Florent wrote:I agree totally here with what you wrote.
The Kuban situation is difficult and disaster as it happened to me is a real danger.
Yes the cost are so huge for now that it's impossible to spread the revolution nevertheless with hindsight after 3 days of play, i would buy my units differently at first with 34 money.
Instead of buying costly Regiments of Fusiliers in small numbers, i would buy initially 17 units of expendable Redguards Rgts at a cost...of 2.
Perhaps it is a solution to create some Strategic Reserves for the fight in Ukraine, Baltic countries, Finland and Poland.
With the Gold Event you can create the Fusiliers Divisions to reinforce them.
And with the soon working Requisition there will be some Extras if you collect 5-6 areas regularly.
Florent wrote:After my first playing where nothing happened at Tsarytsin, i would not hesitate to send Stalin to help in the Kuban, he has plenty of armored trains but should fight in defense only.
Kotik wrote:Well in the Kuban area I have, a couple of times, managed to make the whites to disperse their forces and with a powerful counter attack to destroy some units and stabilize the front over winter 1918.
Kotik wrote:My "trick" was to defend close to the front which makes the whites to strike deep in my territory and weaken them self, then I counter attack with my strongest force which does some damage, although I'm not sure on how much and how lasting, I haven't played for so long into the game.
Kotik wrote:I for once dont understand what to do with partisans on foot, they are slow and small and die of like flies, heck raiders on foot in AACW were more useful.
wosung wrote:Yeah it's a gamble. But I've got the impression in the Kuban area the Whites crush the Reds more often than it's the other way around, like:
"Whites:3 - Reds: 1"
wosung wrote:So you didn't even combines those three stacks?!
Alexor wrote:Great advices...only one thing...I play the Whites and i need advice too !!
Kotik wrote:Well in the Kuban area I have, a couple of times, managed to make the whites to disperse their forces and with a powerful counter attack to destroy some units and stabilize the front over winter 1918.
My "trick" was to defend close to the front which makes the whites to strike deep in my territory and weaken them self, then I counter attack with my strongest force which does some damage, although I'm not sure on how much and how lasting, I haven't played for so long into the game.
But otherwise I agree with previous posters, some balancing and some extra help would be quite helpful. I for once dont understand what to do with partisans on foot, they are slow and small and die of like flies, heck raiders on foot in AACW were more useful.
wosung wrote:Yeah sure, from hindsight I did the same. But you'd better hope Clovis is NOT reading this. Otherwise he might fiddle with the AI. And next time we both loose Tsaritsyn in a nick of time and build up a nice "proto-Stalingrad" down there in Northern Caucasus. Who they rename Tsaritsyn after later on remains open ...
What about Athenagrad? Clovisgrad?!
Regards
Clovis wrote:Partisans: design decision:These troops were locally recruited and got part of their efficiency from their knowledge and support they had on a territory they were inhabitants. As there's no possibility in AGE engine to hinder these forces to be limited in an aera, choice has been made to make them very slow, to force layers to use them differently than regulars.
Kotik wrote:Well cant you give them some kind of speciality like being able to live of the land, I think were such a speciality in AACW, "forager"?
Kev_uk wrote:I find in the three times I have started the GC (and finished around 12 months later) that I can start with the Reds quite good. In my last game I was doing well in the East (putting all garrisons on defend at all costs I found was quite rewarding in the early days, as sometimes the AI would leave the particular city alone if they never took in first round), and I was using Trotsky with Bela Kun troops from Moscow as a form of 'fire-brigade', reacting to threats along the rail lines, repairing broken tracks and shoring up possible areas under threat. About 10k troops, and with Trotsky's abilities he is the most useful Red leader. Not perfect and cannot stand up to a White stack of 20k+ troops, but at least he bites.
In the South, the Don, I try and pull back to Tsaritsyn, and with Stalins armoured trains, use these in defence. I give ground as you are sending the troops who hold the cities down in the Caucasus to their demise as Whites so stacked and strong here. Hit and run along train tracks with your armoured trains to cause casualties, but without leaving Tsaritsyn undefended, or just with garrison troops, you cannot take AND hold ground. At least not this first year of the conflict.
My current game (which is now over waiting for patch) I started taking Ukraine cities and aimed for Kiev, but not strong enough plus again leaving rear undefended if stack all units to gain strength.
In many ways, from what I know about this war, I guess its very historical for the Red player to suffer from lack of good troops, lack of money (economy was wrecked after WW1), to be pressed on all fronts. This first year is about defence. I have yet to form a offensive strategy as have not played later than 1919.
Kev.
Cat Lord wrote:Ah. That shouldn't happen. It's a bug, thanks.
Cat
wosung wrote:As for building strategies until the first balancing patch, honestly I'm quite clueless. But you're probably right on this. Good one!
Red Inf Rgt:
building costs: 8 money, 10 conscripts, 30 days
strength: 20, cohesion: 50
1 regular Inf replacement element: 9 money, 10 conscripts.
Red Guard Mil:
building costs: 2 money, 14 conscripts, 20 days
strength: 12, cohesion: 40
1 Mil replacement element: 1 money, 7 conscripts.
Thus, Mil gives you more bang for the buck. And they can be trained to regular status by training officers (I could be wrong with this).
Now whether some more Mil could resist the Whites remains open. But maybe one first should train them (?!) and send them against Greens and Ukrainians.
Maybe the designers should add some Mil divisions in the building panel, additional to the Mil double regiment, or brigade?
Regards
At which point, instead of being able to use militia replacements which cost one money each, you have to use Line infantry ones which cost 9 each. Thus crippling the Red war effort since you'll never be able to afford to replace any of your losses...OneArmedMexican wrote:Don't forget training officers. One training officer can transform a unit of Red Guards into a unit of Line Infantry within two turns.
Kev_uk wrote:True, I have thought on this in my GC on how strong the Whites are - some places, even if I outnumber them, I cannot take with an assault.
Kotik wrote:if you add more artillery to fighting forces that could help compensating militias lower fighting capabilities while on the defence. Once you have worn down your enemy and gained experience your self then you can go on the offensive.
I dont know how the promotion system work when it comes to promoting militias to regular infantry but only militias with high experience should be able to promote. I think like this, a militia with high experience are units that are important, either they are in front line service and they have gained so much experience that they can just as well be infantry or you have so few of them now that you can spare officers to train them to a higher level.
Return to “Revolution Under Siege”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests