EP '14 mechanics/balance

[ComradeP]

Volcano Man, would it be an option to rate the 1st Army heavy artillery train as siege artillery based on their relative strength against the forts in the area, which as you discovered were not modern? The guns would presumably have been adequate for siege operations during the time they were constructed, which was seemingly the same time the forts were constructed. If there are no modern forts in an area, late 19th century siege guns should be able to make a lasting impression and it would at the least give 1st Army some incentive to go after Koenigsberg if it's felt they can take it. It would still take a lot of time to get there and it's debatable if they can normally get there, but any incentive helps.

As an aside: I'm currently reading Osprey's "German infantryman vs. Russian infantryman 1914-15" and it mentions that German recruits did receive entrenching tools, just like the Russian infantry. This might have been later on, perhaps their source is mistaken. However, it seems logical to me that at least the standing pre-war army had entrenching tools in substantial quantities.

One thing I've been wondering about and which the book also mentions is just how much training the Landwehr actually got, which wasn't that much as they didn't attend annual manoeuvres.

I've also been wondering if pre-war planning envisioned units cooperating like the German and Austro-Hungarian cavalry formations do at Lodz. Considering that it wasn't particularly clear where the Austro-Hungarian forces would go, or where the German forces would support them if necessary, it seems unlikely the HKK formations were operating based on a pre-war plan. The officers of the two nations might not even have met eachother before the war in the worst case scenario.

The book is a more interesting read so far than I expected, even though it's just one book it does add to what can be found in books like "Collision of Empires" and Hindenburg's Memoirs.