AGEOD Forums

I need some quick tips how to generate War supply as Russia ..
The only clue I have right now is ships in the baltic blockade box.

GlobalExplorer wrote:I need some quick tips how to generate War supply as Russia ..
The only clue I have right now is ships in the baltic blockade box.

that's pretty much about it... aside from capturing cities that generate it.

This is one of the limitations that Russia had (couldn't equip soldiers with rifles in 1915 and thus many had to wait for a man to die to get a rifle) when it came to equipping their troops.

You cannot unless you manage to overrun CP territories.

Russian 3rd and 4th lines in a battalion, did not have rifles, they used the rifles of the 1st and 2nd lines.
This means from 1915 onwards, a Russian corps (in game terms) had "1 Infantry + 2 Militia divisions". to compensate for loss of artillery, more men were added into every infantry division by the Russian Command. Divisions having 22000 men were not uncommon, in contrast German pre-war divisions were at 15000, this dropped to 12000 for the mobilised (reservists/landwehr) divisions and further dropped in 1915 to 10500 or so. By 1918 German Divisions had just 8500-8800 men, American divisions at this time had 24000 men. But Germany compensated by increasing firepower 18 times, thus the 1918 divisions were theoretically approx. 10 times as powerful on the defensive as the 1914 divisions of Germany.
Russia could not do this and so got defeated.
USA had more men in a division as their recruiting barracks were far-far-away and they carried about double the men required to ensure all casualties were immediately replaced.

Thanks, ok. So it seems Russia must be played the stereotypical way, where 2 man share 1 rifle.
I had thought I could try to modernize the army and avoid the many mistakes that lead to Russias defeat.
Currently I'm dismantling fort batteries which gives me some needed siege artillery which I could otherwise never afford.

A question that still remains is, did heavy railroad guns really need 100 times as much war supply as an infantry division? I find that a bit overdone, or is it just to prevent me from building railroad guns at all?

GlobalExplorer wrote:Thanks, ok. So it seems Russia must be played the stereotypical way, where 2 man share 1 rifle.
I had thought I could try to modernize the army and avoid the many mistakes that lead to Russias defeat.
Currently I'm dismantling fort batteries which gives me some needed siege artillery which I could otherwise never afford.

A question that still remains is, did heavy railroad guns really need 100 times as much war supply as an infantry division? I find that a bit overdone, or is it just to prevent me from building railroad guns at all?

Rail guns are a pretty large investment in time and resources to build. While I'm not going to say 100 times as much as a division, they were much more difficult to make.

And for anyone still more clueless than me: the Baltic shipping box generates nothing.
Had 2 transporters there, now I move them into to the Atlantic, probably with the same result.

Reiryc wrote:Rail guns are a pretty large investment in time and resources to build. While I'm not going to say 100 times as much as a division, they were much more difficult to make.

WS is 10 vs 1000

GlobalExplorer wrote:WS is 10 vs 1000

I was referring to real life investments of time/resources, not game

Exaclty, and that would mean it is too excessive in the game.

GlobalExplorer wrote:Exaclty, and that would mean it is too excessive in the game.

We don't know what an exact exchange is in real life. But we do know that it was a significant effort in time and resources. Can't say we have enough info to know decide it's excessive in game.

Getting Railroad guns technology is lot of expenditure in R&D, historically only a few of the 'extra long range' PARIS guns were built- why? Cost and effectiveness.
Whereas over 250 infantry divisions were formed by the same Germans.

Shri wrote:Getting Railroad guns technology is lot of expenditure in R&D, historically only a few of the 'extra long range' PARIS guns were built- why? Cost and effectiveness.
Whereas over 250 infantry divisions were formed by the same Germans.

Do the railroad guns only represent those monsters? I would think not as the Western Entente fielded hundreds of former naval/coastal guns (the US alone had planned for 30 batteries, though eventually the guns varried) on railroad carriages as heavy siege artillery...

Actually this makes the point that a regional decisions similar to the dismantle fort guns could be added to dismantle coastal guns and place them on rail carriages (so war supply cost, remove coastal battery, add new railroad battery)...

WSU is actually "ok" for EE my main issue was getting funds...I thought it was drastically low compared to CP and WE. Making bucket loads of milita divisions seems very "russian" but is not doable in the game due to the low funds you get.

Are there "Training" leaders in the game ?

On others Ageod game we can train militia to regular this way, without consuming war supply.

If not maybe some could be added to help russian training an army from militia in the long run.

I search for but in the start setup there where no training leader there.

gotrek wrote:WSU is actually "ok" for EE my main issue was getting funds...I thought it was drastically low compared to CP and WE. Making bucket loads of milita divisions seems very "russian" but is not doable in the game due to the low funds you get.

PRINT MONEY- use the RGD to get 1000 Gold every few turns, you will get your money.

caranorn wrote:Do the railroad guns only represent those monsters? I would think not as the Western Entente fielded hundreds of former naval/coastal guns (the US alone had planned for 30 batteries, though eventually the guns varried) on railroad carriages as heavy siege artillery...

Actually this makes the point that a regional decisions similar to the dismantle fort guns could be added to dismantle coastal guns and place them on rail carriages (so war supply cost, remove coastal battery, add new railroad battery)...

I think many of that is Heavy Artillery, railway guns are like - BIG BERTHA, PARIS Gun etc, which were far too big and fired from a distance of 20 Miles or so. In relatively safe place but needed extensive rails to be transported, huge SHELLS, a single shell cost as much as a 'field artillery' gun. etc.
It is more or less useless, unless you have Fortresses. Heavy Artillery on the other hand is quite useful.

caranorn wrote:Do the railroad guns only represent those monsters? I would think not as the Western Entente fielded hundreds of former naval/coastal guns (the US alone had planned for 30 batteries, though eventually the guns varried) on railroad carriages as heavy siege artillery...

Actually this makes the point that a regional decisions similar to the dismantle fort guns could be added to dismantle coastal guns and place them on rail carriages (so war supply cost, remove coastal battery, add new railroad battery)...

I think many of that is Heavy Artillery, railway guns are like - BIG BERTHA, PARIS Gun etc, which were far too big and fired from a distance of 20 Miles or so. In relatively safe place but needed extensive rails to be transported, huge SHELLS, a single shell cost as much as a 'field artillery' gun. etc.
It is more or less useless, unless you have Fortresses. Heavy Artillery on the other hand is quite useful.

How about creating a periodic event/political decision for the western Entente to send some money&war supply to Russia (From WE stocks) ?

I did not know if england&france did it during WW1, but it is a logical and legitimate option in my opinion.

This is what British leaders thought and tried - Gallipoli.. Rest is disaster

The majority of the Russian imports were via the northern ports of Arkhangelsk and Murmansk, but the rail line connecting the latter to Petrograd wasn't finished until 1915.

There was the Trans-Siberian. But at 5500 miles long, and mostly single track IIRC, it wasn't very efficient.

Costs cannot be totally proportional in a game, balancing aspects have to be taken care of. Never compare directly money, war supplies, and conscripts to draw conclusions on the various units to recruit. Events and decisions neither.