"World War II - Under Construction"

Cifer Almasy · June 19, 2003, 11:31

This is name of our new project. (Ok, its still the scenario Jim and I tried to plan) but with the title we choosed and a new compagnion (?):
Curt Sibling will help us!

Now its Jimmy, Curt and me.

First I will quote Jim from our last thread:

Quote:

"World War II "Under Construction" - Global WW2 1937-45 Scenario

Ok, as all of you who clicked to visit this thread have read the subject we don´t need to explain the theme further.

1st let me answer some questions.

(1) Why 1937-45 and not 1939-45?

Well, we decided to start the game in 1937, beginning with most of our Western Historians called the "Chinese Incident" at the Marco Polo Bridge between Imperial Japanese Forces and parts of the Chinese Army. Also a longer build-up will be much more fun (i mean also diplomatic fun. imagine the "Anschluss" of Austria 1938 and the Sudeten Crisis 1938/39).

(2) Which Civs to take/leave out?

We decided to have seven moretheless playable civs and give the Neutrals to the Barbarians. Playable would be: Germany, Italy (yes you read right, Italy. Explanation below) and Japan on the one side. Great Britain, France and the USA on the other side. The USSR should be some kind of alternative ideological power.

(3) Why Italy?

Well, not easy to explain but for this should become some kind of different WW2 scenario we decided to do it either with Italy as we do it with France. When the scenario kicks of Europe is divided between the 3 Ideologies mentioned above. Democracy (UK, France) with the US standing aside watching, Fascism (Germany, Italy) and the USSR. What we like to include into this scenario is the fact that Italy was some kind of decisive to the German War Machinery (Albania, Greece). For mostly these reasons we decided to make this scenario with Italy instead of e.g. China though there wouldn´t be many cities in Italy (what is the most popular reason to leave it out).

Ok, first answers are here but if you have some other ones just ask. This thread should not only inform you about the progress but should also be some kind of platform where you post your comments, ideas and critics.

Yet we have a map and some citys added. For me its really important to focus on realism and balance. Jimmy and I have a lot of ideas but we still are far away from a final version.
Yet I am not sure if we should include stackable terrain or not. We also thought about event- and unitchanges per batch-file.
As my English isnt the best perhaps I will have to write German sometimes (if I am not able to explain my ideas to Jimmy). I please you to forgive me but I will try to write in English.
Ok, thats it first. Soon I will post the map (with the first citys).

curtsibling · June 19, 2003, 18:59

The joy of WW2 scenario construction!

I will do what it takes to help make this one a winner!

I like the idea of the 1937 start, with war looming in the near distance.

I also like this idea of the European focus, with Italy being important!

Good things are going to happen with this scenario!

yaroslav · June 19, 2003, 19:11

Have you consired to start the game in 1936? This way, you could reflect two big incidents: The Marco Polo incident you told us about (were the Japanese could get experience and even some "barbarian" China cities), and the Spanish Civil War (were the Germans/Rusians could get experience if you put some "barbarian" units/cities in Spain)

Cifer Almasy · June 19, 2003, 20:13

Quote:

Originally posted by yaroslav
Have you consired to start the game in 1936? This way, you could reflect two big incidents: The Marco Polo incident you told us about (were the Japanese could get experience and even some "barbarian" China cities), and the Spanish Civil War (were the Germans/Rusians could get experience if you put some "barbarian" units/cities in Spain)

That would be a nice idea, too!

I´ll ask the others what they think about it and then decide. But the "what if" idea is a good thing - looking at the Spanish Civil war there could be a lot of oportunities. Thanks a lot

jim panse · June 20, 2003, 02:22

Thanks for this advice yaro, keep these comments coming!!!

Palaiologos · June 20, 2003, 06:15

What would the scenario turn rate be?

if it is something like 1-2 months per turn then a scenario start at 1936 would mean 18-36 turns more.

And that in turn would mean that China might have fallen to the Japs by 1938 and the Germans occupy Paris by 1937.

Keep in mind that the whole WWII microprose scenario was 48 turns long-long enough for an aggressive player to conquer the world.

Cifer Almasy · June 20, 2003, 06:29

uuuh...

thats something I didn´t think about yet. I just know that I´d like to multiply the citys granarys with 12 or else so that they grow a lot slower.

FiGu · June 20, 2003, 08:39

It would be nice if you start with the Italian Invasion of Ethopia in 1936.

PS Curt, look into to your PM inbox

jim panse · June 20, 2003, 14:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Palaiologos
What would the scenario turn rate be?

if it is something like 1-2 months per turn then a scenario start at 1936 would mean 18-36 turns more.

And that in turn would mean that China might have fallen to the Japs by 1938 and the Germans occupy Paris by 1937.

Keep in mind that the whole WWII microprose scenario was 48 turns long-long enough for an aggressive player to conquer the world.

I thought about this for a long time and I had some ideas for making it more difficult for Germany and Japan.

Maybe extra-expensive units (representing the superb training of the Wehrmacht) and some kind of lacking military capacities in 1936 (city improvements!) could do something about this.

Cifer Almasy · June 20, 2003, 14:48

I thought about making Infantry from time to time obsolete simulating that you don´t have an uncountable mass of soldiers you can "produce". While tanks and Artys are always produceable.

Palaiologos · June 21, 2003, 04:22

Expensive units could do the trick but be forewarned that the AI detecting weakness might launch sneak attacks.

Palaiologos · June 21, 2003, 04:28

Perhaps............

What if this "free time" is used by the player not to build only his military might but advance in science as well.
I mean, Germany had made a lot of breakthroughts in technology and combat tactics before the war(the concept of blitzkrieg-armoured formations supported by bombers to fight a war of movement) and was only to eager to test them out in Spain.

jim panse · June 21, 2003, 04:52

This sounds really good. Maybe to make it a bit like Hearts of Iron. I mean: Making research crucial in order to gain good - but expensive - units.

I guess the best way to do this would lie in the very middle ...

Cifer Almasy · June 21, 2003, 13:22

Okay i´d say: "let´s start with the graphics!"
Curt, would you as "master of graphics" mind proposing us a set of terrain and citygraphics?

I really liked your new "farmland" graphic as well as the new "oil" terrains.
We´d just need a "Riverbed" terrain (perhaps similar to the grassland one) - cause we decided to have an extra terrain for rivers (with a huge defense-bonus).

I also had one more idea: All ressources for themselves should be moreless weak (I mean copper, Ore, etc...) but with a factory (mining) they give a lot more. But it will cost a lot of turns. So there would be a motivation for building settlers and develop infrastructure in occupied regions. As well as "minor" developed citys in Africa can have nice ressources but still wont be able to use them as there are economicly too weak.
hope you undesrtand what I want to express
There is the potential but you have to work hard getting the bonus.
One more thing: I wanted to make every citizen eating #3 Food per turn. So there would be a major reason to let your citys grow.

Edit: Oh oh, of course Oil and Iron Ore will be important without mining!

I´d propose

Cifer Almasy · June 21, 2003, 13:36

Oh before I forget: Here is a really nice "irrigation" graphic, that you perhaps could convert to your style, if you dont mind...

curtsibling · July 8, 2003, 05:18

Oops!

I only just got back from holiday!

Time to get back to work!

I'll get on this ASAP!

Cifer Almasy · July 8, 2003, 11:18

Quote:

Originally posted by curtsibling
Oops!

I only just got back from holiday!

Time to get back to work!

I'll get on this ASAP!

Hope your holidays were nice!

Cifer Almasy · August 29, 2003, 08:50

Okay, I guess everybody forgot about this. But now the 3 months of work are over (and soon I´ll go studying "Germanistik" in Düsseldorf) - so I got some time again.

And there still is the idea of creating the "perfect" scenario.

Yet I have placed some citys and I really think I have a nice relation for the terrain stats, which do prevent of some "Superterrains" and a rest of useless ones.

But first I need the rules which I can take after they are completed to add the terrain stats.

What we need first is:

- A set of terrain and city graphics

- A list of units

- A list of wonders

I am looking forward to your suggestions.

Bye, Cifer

curtsibling · August 29, 2003, 14:32

I'll get working on a city gif file for you!

N35t0r · August 29, 2003, 15:14

I suppose that you will be using railroads as suburbs in the game...

What i did in a mod i'm working on (for myself mostly, in my SA map) is create an 'urban' terrain type (replacing Glacier) with movecost 0, +100% base defense, and that produces 3 shields and 3 trade.... plus, it can be 'mined' (industry) for an extra 4/5 shields...

This, in most ways, mirrors the using of railways for the same purpose, prevents suburbs from being pillageable, and frees up the railroads for the MINES.

The mines, although not very widespread (in my mod at lest) boost the shield production of key places (copper mines in chile, etc.) by 50%, besides from providing a nice mine graphic over them... plus, because there aren't adjacent specials, the 'railway' mine doesn't boost movement...

jasev · August 29, 2003, 17:29

Quote:

What i did in a mod i'm working on (for myself mostly, in my SA map) is create an 'urban' terrain type (replacing Glacier) with movecost 0, +100% base defense, and that produces 3 shields and 3 trade.... plus, it can be 'mined' (industry) for an extra 4/5 shields...

This, in most ways, mirrors the using of railways for the same purpose, prevents suburbs from being pillageable, and frees up the railroads for the MINES.

That's a good idea, N35t0r, I'll remember it for (hypothetic

) future scenarios

Cifer Almasy · August 30, 2003, 06:30

Quote:

Originally posted by curtsibling
I'll get working on a city gif file for you!

Thanks a lot!

But still i´d prefer to call it our project!!!

I will always depend on a lot of help, cause i will never ever be able to create a complete rules file on my own - as well as I won´t ever know all the tricks you have to know for creating a cool scenario.

But therefore I got a lot of nice ideas!!!

@N35t0r: Thanks for your ideas - I will think about it. Though I thought of not using RRs in the scen apart from the Transsibirian RR (You know what I mean).

Thanks guys.

curtsibling · August 30, 2003, 16:43

I suggest we use the Gothmog principle in the rules...

In which we create a twice and first removed techs and then allocate various stand-alone tech-trees to all civs...

Best thing to do is have a look at this...

It's the tech layout for the Dictator scenario.
Notice how all civ's unique techs stem from the 'PT' tech.

which in turn stems from the 'Plu' tech.

Gothmog's brilliant system makes sure all civs can have their own tech trees.

Even better, improvements can become unique to a civ if it they are derived from a unique tech!

I suggest we look at this system and edit it to our needs...

What remains is to decide what techs we want for each civ...

N35t0r · August 31, 2003, 22:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Cifer Almasy

@N35t0r: Thanks for your ideas - I will think about it. Though I thought of not using RRs in the scen apart from the Transsibirian RR (You know what I mean).

Thanks guys.

You could use the railways for the TSR AND for mines: as long as you keep the 'mines' not adjacent to a city or airbase, they will use the graphic of the RR with no connections to ther tiles, which wouldn't appear in the TSR unless it is pillaged...

Cifer Almasy · September 1, 2003, 07:35

Hey Curt,

this system looks as if there could be the chance that even I could somehow understand the meaning behind the codes...

I will make a unit list now:

Third Reich:
-Pre War Wehrmacht
Wehrmacht etc... (There should be a possibility of constantely improving your army)
- SS Units
- SA Units (?)

- Several Tanks (You now better then me about all the pzkw´s)

And of course Artillery

and ehm... Armoured cars

as you can see, i dont know too much. I want the historically accurate units.
And whats the most important thing for me is: That you have to fight balanced.
In the first instance this scenario should be a MP scenario (cause the AI always is too stupid) for a Demogame project in the future (I will tell you later about it) - later on we could create a SP version for a special civ (with AI events which make life harder for the human player).
About balanced fighting:
I want it to be necessary that you have to combine your arms: Tanks - Infantry - Air Units

Any suggestions?
Yet I thought about some old ideas (Inf ignores Citywalls so you need Inf to fight inside citys while tanks are better for the outer battlefields - Inf have more HP and less Firepower while its the other way around with tanks).
You need Artillery for cracking some bunkers. (So perhaps artys get more fp than Tanks)... Oh guys I dont know. Whats realistic?
I want realsim in this scenario.

Is there any way to make some ground units beeing better for fighting against Unit A and another better fighting against Unit B?

If you got some ideas, then please tell me!

Bye, Cifer

jim panse · September 1, 2003, 14:22

I suggest we recycle some of these units for this one. Theyare from part 3 of my upcoming scenario ´Götterdämmerung. The Downfall of the Third Reich´ will be released soon ......

Lft Marks · September 1, 2003, 15:10

Heres an idea for the infantry that may prove useful if you want to simulate the "upgrading" of infantry from one period to the next (with new tactics weapons etc, with stats to represent this).

Using a batch file, you could change the infantry stats and pics from season to season, making the infantry unit also have a new preq so that these new tactics and weapons would have to be researched.

This way it would simulate the fact that no country has the means to produce countless infantry (half the time infantry would be un buildable) and also means that infantry could remain a viable and usable weapon throughout the game, as they would upgrade along with thier metallic counterparts.

Long time no see curt!

Cifer Almasy · September 1, 2003, 16:35

If I understand you correctly, these are good ideas!

Not beeing able to always produce soldiers would be a good thing.
Otherwise you could make for example German Units more expensive then Russian ones (cause they have a larger population).

Jimmy and me decided to have stackable terrain.

What exactly is the function of armoured cars and mobile Infantry? I mean in comparism with Tanks and Infantry?

Cifer Almasy · September 19, 2003, 08:10

I always did not want to use Urban terrain- but now I played Paps 2194 days of war again and I really like the urbans...

Jim, we should perhaps think of the techtree per email. Cause in German I can explaijn better what I want.

Palaiologos · September 19, 2003, 08:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Cifer Almasy
What exactly is the function of armoured cars and mobile Infantry? I mean in comparism with Tanks and Infantry?

Armoured cars were not used during WW2 in any other role apart from reconaissance(sp?). Sometimes as suppport in infantry battles.

The concept of Mobile infantry was first introduced by Heinz Guderian in his "Achtung Panzer". His new all-tank units moved at a speed that foot infantry and horse drawn artilery could not keep pace with. So idea was that motor vehicles should be assigned for infantry transportation so they can move at comparable speeds with the tanks.
That means that only difference between "mobile infantry" and "infantry" is their speed.