaders.xls file).
Also, I see that Lanrezac is present in all French warplans, always as commander of French V army.

Well I understand what happened!
The "Leaders Misunderstanding" rule between Lanrezac and Franchet rule is in effect until the end of turn #4 (October 1914). When a random test is successful, Lanrezac is replaced by Franches as commander of V army!!!!

The only way to avoid such effect is to adopt the "Gallieni" war-plan option.

I went ahead and tried this, by adopting Plan XVII(historical WP) with the Gallieni Warplan option, and it did not change anything; Franchet starts out as commander of the V army and Lanrezac is not seen. If I understand correctly, the rule should only apply starting in September 14, right? so Lanrezac should be in command of V army during the Early August and August turns, which is not happening. From what I experienced, only plan XIII makes Lanrezac commander of the V army, in the other plans he is not present in the game, although the leaders.xls indeed says he should be.

Also, if I choose the generals option, Lanrezac commands the III army and not Franchet as the description said(except, again, when plan XIII is used).

[calvinus]

Well, there's an error in TurnRules.xls file for the Leader Misunderstanding rule between FRA_L09 (Lanrezac) and FRA_L11 (Franchet).
The rules is scripted to be in effect since turn #1 (Early August), and not from the end of turn #2 (August-September). I'm going to set the start turn to 2 (August), and not to 3 (September), because the rule is supposed to be applied in the end of Reinforcements phase. Military and Reinforcements phases are mixed into one single phase in WEGO mode, so if I set turn 3, the rule is checked only once instead of twice.

From WarPlanTurnRules.xls file...

• War-plan option "Generals":

FRA_WPO_Generals TR_AddPoliticalEffect 1 1 TP_WarPlans FRA PE_LeaderAppoint,PO_None,1,1,0,FRA_L11,FRA_A03

it means if you adopt option "Generals", FRA_L11 (Franchet, not Lanrezac) is appointed commander of III army.

• War-plan option "Gallieni":

FRA_WPO_Gallieni TR_AddPoliticalEffect 1 1 TP_WarPlans FRA PE_ModifyTurnRule,PO_None,1,1,0,TR_LeadersMisunderstanding,FRA,FRA_L09,FRA_L11,5

it means if you adopt option "Gallieni", the die roll required to have Lanrezac replaced in command by Franchet becomes 5+.


I'm going to do a detailed test. For the next patch I will add for sure the fix on the Leaders Misunderstanding rule, in force since turn #2.

Thanks,
Calvinus.

[poweraxe]

Great! Thanks for your help!