Realistic WWII Scenario
-
@cernel said in Realistic WWII Scenario:
Generally speaking, the usual TripleA warfare in WW2 maps is more akin to Napoleonic warfare than period warfare. You have this extreme tendency to stack your force in a single location for a single massive battle (or the menace of it), instead of dispersing your forces to hold the whole frontline, as it was almost always the case. This is mostly due to two factors:
- The usual games underestimate the advantage of the defence (and this could be fixed by having infantry at offence/defence 1/4 instead of 1/2, or something like that).
- The usual games have infinite rounds for battles (meaning that, practically, all battles happen in no time) and no ability for the defenders to reinforce after the battle starts but before the battle is over (and this could be fixed by having limited combat rounds and low power to dice-sides).
Yes! I was beginning to wonder if I was the only person who feels this way.
-
@schulz stacking limits and limited rounds would help.
-
Here is the possible names. I know Rome and Naples' locations are incorrect but it was result of trying to keep all territories in similar size.
-
Here is a possible Axis income distribution;
- 1939 Germany is roughly 3.5 times stonger than 1939 Italy. While 1942 Germany (+Balkan allies and occupied territories) will be 6 times stronger than Italy. I hope I am not undervaluing Italy.
-
@schulz
To simulate the Uks dependency on imports I would have the sea zones producing PU for the UK, so when the German subs move through them, they are sinking allied shipping and deny the PU to the UK income.
This forces the Atlantic destroyers to hunt the German subs. -
@thedog Good suggestion, definitely there should be British convoy centers on the Atlantic.
-
-
When I try to make collecting incomes in the beginning of rounds, it charges upkeeps two times is there any way to fix this?
-
Also is there any way to prevent units retreat from a contested territory?
-
-
2nd part
AFAIK move 2+ units will move out if they can. Move 1 units are stuck in combat till they die or its not contested. -
@schulz units cannot move out of a contested territory directly into an enemy controlled territory. So if an attacker sent units into the defender's area, and some of the attackers are able to survive, and the attacker's alliance was also, sometime before the defending player's turn, able to take control of all the surrounding areas, then the defending units would be not only isolated but unable to move into any surrounding areas.
-
-
I think it would be fair to have Allies rougly %28 income advantage in April 1942 and if Axis manage to take Caucasus, Leningrad plus a bit more territory while holding the other territories, they will slowly start outproducing Allies and likely win.
-
Axis need to start with significantly more income to make expanding possible.
-
If Axis fails to catch the Allies income parity in certain amount of rounds, that would mean the end of the game. With April 1943 borders, Allies would have roughly %35 income advantage. However if Axis gets some ridiculously overpowered units in this stage (like how exclusive units become avaliable in WaW), they might still have a chance (thougl less than 1942) which I would exactly prefer this.
-
In sum up my goal would be giving Axis %30-%40 chance to win in 1942 if they fails then giving another %20-%30 chance in 1943. Normally victory condition is achieved by capturing 2 enemy capitals. So preventing enemy to do it in certain amount of rounds might also be considered stalemate.
-
-
@schulz Since the objective here is to make a realistic scenario, shouldn't you pursue realism regardless of balance or try to set the winning chances at the same level as you believe they were in reality?
Balance is not needed for competition: even if one side has virtually 100% to win on annihilation, you can still set victory conditions arbitrarily or have a minimum time for the victory condition to be achieved by one side otherwise the other side wins (and the players can bid on the minimum time).
-
@cernel Increasing Axis income is the only way to make possible pushing forward on the Eastern Front and North Africa.
I wouldn't really want having Axis doomed to lose or incredibly low chance. But it is good to have multiple war goals.
For example setting up the victory condition as controlling 5 capitals within certain amount of rounds, if no side can achieve it, game will be concluded as "draw".
-
@cernel BTW I could hand over the map if you want. Currently it is well functioned.
-
Could anybody help me to create a relief tiles? Or giving tips about how to create it by using GIMP? I'd be grateful to any kind of graphic enhancements. Here are the base map and its variant without borders.
https://i.ibb.co/2Mmngbp/wwiieurope.png
https://i.ibb.co/LkXs3Cj/wwiieuropeborder.png -
It will be the blind leading the blind, but what do you want to do exactly with the reliefTiles?
Do you know you dont need the reliefTile set, as they are optional?
-
@thedog Yes I know. I was looking for relief tiles similar to v3/v4/v5/v6 or Global. I have actually managed to handle the sea part.
-
Looking good.
-
Is anybody interested in to play it? I am planning to have two version of it which one of them will be balanced as much as possible without changing set up or incomes (instead achieving it by increasing Axis starting income).
While Axis will be handicapped in more historical version but they will still have roughly 30% chance to win.
BTW I am having troble to rescue my original account. If it is a issue to have new account. Please inform me, I can just delete this post.
-
@anil-yuksel I think you see what I meant: most of these territories appear able to display only 3 or 4 units (only 1 for Stalingrad). This implies that you will easily have overflow lines, making harder to look at the game. A way to reduce this problem would be to have the Rumanian power part of Germany.
Are the units 48 pixels wide and high and displayed at 100% unit zoom?
-
@cernel Actually Stalingrad can display up to 4 units if its placement spots are selected manually.
Units are 48 pixels with %100 zoom.
I am aware there are not plenty of placement spots in the Eastern Front. But increasing the dimensions of map would be problematic which would make tracking air units way harder.
Actually using 87.5% zoom for automatic placement finder significantly reduces overflows.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login