Playing as Germany in 1914 and decided to try the opposite of the Schleiffen plan. In other words, play defense in the West, and go on the offense in the East. Declare war on France to keep it honest, but don't attack Belgium and thereby keep the British at peace. Build units on the Western front to keep pace with the French numbers (or close at least), but don't attack there.
By late 1916, I had Moscow. Of course hindsite is 20-20, but do any of you think this would have worked in real life?
The courage push the bravery. ~Iron Cross
its a suicidal if you play a multiplayer game unless you want to die in 1915 making original shclieffen plan.
I dont know how France and Germany have same starting divs. At this way is impossible to stop russians too, beacause strategical redeployment is very fast.
It certainly works in game. I declared war on Belgium and Luxembourg as well, but I still managed to pull it off.
1914 - First offensive against Russia, sieze all of Poland, annex Luxembourg to shorten Western front and spare 14 divisions for the East.
1915 - Attack and annex Denmark to free up Baltic Coastguards, Keep pushing the Russians.
1916 - Russian front utterley disintegrates, no cohesion whatsoever. Transfer some troops south and mop up the mess AH has made in the Balkans.
1917 - Russia surrenders early (Would have happened sooner but I didnt take Kiev till I was at the gates of Moscow, Italy falls after I transfer the entire Russian front against them, in a huge 5 month offensive in which I outnumber them 12-1 I crush them easily, I then transfer the troops for an offensive in the West, this starts in late 1917 and after 6 months results in the French, Belgians and British being utterley destroyed on the continent.
1918 - War ends early in the year as UK White Peaces.
My biggest lesson from this game has to be the benefits of annexing Denmark. Normally about 7 divisions are required to hold the Baltic coast, but with Copenhagen in German hands, you only need to garrison Wilhelmshaven, Copenhagen and the other Danish Beach. However, you must strike hard and fast, with an overwhelming force. If you dont knock them out within a short time, the UK and France can land troops and turn a potential benefit into a costly operation that takes 5+ divisions away from the front.
I do not have to give you a reason. This is my country, I do not want him here, end of story. - Joseph Vissarionovic Stalin
I cant Dow, neutral countries, it says me me that I need to have a beligerence lower than 1 , and besides, it says me that my currently beligerence is 0. But its False its 20....
IMO it would have worked even better in real life than in the game - it took until late in the war to develop effective ways of attacking entrenched troops, if the Germans had gone on the defensive the French would have exhausted themselves in the west. Even if/when the UK joined the allies, Germany would have been in a far better shape and would likely have knocked Russia out sooner and relieved some of the pressure on Austria-Hungary to the point that they might actually hold together.
You do need to have some spies raising their belligerence. After a few attempts, you should succeed with one and be able to declare war. (I ussually go full interventionist so one point of belligerence is enough to attack over)Originally Posted by Sam877
I do not have to give you a reason. This is my country, I do not want him here, end of story. - Joseph Vissarionovic Stalin
In the real life, in the last moments of peace, the Kaiser asked to von Moltke if were possible to cancel the Belgian invasion and to concentrate in a offensive against Russia. The answer was "no", because all the plans and orders of march of the General Staff were directed to an offensive in the West and a defensive in the East. This it's the biggest fault of the German war plans: inflexibility. In the retrospective, maybe that were the best chance to German Empire: defensive against the French that would bleed attacking Metz and Lorraine; and offensive againt the Russian, that would to be defeated by a concentration of superior German and Austrian forces.
Maybe, in the game, a player that choice no to follow Schlieffen plan must be penalized with a moral and organization loss in the combat forces. And maybe a high dissention.
I would make shclieefen plan if France had less divs than ger, and if strategycal redeployment wasnt so fast and effective.
The plan itself had a serious logistical flaw--see "The Wheel that Broke" in SUPPLYING WAR by Martin van Creveld. But it's truly fatal flaw was it provided a supposedly neutral government in Britain a casus belli. It was the same kind of blunder as Pearl Harbor. And it was based on the same kind of flawed logic. It brought into reality the very worst-case situation it was designed to counter, i.e., a 2-front war, and made it worse by actually converting it to a 3-front war at sea with the greatest naval power in the world. The Schlieffen Plan ranks with the Japanese Operations Order #1 as one of the great strategic blunders of the 20th C.
I love the game, esp. AAR, because it lets you explore realistic alternatives. And yes, defending in the West and keeping the UK out was the thing to do IRL and the game.
IRL the plan doomed Germany,however against the AI Shleifen plan is fine,you can overrun belguim very fast and then rush to paris,wich will trigger the peace treaty,you can then proceed to smash russia or land in UK for some more lands in their surrender.
Just dont do in MP the human UK will annighilate you and land in VERY annoying places.
Also i distributed my troops 80:20 with west and east and due to the very fast victory against france i move 40% to serbia and 40% to russia and i leave some troops in belguim as UK has the annoying tendancy to land troops.
Last edited by AbsoluteZer0; 24-03-2012 at 09:40.
DAAAAMMNN YOU STEAM EU3 KEY!!!
“If my body dies, let my body die, but do not let my country die.” -Genghis Khan
How did you invade Denmark Doombunny? AFAIK there is no danish surrender event in the 1914 scenario and you cannot land in copenhagen because of the closed strait. I ask, because i tried to invade them, too, but i failed.
One thing you could try is placing a strong fleet right into the seazone that gets locked for you before the DOW (meaning you station your fleet in the seazone and then send the DOW). Since your ships are already there when the strait becomes impassable, they can stay in the strait and keep the connection from Odense to Copenhagen free from enemy fleets' blockade. Your armies can then walk into danish capital from Jutland, occupy it and close Baltic.
Even easier would be to put transport loaded with divisions with this fleet and assault Copenhagen amphibiously, but IIRC, GER doesn't start with any and you might not want to wait with the DOW until you built some.
OT edit: I don't think that the Anti-Schlieffen plan, that is defense against France and going after Russia first, would bring guaranteed win for Germans, as many other seem to believe. The British were very much inclined to oppose Germany, and with a war on, there was bound to be some kind of incident involving Germans damaging something british that could trigger British DOW anyway. But even if Britain stayed out, going on the offensive might end badly for Germany. See battle of Lodz. To alleviate some pressure on Austria-Hungary and force Russian to commit forces elsewhere, Germany launches attack on Lodz. They smash one Russian army, get overextended and are then almost encircled by another three armies. They have to make a hasty retreat away from Lodz. In the end, Russians defended their lines successfully and losses were comparable for both sides. In 1914, Russians on defensive in familiar territory were still a very formidable foe and could make life very hard for attacking Germans.
Last edited by Kurfürst; 22-03-2012 at 14:22.
My invasion wasn't particularly well planned, I did it on initiative. Basically, I just marched 5 divisions up the peninsula and took the Danes out the old fashioned way with a land campaign.
I do not have to give you a reason. This is my country, I do not want him here, end of story. - Joseph Vissarionovic Stalin
It's not suicidal in game, just frustrating. The British make a lot of amphibious landings that can be rage inducing, but ultimately time is on my side...I'm building a lot more troops than they are and they have to fight the Turks as well. If I want to take on the Schleiffen plan I go for the extended one - why not?
But I agree, attacking only France in the West supplies a much more compact and robust defensive area and the French were definitely looking for blood. I've actually managed to simultaneously attack both sides this way with a 50/50 troop distribution until I have to hold my position in France, then wait for Russia to fall.
Constantly creating flags.
> Trembling Blue's Colour Scales < - Version 1.4 released! Final version for DH 1.2 and KR 1.3.
> The best HOI flag depository online <
> RumpNissen's flag packs <
A fascinating book on the Russian campaign is Max Hoffman's WAR OF LOST OPPORTUNITIES. Max, as a behind-the-scenes staff officer, was the architect of Tannenberg, the successful German campaigns in the East, and even the "bitter peace" of Brest-Litovsk. Manstein is really the only other professional to pay him tribute, calling his own memoirs on the Eastern front, LOST VICTORIES. Max spent his life in the shadows of lesser men, probably because of his tongue and wit. He was reputed to show visitors where Ludendorff (himself the brains behind Hindenberg) slept before--and during--the Battle of Tannenberg. And when a woman at a reception asked what he got his Iron Cross 1st for, he replied honestly "for talking on the telephone."
In RL, if the UK had mounted an amphib assault against the German Baltic coast, would the Danish government of protested the movement of warships through the Skagerrak? Wouldn't that have totally violated their neutrality?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
