I've read quite a few of the previous posts concerning EAW, but not all. Perhaps some of these items have been addressed? Thanks DB
1. Messages which exceed the width of the message display area should either wrap to the next line or the message area needs to be enlarged. These messages typically are air battle results with the last part of the message off screen to the right and unreadable.
2. It appears that an air battle display window does not automatically delete when a new battle result (crossed swords) is selected from the message display. The previous display bleeds into the new display and is only deleted when the ‘x’ box in the upper right corner is clicked on that air battle result window. I think that the ‘x’ box on all these displays is unnecessarily small by the way.
3. When reading the battle results using the larger (and usually easier to read) font the text often wraps onto itself making the text unreadable. If the top section of the battle result window were larger it would provide space to wrap the text so as to be legible.
4. The Bulgarian units which have their strengths displayed in black against the dark green unit icon color are very hard to read. Perhaps this text could be displayed in another lighter color or highlighted in some way to be move visible.
5. US generals Hunter-Liggett and Graves are listed as BG but have two stars on their icon. Italian general Ameglio is listed as major general, but the icon has one star. There may be other leaders with inconsistent data.
6. There seems to be a problem with the Montenegrin corps commander Janko Vukotic. Once the split units button is clicked on this leader apparently he is prohibited from ever combining any units into a corps. Including even the subunits he begins the game with. There is no unique Montenegrin unit in the game. There should be one, commanded by Vukotic, and it should be compatible with the Serbian army.
7. Recently while playing as the Eastern Entente the Russian state funds remained at 0 for both early and late June 1915 while NM was at 88. No battles were lost and significant victories were won during these turns. Is this due to some obscure historical issue or to a programming problem?
8. These are several issues related to the Czar. His icon appeared in two places on the map at the same time once he took command. One was deployed at the front and one was in St Petersburg. Also the Czar was blamed for defeat and, even though the morale level was 75, the Russians were still decremented 1% support for the war. But not only wasn’t the Czar in a battle, in fact there had been no battle that turn. On another occasion support for the war was reduced 1% with the message that troops in Russia were blaming the Czar for continued defeats, except there had been 4 turns of continuous Russian victories without a defeat. I could understand this if there had been even one defeat or even no battle, but this was hard to take. Later, the czar was once again blamed for defeat and Russian morale decremented 1%, yet this occurred after the revolution and the Czar had been deposed! -
9. During a recent game there was a battle, Russian(defender)/German(attacker), the results of which I can not understand. Two German units were destroyed, the casualty count was Russia 1640, Germany 8456/162/30, yet it was called a Russian defeat even though there was no change in province ownership.
10. I do not believe the event ‘Molkes Replacement’ should occur when there is no attack through Belgium, i.e. when neither the “Schlieffen Plan” nor the historic game has been selected for play.