Scenario Preview: Lebensraum 1939 - Page 3

Case · October 13, 2002, 19:29

On the topic of Turkey, Ataturk's legacy really shouldn't increase the value of mosques. Ataturk is best remembered for his secular reforms which greatly reduced the influence of religion in Turkey

klesh · October 13, 2002, 21:27

Yeah I know that. The Wonder itself is a holdover from AoW. Henrik pointed out that Turkey wasnt exactly hyper-religious at the time, so I went with merely a namechange. The fact that it boosts temples is pretty much a gameply issue to help Turkey's Monarchy...

As far as the text goes in the civlopedia, the pedia will eventually be changed for that.

-FMK.

tarpoon · October 14, 2002, 10:53

A picture of an destroyed Char 2C (Char du Rupture) and some german landers visiting it.

Pevonian · October 20, 2002, 10:59

The scenario looks like it will be really good. I don't suppose there's any room but if there is a space I'd like to join that PBEM game...

:0

Pevonian · October 27, 2002, 04:40

Contrary to the former post by (I forget whom, but he had an Irish Tricolour Flag)

Quote:

Errr... From the map FMK it looks as though Ireland is part of Britain. We were, with the exception of the North however, an independent nation by 1939.

This however (to my knowledge) is untrue. Ireland did have home rule during this period, but was part of the British Empire and the Commonwealth until it became the fully independant "Eire" in 1948, meaning that Britain could still have control over it's cities in Civ (you said you wanted them to have more cities or similar earlier I think....)

:0

Case · October 27, 2002, 06:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Pevonian
This however (to my knowledge) is untrue. Ireland did have home rule during this period, but was part of the British Empire and the Commonwealth until it became the fully independant "Eire" in 1948, meaning that Britain could still have control over it's cities in Civ (you said you wanted them to have more cities or similar earlier I think....)

While Ireland was still part of the Commonwealth in 1939-45, it was most certainly not alligned with Britain. The Commonwealth was/is a loose political club, and is in no way a military or economic alliance.

our_man · October 27, 2002, 06:35

In response to your question Pevonian, Ireland only became a Republic in 1947 I believe, until then we were only a Dominion. Suggesting however that Ireland should be lumped into the British Civ at the beginning of the game is not realistic from a historical point of view.

Up until 1932 the British parliament still exerted control over our laws, but due to the Statute of Westminster of 1927 (in which Kevin O'Higgins played a pivotal role in creating) Dominion states could change their constitution without consulting Britain. With the coming to power of Fianna Fail, de Valera created a new constitution which destroyed the power of Governor-General, which was the last British office that could influence our independence. Throughout the 30's de Valera sought to remove all links with Britain - hence the Economic War and the returning of the Treaty Ports.

Even if this does not convince you as to why Ireland should be represented neutrally, the fact that we declared neutrality (the only Dominion country to do so) during the 2nd World War is enough of a criteria to warrant an independent country. To suggest otherwise is ludicrous.

As it is in the scenario, I feel that there should be a few Minor Nations units in Ireland, as all the British have to do is walk into the Irish cities - if we had been invaded by either an Allied or Axis power we would have put up some sort of fight. Of course we would have got our asses kicked, but in Civ terms surely we would have been able to damage a unit or two? Maybe some partisans?

Case · October 27, 2002, 22:11

If anyone's interested, the Irish OOB for WW2 can be found at: http://home.adelphia.net/~dryan67/orders/eire.html

From looking at where the 2 divisions were deployed (Dublin and Cork), I'd guess that the Irish were mainly concerned about the British and/or Germans trying to grab their strategic ports. The relative absence of units on the border with Northern Ireland is also interesting.

our_man · October 28, 2002, 08:19

Thanks for the link Case! It makes for interesting reading - The "Piddling Panzers".

Arthedain · October 28, 2002, 08:47

Hey!
Has anyone thought of that Vilna should belong to poland? Well it's not that important because it was quickly ockupied by the Soviet Union but I just wanted to tell you.

Otherwise i must say that this is a great scen FMK

Boco · October 28, 2002, 17:52

When was the Commonwealth formed (hope I didn't miss an earlier post)?

Case · October 28, 2002, 20:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Boco
When was the Commonwealth formed (hope I didn't miss an earlier post)?

I think that the British renamed their Empire as the Commonwealth after WW1. The current form of the commonwealth (ie a pointless club of ex-British colonies) came into being after WW2.

techumseh · October 28, 2002, 20:53

The Commonwealth was formed in the '50s I believe, as the British Empire dissolved with the independence first of India and then the African and Caribbean colonies. The Queen wanted something like an empire to rule over, but India and others wanted to be republics, so they let her be the "head" of the Commonwealth.

It also had an economic aspect, with "favourable" tariffs for Commonwealth countries for their raw materials in exchange for British manufactured goods. This aspect has more or less disappeared with Britain joining the European market. Since the end of apartheid, South Africa has rejoined the Commonwealth. They were kicked out in the '60s.

tanelorn · November 1, 2002, 21:17

Great scenario, I single- played both versions (well, at least a few turns).
I know this is an alternate history scenario but, IMHO:

A few points about the map: Back at 1939 Adrianople was Turkish, not Bulgarian and Mosul was Iraqi, not Turkish.

The British mandate was lifted and Iraq was an independed monarchy, nominally, but because of the oilfields -in Mosul of all places-, in the Kurdish territory there were still imperial troops stationed in the area. So, when a pro-axis coup-d' etat was staged after the war broke out, the British intervened and took active control. They were in conflict with Vichy French in control of Syria and Lebanon too.

The Bulgarians held Adrianople only briefly, during the Balkan wars (1912-13).

Moreover, the Turks did not have a production line for Renault tanks (they had only a few samples of tanks), but produced about 100 polish planes

.

The Spanish actualy produced Bf 109 Messerchmits as Ha 1109 (Db 601 engines) and Ha 1112 (Merlin engines!).

Moreover, giving so many movement points to ships without lowering their attack factors makes them the ultimate coastal killer. The British navy can shoot the entire European coastline clear in a couple of turns!

What do you think?

techumseh · November 2, 2002, 01:41

Quote:

Originally posted by tanelorn

Moreover, giving so many movement points to ships without lowering their attack factors makes them the ultimate coastal killer. The British navy can shoot the entire European coastline clear in a couple of turns!

What do you think?

No doubt about it, shore bombardment is far too powerful. It would be better to give ships lower attack and defense factors and even slightly higher hit points. That way they could take out one land unit but usually get enough damage to make repeat attacks risky.

klesh · November 2, 2002, 12:14

Yes, this is very true. I'll take your advice for a test drive techumseh. Though, I have been debating removing costal bombardment from all ships, except maybe destroyers.

-FMK.

tanelorn · November 2, 2002, 19:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Field Marshal Klesh I have been debating removing costal bombardment from all ships, except maybe destroyers.

-FMK.

Wait! Destroyers had escort/ anti-sub duties, it was Battleships that performed coastal bombardment.

Giving the sub advantages/disadvantages flag to all the ships would nullify the benifits from subs, unless the subs retained very high attack/ firepower factors (and very low defence and movement, for balance).

Destroyers could still be the fastest and only unit able to detect subs (that now includes most surface ships as well) but low stats otherwise.

Also German infantry presence in Eastern Europe is still too weak, in my oppinion.

One more thing, a ToT pbem version would solve many issues with its two extra rows of units, can't have/ can't research flags for techs and units and intricate diplomatic triggers.
Plus 24bit graphics.

I hope this doesn't sound "too much".

curtsibling · November 21, 2002, 07:17

FMK, Henrik, This is looking like a fun scenario!!!

Where do I download it!?!

curtsibling · November 21, 2002, 07:19

Quote:

Originally posted by tarpoon
A picture of an destroyed Char 2C (Char du Rupture) and some german landers visiting it.

What a beast of a machine!

Remind me to never underestimate the French tank regiments!

Dr. Nick · November 21, 2002, 08:31

curt, there never were any French tank regiments.

techumseh · November 21, 2002, 11:31

Quote:

Originally posted by El Awrence
curt, there never were any French tank regiments.

Huh?

curtsibling · November 21, 2002, 12:54

Quote:

Originally posted by El Awrence
curt, there never were any French tank regiments.

Ok, I meant the "Tank Brigades" of the French Armoured Corps...

Happy????

techumseh · November 21, 2002, 14:04

The French DCR's (armoured divisions) each had 2 demi-brigades of tanks. Demi-brigade = regiment.

curtsibling · November 22, 2002, 04:49

Quote:

Originally posted by techumseh
The French DCR's (armoured divisions) each had 2 demi-brigades of tanks. Demi-brigade = regiment.

Thank you, techumseh!

Please check your PM...

Henrik · November 22, 2002, 08:13

Quote:

Originally posted by curtsibling
FMK, Henrik, This is looking like a fun scenario!!!

Where do I download it!?!

Not sure, not at my server anymore though

While the server is my own, the company providing the connection for it dislikes hosting stuff trough their connection

klesh · November 22, 2002, 17:58

Time to get a new connection provider there H.

And yes, the scenario is 'nowhere' currently. I will most likely finish the last few things to be touched, then mail it off to Apolyton's Database. It will only be momentarily though, as v2 is in the works. Same gamefiles mostly, with a kickarse new map.

But today at work I thought long and hard about Stalingrad.

Patroklos · December 2, 2002, 12:59

Did it go to apolyton yet?

I just found this thread today and it has made me go dig my Civ II disc out of the closet (I am disgusted by the CivIII WWII scenarios). Hope you release a version to the public soon.

Never tried PBEM before, but will definetly after reading the test thread.

klesh · December 2, 2002, 18:26

Well there you have it Patroklos. Welcome to PBEMS, you'll find they are quite fun indeed. Be sure to check the PBEM forum and view the guide there, its got what you need to get familliar.

I have not mailed this out to either CF or Apolyton because I am lazy. I have also been busy tinkering with other things during my alloted Civ time. But you and others have been asking and I really should do it. Its 17:30 here and I got the night to myself. We'll see what I can do to finalize and get this thing out in the very near future.

-FMK.

-FMK.

tarpoon · December 3, 2002, 10:32

Klesh, any comments on adding the Char du Rupture as heavy french tank?

Patroklos · December 6, 2002, 08:39

Any luck in getting the scenario up?