Tank design for WW2 scenario

Steff · December 16, 2002, 08:53

Currently I am working on a WW2 scenario with Germany, Italy, France, Great Britain, USA, Russia, Neutrals and Scandinavia and there occurs a problem with the tanks. There are three different tank designs (I to III) to research. For Germany I used the PzKw III, PzKw IV and the PzKw VI Tiger. For Russia the KV II, the T34 and the JS II. For the US and Great Britain I cannot split up the tanks due to the limited unitslots so I have to use one(three) for both countries. At present I used the Matilda MkII (tank design I), Grant/Lee (tank design II) and the Sherman (tank design III). Has anybody a better idea because the Matilda seems to be no good choice ?

Jimmywax · December 16, 2002, 11:21

Instead of the Matilda maybe start out with the M3/5 Stuart/Honey. A light tank that both countries used. Or maybe forget the first one all together and add the Pershing on the end.

Steff · December 16, 2002, 13:05

Good idea with the Stuart. I will include it. Attached is my actual unit file. The only unit created by myself is the SM 79 torpedo bomber. All other units and shield were created by captain nemo, tanelorm and others......

Maybe you have an idea what I can change else....

fairline · December 16, 2002, 13:59

When does the scenario start Steff? judging by the Polish units I guess it's 1939, in which case the Stuart wasn't issued to the British 8th Army until mid '41 IIRC. Have you thought of using a batch file to replace units without taking up slots, as in Red Front?

Steff · December 16, 2002, 14:26

fairline, the scenario should start shortly before 1st september 1939 and it lasts till...... Of course I thought about creating a batch file with the possibilty of more units. But I do not like such "complicated" scenarios with a lot of unit, rules and terrain files. So I restricted the number of units and only have a summer and winter edition. You can play in summer or in winter times. It's up to you and there is no specific rule to change seasons. Just do as you like it. Due to the limited units I had problems with history. I think there was no american Matilda tank and the infantry is only an english version. I tried to make it as historically correct as possible but sometimes it was not possible, sorry. But I think it is quite good......

Steff · December 16, 2002, 16:37

Here Is a screenshot of the eastern campaign....

klesh · December 16, 2002, 17:34

looks to me like you're using the PzKw's II, IV and VI... not the III as described. I think that is best though, evens it out a bit. If I were you, I'd remove the Kv-2 for the Kv-1, a much more important tank imho.

-FMK.

Case · December 16, 2002, 18:13

Yeah, the KV-2 was considered a total failure and the Soviets were fairly quick to phase it out.

The US didn't really have a tank force untill about 1941, so the Matilda II should be fine. It was Britain's best tank of the period, and some would have been issued to the US had it entered the war. If you want a US tank progression it should be M-2, M-4 and M-26(?) Pereshing.

Fore the Germans, the Tiger I was actually introduced before the Panther. From memory, Tiger I's were introduced during late 1942 and Panthers didn't really show up in significant numbers untill mid 1943, and didn't become mechanically reliable untill later that year. Anyway, the Tiger series was more a specialised tank then a main battle tank like the Pz III and Panther.

BTW, why have you given the Germans both the He-111 and Ju-88? These aircraft were broadly similar, so you could get rid of one of them and free up a unit slot.

Steff · December 17, 2002, 03:08

Thats right, I used the PzKw II and named it wrong, sorry.
The idea with the removal of the KV II is good, i will introduce the KV I.

Well, now the problem with the He 111 and the Ju 88. Of course both were in service at nearly the same time. In my scenario I have two bomber research states. Bombers I and Bombesr II. You can see the units in my previous post. Another possibility besides the Ju 88 was the He 177 Greif. But in WW2 it was not such an important bomber for the Germans due to technical problems. And it was rather a long range bomber or should it be. And with a german long range bomber the scenario would be easier for the german side as targets behind the Ural could be bombed. So I took a later version of the Ju 88 with a little bit more range as the He 111 (8 and 10) to get the scenario more balanced. In a first beta version of my scenario I had the Ar 234 (Bombers II combined with Jet Engine). So what do you think about this solution ?

Another word to the tanks. At the beginning all countries have tank design I except Russia. They only have the BA-10. I already thought about the BT-7 to replace the BA-10 as a light tank. The KV II or the KV I should be their first heavy tank but should be outclassed by the german tanks. So the KV II is not such a bad solution because the KV I was really hard for the Germans due to its heavy armor. With the research of tank design II (T34, SU 76) the game will change and the russian tanks will be a real threat to the Germans.
That was my intention.....

Case · December 17, 2002, 06:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Steff
Well, now the problem with the He 111 and the Ju 88. Of course both were in service at nearly the same time. In my scenario I have two bomber research states. Bombers I and Bombesr II. You can see the units in my previous post.

Oh, OK. Personally I'd use the Ar 234, which was a fairly promising aircraft, but what you're currently doing makes lots of sence.

Quote:

Another word to the tanks. At the beginning all countries have tank design I except Russia. They only have the BA-10.

The Soviets had a huge fleet of tanks in 1939. The Soviet tank force in 1939-41 was crippled more by poor organisation and doctrine then any shortages of tanks. However, as the Soviets used tanks primarily to support infantry, it would make more sence to give the Soviets the tank design tech, but no seperate tank units.

Steff · December 17, 2002, 06:44

Hmmm, I must say that's correct what you say about the russian tank fleet. But when I give the russians tank design I, they automatically will get the KV I or II. So I gave the russians the tech "armoured cars" thats more or less the same as tank design I but with poor armour. So I could replace the BA-10 with the BT-5 or BT-7 so the russians will have poor tanks.....

kobayashi · December 17, 2002, 09:42

For the first allied tank, I'd go with Matilda IIs, they were actually used in the Battle of Arras in 1940. The Sherman (not the firefly version) should be the second Allied tank. It definitely isn't even close to being the third tank. The third tank should either be a Cromwell, Cruiser Comet or Pershing.

German tanks should be Pz II, IV and V which were the main variants made in any great number.

Consider using the Junkers 188E to differentiate it from the earlier Junkers 88. Or even name it the Ju 388, about 50 were delivered so I guess it should qualify.

Steff · December 17, 2002, 10:06

kobayashi, great Idea with the Ju188E.

Concerning the third tank of the USA and GB I have a different opinion. Only a few Pershings saw service on german battle fields and the main allied tank in 1944/45 was the Sherman. The german opponent to the Pershing would be the Tiger II. Comparing the american and english tank groups there were more Shermans than Cromwells or Comets, so I have chosen the Sherman.

Concerning the german tanks, I would prever the PzKw VI (Tiger) because it was build in higher numbers and was the most known german tank. Of course the PzKw V (Panther) was the better tank due its speed and armour technic.

fairline · December 17, 2002, 13:28

Steff, IIRC the Tiger was only ever issued to 5 or 6 independent heavy tank battallions, a handful of SS pz Divisions and the GD and Lehr Pz Divisions. By 1944 of the 2 abteilung (battalions) in a standard German Panzer Division, generally 1 was equiped with PzKw IVHs and 1 was equiped with PzKw V Panthers. There were a few PzKw IIIs knocking around as well.

There were about 6000 Panthers built as aopposed to around 1800 Tigers and Tiger IIs. I'd go for the Panther if widespread use is your criteria - it had a better AT cpability than the Tiger and it's sloped front glacis arrmour gave better protection but the Tiger had far superior side and rear armour, and a better HE capability.

Jimmywax · December 17, 2002, 15:52

Allrighty then, I didn't know when your scenario started and just assumed that it started in Dec 1941. (typical American huh) Since it is starting before that I would give the Allies the Matilda but make it so the Americans cannot build it.That is unless you want them to join the war early.

Case is right on the account that we didn't have jack **** in the area of armor. Stupid politicians and old out dated tactics are to blame for that.

Steff · December 17, 2002, 16:34

OK fairline, you are right. I will include the Panther.
Jimmy, when I give the Matilda only to the British, the Americans will not have a tank in the first period of the war......

My scenario is nearly ready and I will need some playtester to kill some bugs. Maybe I will post it here tomorrow but without sounds (approx. 9 MB soundfiles, that's not a joke). Attached is my new unit file with the PzKw V and the Ju 188S.

MagyarCrusader · December 17, 2002, 16:54

What map are you using? Can you post a screenshot of it?

klesh · December 17, 2002, 18:06

I have to humbly disagree with the change to the Panther. The Panther A is useless due to the mantlet creating a shot trap. By the D model things get better, but only the G model is a top shelf vehicle. It indeed served and was intended to be a main battle tank, but even late war it fought alongside many IV's. You've already filled the medium tank role. If you want the scenario's German tank development to include a heavy tank type, you'll need either the VI or VI ausf B. It is up to the player to put his country in a situation to produce these in sufficient number. Dont let history bottleneck the tank design tech tree to medium tanks only. 2 cents.

-FMK.

Steff · December 18, 2002, 02:48

FMK, regarding the size and role of the tank you are right.

Germany has the PzKw II/III, the PzKw IV and PzKw VI.
So that are more or less two medium tanks at the end.
Russia has the KV I/II, the T34 and the JS II. They have a heavy tank at the end.
So Germany should also have a heavy tank at the end.

Regarding GB and US they will not have a heavy tank at the end. The Sherman and also the Firefly is not a heavy tank for me. And the Pershing saw "only a few days" service in europe.

Italy and France are limited to light tanks/armoured cars..

OK, now I have to propose following solution. Have a look at my scenario and we will discuss this matter later. I am sure there are more such problems....

I think I will post my scenario here in one or two hours......

DarthVeda · December 18, 2002, 03:20

Why not give the Americans the M10, M18, or M36 if you're not going to use the Pershing?

Steff · December 18, 2002, 03:39

This would be possible if GB and US had separate tanks, But I only have three tank units for two countries. Thats my problem, but have a look at my scenario and I think together we will find a solution.

Steff · December 18, 2002, 04:09

OK, here it is. My first CIV 2 scenario about world war 2 in Europe. Available countries are Germany, Italy, Great Britain, USA, France and Russia. The scenario should be played as Germany, GB or USA.

Before playing please read the readme file first !!!!!!!!!!

IMPORTANT:
I only have a german CIV2 version and the scenario is totally written in German. But this should not be a problem, because the role of the units should be clear, city improvements can clearly be identified and the tech tree is rather small. The file extensions have to be changed from *.ger to *.txt if you have the english/american version.

The scenario comes without sound files and is therefore only a stripped version. I will try to post the soundfiles on Thursday (will be about 6 to 7 zip files). The event sound files are missing completely and I do not know how to post it here because of the size (9MB). The event files *.txt have been stripped (without sound events) but the original german files can be checked by the *.ger file.

If you are interested in the event sound files I can send the files by email or provide an other solution to get it.

Of course there are still some bugs which need correction. Please help me. Already known bugs are:
- small tech tree (my first one)
- only a few real events
- city style of Russia changes during the game

Steff · December 18, 2002, 04:10

and part 2
sound files will follow on Thursday

Steff · December 19, 2002, 04:16

Last night I tried to translate the german rules.txt file.
Here it is....

Thoddy · December 19, 2002, 07:14

Hallo Steff, warum postest du das nicht im deutschen civ2 Forum, es gibt sicherlich auch dort paar Leute, die vom Thema Ahnung haben und gewisse Unterstützung geben können.

Ich habe ja leider mit meiner 2.WK Umsetzung für Test of Time mangels Interesses aufgehört mit der Entwicklung. Dabei war mein ansatzpunkt mal ganz anders

.

Steff · December 19, 2002, 07:35

Thoddy, natuerlich habe ich daran schon gedacht, nur haette ich das Szenario dort nicht so herausbringen koennen (Hakenkreuze, usw). Das war halt damals, die deutsche Flagge und einen gewissen Grad an Realsimus haette ich schon gerne .....und ich habe keine Lust mir vorschreiben zulassen, was ich in mein Szenario einbauen darf und was nicht. Ich habe auch erlebt, das man dort bei WW2 Themen relativ schnell in die rechte Ecke gestellt wird (nicht mir passiert). Zudem kommen in den soundevents natuerlich auch deutsche Personen der damaligen Zeit vor (z.B. Angriff auf Polen, Wochenschaumeldungen, Einnahme von Stalingrad, usw.). Genauso wie in englischen, russischen, amerikanischen Meldungen auch. Da haetten viele Leute in Deutschland ein Problem damit, obwohl absolut nichts volksverhetzendes oder andere bedenkliche Meldungen bzw. Texte vorkommen. Ich finde das zwar sehr schade, aber ich habe wirklich absolut keine Lust mich andauernd fuer irgendein Detail rechtfertigen zu muessen oder mir von anderen Leuten Vorhaltungen machen zu lassen. Die Diskussion hier im Forum ist viel ungezwungener und relativ frei von der ganzen Problematik.

Aber was ganz anderes, wie findest Du eigentlich mein Szenario ?

Thoddy · December 19, 2002, 08:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Steff
Thoddy, natuerlich habe ich daran schon gedacht, nur haette ich das Szenario dort nicht so herausbringen koennen (Hakenkreuze, usw). Das war halt damals, die deutsche Flagge und einen gewissen Grad an Realsimus haette ich schon gerne .....und ich habe keine Lust mir vorschreiben zulassen, was ich in mein Szenario einbauen darf und was nicht. Ich habe auch erlebt, das man dort bei WW2 Themen relativ schnell in die rechte Ecke gestellt wird (nicht mir passiert).
Aber was ganz anderes, wie findest Du eigentlich mein Szenario ?

Die Diskussion war so ziemlich parallel als ich meine Testbeta eingstellt habe. Ich habe daraufhin diverses entschärft.

Szen
wie ich an den events sehe beruht das szen nahezu ausschließlich auf der AI intelligenz
An dem Event hätte ich was zu "mäkeln"
@IF
CITYTAKEN
city=Dover
attacker=Deutschen
defender=Englaender
@THEN
TEXT
^Operation Seeloewe hat begonnen. Die Deutsche Wehrmacht hat den Kanal
^ueberquert und einen ersten Brueckenkopf gebildet. Der Marsch auf
^London hat begonnen.
ENDTEXT
@ENDIF

Ich komme meistens von Norden oder lande in cornwall
Dover liegt bei meinem Vorgehen genau an der hintersten Ecke und bei der letzten Stadt kommt die Meldung.
Ich würde ein unitkilled event nehmen mit einer besonders schwachen unbeweglichen einheit die in jeder britischen Stadt beheimatet ist, wenn bei den units noch platz ist. Die einheit wird dann sozusagen in der Regel vor der Eroberung gekillt.

Steff · December 19, 2002, 08:06

Oh, daran habe ich gar nicht gedacht. Stimmt, grober Fehler. Die Einheiten sind leider alle belegt. Werde mal schauen was sich machen laesst. Danke fuer den Tip...

Und sonst ???? Check mal dein mail.....