Quote:- Drastically improved the VP levels and objective values in the #1914_0822_01s_Campaign_Early scenario. Based on feedback from campaign results, the old VP levels and objective values have been quartered. The change is minimal, but it has a drastic impact on the game play since greater historical emphasis is now placed on casualties than before (for example, von Moltke's historical decision to turn away from Paris was based largely on the desire of destroying the French Army by inflicting heavy losses on it in a double envelopment). It is rationalized that any losses sustained on a level that is massively out of proportion to the enemy's (on a difference of a half of a field army of men or more) would have influenced the outcome of the war, as the political will to fight a prolonged conflict would have likely been broken immediately. In regards to the changes to the campaign the following points must be mentioned...
a) Neither side can no longer afford to lose over a hundred thousand men and thousands of guns more than their enemy, doing so will alter the outcome.
b) If one side manages the elusive "holy grail" result of isolating and destroying an entire enemy field army then the campaign will likely be won easily. This was not possible before.
c) It has now been calculated that the Allies can afford to fall back from the start to the Marne, and still keep the game close in the draw result region. Losses above or beyond this, or taking back or losing objectives along the final line should tip the result one way or the other.
d) A forward Allied defense that disregards all losses should reliably result in no better result for them than a draw now, depending on how many losses were inflicted and which objectives were held of course. However, such an Allied tactic is risky because, combined with high losses, and just "a few more objectives" taken by the Germans will likely result in a Central Powers victory, rarely resulting in an Allied victory unless something miraculous occurs (such as like loss ratios are kept close).
e) Because of the changes above, the odds are stacked a little more fairly. A successful Allied tactic now is to bloody the Germans at the start, then break contact and fall back and repeat. Continue to fall back, periodically holding or counter attacking (delaying) in some areas as you, overall, continue the strategic withdrawal. The point in which the Allies should withdraw is once the Germans begin inflicting heavier casualties than the the Allies themselves are inflicting, taking into consideration also the time spent delaying the German advance. In other words, a series of delaying actions, with each disengaging at the point when the Germans begin to get the upper hand is advised. Near the end of the campaign, perhaps in the final week or so, the Allies should be looking to hold fast and counter attack where possible. Do this too early and the Germans may decimate the Allies and win from objectives and casualties inflicted. Do this at the right time and the Allies can push the Germans back and possibly administer heavier losses on the enemy (think of the historical out flanking at the Marne for example, and the near destruction of the German 1.Armee).

(12-14-2012, 05:39 PM)jonnymacbrown Wrote: "Still though, the VP levels and objective values must be adjusted and they will."

Knowing what I know now; if there were no objective hexes I'd immediately pull back towards Paris asap leaving cavalry and some rearguards to cover the withdrawal, taking some hits but linking up with the Paris Garrison, and while a Plan XVII attack in the Ardennes is amusing, it is far easier to just get the hell out of there quick while holding onto Nancy, Verdun and Toul. jonny

(12-17-2012, 11:18 AM)jonnymacbrown Wrote: Using the new data, would this have been a loss for the French? jonny