1940AD - World War 2
This is the thread to discuss and update anything related to the 1940AD on GEM scenario development.

Current release (Version 2.0) - Released: 17 Sep 2008

1) Polish skirmisher still exist around Polish area.
2) A new player is added - the Chinese Communist! It will control the Communist ruled area in history + Sinkiang. That's a total of 9 cities and ~30 units in the scenario. The leader will be Mao. Friendly towards Russia (but remain independent), hated Chiang to the guts (same goes to Chiang) and at war with Japan. Hated by most western countries.
3) India is now fully controlled by the British. The Indian Civ is now replaced by Nepal, which control all the Himalayan cities. Nepal is neutral in the war. It controls a total of 5 cities and less than 10 units.
4) South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all independent states (i.e. not vassals of Britain). They are still at war with the Axis.
5) Commerce, Research, Production, Culture, Espionage and Gold are all rebalanced for better realism.
6) Germany has half of its forces situated in Poland.
7) Russia is at war with Japan.
8) Britain has no forces landed in France yet.
9) All the fascism nations now uses Free Market instead of State Property (only the 3 communist nations use this).
10) Most western countries now starts with Universal Suffrage instead of Representation.
11) Germany now owns the Mining corporation and Japan owns the Sushi corporation.
12) Switzerland is now owned by Sweden. That is to make Germany unnecessary to invade Switzerland.
13) Added city Stettin and Konigsberg in Germany.
14) Added city Vichy in France.
15) Added city Huanshang, Hanchung and Ganchow and removed city Linchuan in China.
16) Added city Gwalior and Indore and removed city Bhopal in India.
17) Changed some of the city sizes for population balance.
18) Added some defensive units in eastern Germany and western Russia.
19) Some Japanese marines now relocated to Haikow for easier invasion on Indochina.
20) Added many artillery to many nations.
21) Added two anti-tanks in Russia.
22) Added many rebellion culture to those cities that are owned by foreign nations. For example, Warsaw has minor nation's culture and Aleppo has Turkey's culture.
23) The minor nation flag will use Poland's flag (since Switzerland no longer represents minor nations).
24) The order of the scenario will be permanently arranged for multi player game.


Previous release (Version 1.3) - Released: 25 Jul 2008

1) All civs now uses the correct flag.
2) Japan can get an oil from Manchuria now!
3) Japan's fleet is now the most deadly while American's fleet is now the fastest. The naval balance is now: (Britain, Japan and US starts with 4 promotions; France and Netherland starts with 1 promotion)
4) Japan's infantry in China now starts with some more promotions. Japan's Marines in Japan also get extra promotions. Added one more transport for Japan.
4) No more use enemy roads for Germany
5) France gets promoted units for defending the cities, some aircrafts have been moved to southern France.
6) Russian's tanks starts with more promotions. Russian's infantry gets some promotions too.
7) Russian's cities are now more productive
8) The entire India is now under the control of Britain and the Indian civ. Basically, the British now takes what ever was Indian's cities in v1.2 and the Indian takes what were the minor and barbarian cities in v1.2.
9) Cities of Britain and Canada are now more productive, Canada now starts with some ships and planes
10) America also get some boost in the cities which were low in production
11) More ships and units for Argentina and Chile.
12) Removed some city improvements in Africa and India.
13) Added some more units for Britain and Egypt in Africa


Previous release (Version 1.2) - Released: 10 Jul 2008

1) India is now significantly reduced in power.
2) the western front army distribution has been changed.
3) modern flags borrowed “Road to War” have been incorporated.
4) added some minor religions to some American cities.
5) the diplomatic relationship setting among each state, reduced by a factor of 10. For example, Germany was -100 to Britain, now it is -10.


Previous release (Version 1.0) - Released: 15 Jun 2008

This is a World War II scenario of a global scale. The scenario begins just before German is to invade Denmark, Norway, Benelux and France. At the same time, the winter war between Finland and Russia is already started. Italian is ready to join the Germans to invade France, North and East Africa. In the east, Japanese is at a stalemate with Chinese and has her eye looking further south.


The playable nations are:

Germany
Italy
Britain
France
Netherland
Spain
Portugal
Norway
Sweden
Finland
Hungary
Greece
Russia

Turkey
Saudi Arabia
Egypt
Iraq
Iran
India
Thailand
Mongolia
Manchuria
Japan
China

South Africa
Australia
New Zealand

America
Canada
Mexico
Colombia
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile



Instruction
This scenario will come with GEM mod version 5. Only available in BTS version.

Screenshots group 1: The western front, Germany, France and Britain.

Screenshots group 2:

Scandinavia, Italy, Winter war, Russia and Balkans.

Screenshots group 3:

Japan, coastal China, inland China, Middle east and India.

Screenshots group 4:

East coast US, West coast US, Brazil/Argentina, Australia and South Africa

Congrats, Genghis_Kai!:goodjob:

So... when will GEM 5 be available? (You have been busy!);)

Congrats, Genghis_Kai!:goodjob:

So... when will GEM 5 be available? (You have been busy!);)

Soon, say one or two weeks. :)
Only the 200BC scenario is required to finish off before the next release. There are more things I wish to do, for example, adding some customer civilizations and leaderheads. But I will do them as revision 5.1 instead.

:dance: :woohoo:

hi ,

so that should be one week now , tik tak , cant wait !


hmmmm , screenshot thread ?


have a wonderfull day :)

:dance: :woohoo:

hmmmm , screenshot thread ?



Yeah, I shall upload some screenshots for the new scenarios this weekend.

Screenshots uploaded!

Did you ever come across this site? (It has separate listings for the various Axis & Allied sides, including minor countries participating plus Japan. I checked out the Soviet listings, which are subdivided into the different fronts - although only total strengths and losses are listed, without subdivisions into men and materiel.)

http://forum.axishistory.com/index.php

Did you ever come across this site? (It has separate listings for the various Axis & Allied sides, including minor countries participating plus Japan. I checked out the Soviet listings, which are subdivided into the different fronts - although only total strengths and losses are listed, without subdivisions into men and materiel.)

http://forum.axishistory.com/index.php

I haven't. But I have the scenario all set up now and so I won't change it before it is released.

When will the play-testing finish? :D

I am new to this mod so if I say something stupid.. Hit me twice :crazyeye:

1. What is the point in playing countries like "South Africa or Chile "?

2. From what I can see "world builder", how can an outcome other than a US lead victory happen? Anyone have any pointers or strategies?

Any general tips would be helpful

I am new to this mod so if I say something stupid.. Hit me twice :crazyeye:

1. What is the point in playing countries like "South Africa or Chile "?

2. From what I can see "world builder", how can an outcome other than a US lead victory happen? Anyone have any pointers or strategies?

Any general tips would be helpful

Re 1: Not much point if you are not bored or you are not South African/ Chilean :lol:

Re 1: I think US is actually not that powerful in the scenario. The military it has is relatively small as compare to Germany or Russia.

I will attempt to play the Japanese this week.

Thank you for all the effort!

Re 1: Not much point if you are not bored or you are not South African/ Chilean

I don't agree! I recently played Zimbabwe on the 1500 AD map just to see how long I could survive - lasted till 1890 AD, when the Venetians declared war on me (Cavalry + Infantry vs. Impis), but I managed to be 4th in land mass at that time.

Another issue, more related to the 1940 AD Scenario: I was slightly alienated by the pink (light purple?) German armies. How about giving PLAYERCOLOR_GRAY to Germany instead of India? For all I care, India would be allright with that color, since it's very much their standard color in Civ IV, whereas gray is the standard color for Germany.

Best Regards,
Ace

I don't agree! I recently played Zimbabwe on the 1500 AD map just to see how long I could survive - lasted till 1890 AD, when the Venetians declared war on me (Cavalry + Infantry vs. Impis), but I managed to be 4th in land mass at that time.

Another issue, more related to the 1940 AD Scenario: I was slightly alienated by the pink (light purple?) German armies. How about giving PLAYERCOLOR_GRAY to Germany instead of India? For all I care, India would be allright with that color, since it's very much their standard color in Civ IV, whereas gray is the standard color for Germany.

Best Regards,
Ace

I was just joking on the issue of playing minor civs so don't take it serious :cool:. In fact, I do like playing minor civs once a while.

About player color, in fact I did a lot of work to change the player colors of the civs to make the contending civ more distinguishable. If German is to use default color gray, British territory and German's would look very similar on the map. The current setting is that Germany is middle Purple, Italy is Dark Purple, Hungary is purple and Finland is light purple nicely grouped them and appeared to be a team on the mini map. On the other hand, Britain is white and India is gray nicely resemble the British Empire on the mini map.

Thank you for the explanation, this makes perfect sense, of course. By the way, it might be a bit off-topic, but is there a list of all the available player colors? Are they limited to a certain amount of predefined values? Or can they even be specified in RGB values?

Maybe if I knew about that, I could experiment a bit with other possible combinations of colors, to keep "teams" distinguishable and at the same time keep some colors (like the Germans') that feel more "natural" to me.

Best Regards,
Ace

About player color, in fact I did a lot of work to change the player colors of the civs to make the contending civ more distinguishable. If German is to use default color gray, British territory and German's would look very similar on the map. The current setting is that Germany is middle Purple, Italy is Dark Purple, Hungary is purple and Finland is light purple nicely grouped them and appeared to be a team on the mini map. On the other hand, Britain is white and India is gray nicely resemble the British Empire on the mini map.

Couldn't agree more.

Another thing though: India was still very British in 1940 (I believe it was a Crown Colony to be exact, and certainly not a Dominion like Australia or Canada - and although Gandhi was a very famous Indian, he never actually led the nation as president, premier or anything after independence in 1947).

Thank you for the explanation, this makes perfect sense, of course. By the way, it might be a bit off-topic, but is there a list of all the available player colors? Are they limited to a certain amount of predefined values? Or can they even be specified in RGB values?

Maybe if I knew about that, I could experiment a bit with other possible combinations of colors, to keep "teams" distinguishable and at the same time keep some colors (like the Germans') that feel more "natural" to me.

Best Regards,
Ace

The color definition is defined in an XML file which I forgot the name. There aren't a lot of colors to choose from, 40 something I think. It is possible to add more colors by setting the RGB values, but I didn't bother.

Couldn't agree more.

Another thing though: India was still very British in 1940 (I believe it was a Crown Colony to be exact, and certainly not a Dominion like Australia or Canada - and although Gandhi was a very famous Indian, he never actually led the nation as president, premier or anything after independence in 1947).

Yeah, India is definitely still under British Crown in 1940 while Australia, New Zealand and Canada were not vassals of British any more. It was a gameplay decision to made all of them as independent civs but vassals of Britain. If india is added to Britain, it is going to be too strong.

Morever, the British government in 1935 has signed the Government of India Act, which authorised the establishment of independent legislative assemblies in all provinces of British India, the creation of a central government incorporating both the British provinces and the princely states, and the protection of Muslim minorities. So in some sense, India was very close to independence already in 1935.
(Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Raj#1930s:_Government_of_India_Act_.281935 .29)

If india is added to Britain, it is going to be too strong.

Morever, the British government in 1935 has signed the Government of India Act, which authorised the establishment of independent legislative assemblies in all provinces of British India, the creation of a central government incorporating both the British provinces and the princely states, and the protection of Muslim minorities. So in some sense, India was very close to independence already in 1935.
(Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Raj#1930s:_Government_of_India_Act_.281935 .29)

Well, sorry for nitpicking, but Gandhi, I believe, and others of the independence movement actually opposed fighting for the British during WW II (for very various reasons); also, defense and foreign policy were, as I understood it, a British affair.

Is Iraq also a British vassal? (It was under military rule after an uprising in 1940, if I'm not mistaken.)

As for the British being too strong (and other matters of gameplay), I can't really comment on that because of my poor comp's state, which won't let me load the scenario.:(

Well, sorry for nitpicking, but Gandhi, I believe, and others of the independence movement actually opposed fighting for the British during WW II (for very various reasons); also, defense and foreign policy were, as I understood it, a British affair.

Is Iraq also a British vassal? (It was under military rule after an uprising in 1940, if I'm not mistaken.)

As for the British being too strong (and other matters of gameplay), I can't really comment on that because of my poor comp's state, which won't let me load the scenario.:(

India in the scenario is suppose to be the official government in India - British Raj, which is ruled by the viceroy, Lord Linlithgow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Hope%2C_2nd_Marquess_of_Linlithgow) at the time of WW2. I chose not to call the leader of India Lord Linlithgow because I am running out of European looking leaderheads!:rolleyes: Since Gandhi is a well known Indian figure of the time, and that Civ 4 comes with Gandhi leaderhead, it lead me to the decision to use Gandhi as the leader.

Is Iraq also a British vassal? (It was under military rule after an uprising in 1940, if I'm not mistaken.)


Iraq is not a vassal in the game. The prime minister of Iraq, Rashid Ali,is pro-Nazi. Having Iraq as an independent country opened the possibility of trading oil with the Germans. If it is a vassal of Britain, it has to be at war with German. Also, Iraq eventually went war with Britain at 1941 also makes me think it should not be a vassal.

I have now played 30 turns as both the Italians and the Japanese. The problem seems to be getting the Germans to attack anything other than Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Minor Nations.

Checking World Builder in both games the same thing occurred twice, Germany takes Amsterdam and Copenhagen, then stops, heads south to the minor nation "Serbia". Anyone else seen a different behavior out of Germany?

Maybe I am not being patient enough for Germany to realize it wants to fight England and France :eek:

I have now played 30 turns as both the Italians and the Japanese. The problem seems to be getting the Germans to attack anything other than Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Minor Nations.

Checking World Builder in both games the same thing occurred twice, Germany takes Amsterdam and Copenhagen, then stops, heads south to the minor nation "Serbia". Anyone else seen a different behavior out of Germany?

Maybe I am not being patient enough for Germany to realize it wants to fight England and France :eek:

Yeah, I realize that too. And was thinking of changing the setting so that AI Germany will invade Norway, Belgium and France as it should. The problem is that if Germany is the human player for such a setting would then be too easy. The current setting allows me to almost repeat the history up until invading Russia, but not earlier, even I was very aggressive.

Suggestions?

I have now played 30 turns as both the Italians and the Japanese. The problem seems to be getting the Germans to attack anything other than Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Minor Nations.

Checking World Builder in both games the same thing occurred twice, Germany takes Amsterdam and Copenhagen, then stops, heads south to the minor nation "Serbia". Anyone else seen a different behavior out of Germany?

Maybe I am not being patient enough for Germany to realize it wants to fight England and France :eek:

So what about your play as Japanese and Italian? How did it turn out? Too easy? Too difficult?

Italy

Played on Monarch - I think the Italy is pretty good, maybe a wee bit easy, but as it is Monarch maybe balanced right.

What I found was Italy can control the "Med", wipe out French and English fleets and crush Greece, Egypt, French in the Med and start marching through Africa... (if Italy ignores France proper and "Minor Nation").

The problem with doing that it allows France to build, however Italy can not attack and win in France without German help (not enough of the right kind of units), so unless that gets solved I think the "Med" strategy is the main viable one.

I do think that even a lone Rifleman should be place in every city in Africa, otherwise one unit can claim many cities. Was surprised how easy it was to take Egypt. However, I guess then I would be complaining that Italy can't make much progress in Africa.

I also wonder if Italy has too many Subs.

Japan
Well this has me confused. I feel well... Like the Japanese in WWII, fighting slow hard in Asia while making slow but easy progress on the islands. I did not fight USA much, my hunch is if Japan did it would be considerably worse off as its lack of fighters is quite an issue. Is the small number of fighters intentional?

In my view any of the major countries (USA, Germany, France, Etc...) in player hands will win 9/10 because of the "combat" mechanics at Monarch. Probably would have a much different view at Emperor and above.

Germany

Played only four turns as Germany and was able to take out all of France. The use of roads by my super upgraded infantry allowed two units (with no deaths) to take out each town. I was able to take Paris on the first turn, and three other cities. Lost one but regained it on the 2nd turn. Wiped all the english and 3/4 of the French forces out on the 1st turn

Only stopped playing because I screwed up and left my fleet out of at sea and Winston's Fleet stopped by and said hello.


Not sure if any of this is much help.

I've been playing well into 1941 as the United States. I must say I really love how you've expanded the GEM to include scenarios, and especially more modern ones.

The large number of nations is a bit of an issue, since I usually play in windowed mode, but I had to convert to full screen to be able to see everyone's scores. Still, that's not a big problem.

The United States was incredibly powerful, probably as you intended. I haven't declared war on anyone yet, but I did take over the minor nation civs in the Americas. On the first turn, all of the Latin American civilizations were willing to vassalize to me, which I think is a good thing. Brazil (and I believe other nations) joined the Allies late in the war anyway, and US economic imperialism in latin america can hardly be overstated.

Overall, as I said, an amazing scenario, and there's very little to change. I especially liked the use of super-promoted units in key areas, and the change to merchant specialists that allows cities that are realistically huge but in civ4 are usually constrained (like New York) to still grow very large. The extra hammers on sea tiles deserves a shout-out, as well.

However, there were (as always it seems with civ4) some issues with the gameplay of the AI. Germany never took over a single city in France (only the Netherlands), and to my knowledge Italy never took a single city either; similarly, there's been no activity in the Winter War, so most city conquering has been in China. By the gain of great generals on both sides in Europe, there's clearly fighting going on, but a more historical outcome/more action would be great.

I like how there are huge diplo bonuses and penalties, to make it impossible for nations like the US and Britain to go to war; but even with this, surprisingly few wars broke out after the ones preordained at the start. A bunch of nations declared war on poor Norway, but other than that ridiculous phony-war dogpiling, there hasn't been any Soviet-German War, or Japanese invasion of Indonesia or the Philippines, or even minor conflicts. Japan didn't even take any cities in Indochina, whereas amphibious invasions are supposed to be fixed in BtS.

Still, my guess is that the AI stuff is simply due to the game engine, so by all accounts you've made a truly excellent scenario. Keep it up!

Two last comments- I initially thought it was annoying that India was a vassal and not fully British, but realized it makes sense in a scenario where India becomes independent only 7 years after the start. Still, in my game India broke away in early 1941... maybe make them a bit weaker and more compliant? They were very very high in score, around 4th I believe. Reducing India's wealth/population would probably be bad, since it WAS the jewel in the crown, but perhaps give some of the coastal cities to the British?

Also, maybe the minor civs should start at peace, if possible, like independent cities in Rhye's mod? It was a bit annoying that Italy directed their attention to conquering the minors instead of invading Egypt.

Which difficulty did you play on?

I agree the US is vastly overpowered if you play it like a "human" and wait to engage the major powers until you have built up sufficient forces.

The Civ IV AI has never been that great at sea conquest.

Next week when I get my computer to run :mad: I will try the scenario again at Immortal/deity to see if that makes this scenario any harder.

Truly love the maps. Can't wait to play in America as the Sitting Bull and dominate the world.:goodjob:

I've been playing well into 1941 as the United States. I must say I really love how you've expanded the GEM to include scenarios, and especially more modern ones.

The large number of nations is a bit of an issue, since I usually play in windowed mode, but I had to convert to full screen to be able to see everyone's scores. Still, that's not a big problem.

The United States was incredibly powerful, probably as you intended. I haven't declared war on anyone yet, but I did take over the minor nation civs in the Americas. On the first turn, all of the Latin American civilizations were willing to vassalize to me, which I think is a good thing. Brazil (and I believe other nations) joined the Allies late in the war anyway, and US economic imperialism in latin america can hardly be overstated.

Overall, as I said, an amazing scenario, and there's very little to change. I especially liked the use of super-promoted units in key areas, and the change to merchant specialists that allows cities that are realistically huge but in civ4 are usually constrained (like New York) to still grow very large. The extra hammers on sea tiles deserves a shout-out, as well.

However, there were (as always it seems with civ4) some issues with the gameplay of the AI. Germany never took over a single city in France (only the Netherlands), and to my knowledge Italy never took a single city either; similarly, there's been no activity in the Winter War, so most city conquering has been in China. By the gain of great generals on both sides in Europe, there's clearly fighting going on, but a more historical outcome/more action would be great.

I like how there are huge diplo bonuses and penalties, to make it impossible for nations like the US and Britain to go to war; but even with this, surprisingly few wars broke out after the ones preordained at the start. A bunch of nations declared war on poor Norway, but other than that ridiculous phony-war dogpiling, there hasn't been any Soviet-German War, or Japanese invasion of Indonesia or the Philippines, or even minor conflicts. Japan didn't even take any cities in Indochina, whereas amphibious invasions are supposed to be fixed in BtS.

Still, my guess is that the AI stuff is simply due to the game engine, so by all accounts you've made a truly excellent scenario. Keep it up!

Two last comments- I initially thought it was annoying that India was a vassal and not fully British, but realized it makes sense in a scenario where India becomes independent only 7 years after the start. Still, in my game India broke away in early 1941... maybe make them a bit weaker and more compliant? They were very very high in score, around 4th I believe. Reducing India's wealth/population would probably be bad, since it WAS the jewel in the crown, but perhaps give some of the coastal cities to the British?

Also, maybe the minor civs should start at peace, if possible, like independent cities in Rhye's mod? It was a bit annoying that Italy directed their attention to conquering the minors instead of invading Egypt.

The American dominated I think 40% of world manufacturing production during WW2. So I really don't think the scenario is overpowering America. In terms of gameplay, the initially small army (which is also historical) I think already balanced the playability of other nations.

The gameplay of the AI is an big issue for reproducing the history, I truly agree. Without putting in scripts, it is so difficult to force the AI to be aggressive enough.

I am also quite amaze about how India can catch up so quickly in the scenario. I will think about how to down weight india.

I am playing a game on German the last few days. Having so much fun. The first turn took me an hour to complete, not because of the loading time or any technical reasons, but of the various military options I need to consider. During the first, like someone else has reported, I conquered the lowlands, Denmark and all cities of France except Marseilles and lost only one or two units. This is possible mainly due to the other players haven't take their turn yet and hence no fighter is yet defending the cities (Blitzkrieg?) so that I can bomb the cities first and then move in my super promoted units in there. I think this is probably the best possible extend for Germany in the first turn. In terms of economy, the first thing I do was to grab an oil resource from Hungary (anyone now figured out why I need to set Hungary as a vassal in the scenario?) Then I micromanage the cities improvements. More importantly, I look into the development of the cities and work out which cities should specialize in producing which units. I end up having two cities producing ships, two cities producing airplanes, three to produce panzer, one for artillery and three for infantry. I ended my first turn.

May be because I am playing at Emperor difficulty, surprisingly, the American, with all of her Latin vassals declared war on me the very first turn! That makes me straight away at war with half of the civilization on Earth. The super experienced British Royal Navy and Airforce started to bomb my cities but without land unit's support, it is not an big issue. Thoughout the rest of the game, there were intense assaults in the air and I need to refill fighters to defend my coastline at a rate that I can catch up with the lost. In the see, there is no way a match for me to dare ending turns with ships outside my cities. Still, I have managed to sneak attack some british ships (even a Battleship!) with submarines. The new submarines I produced give me two promotions and I chose Flanking I and II making them with 80% withdrawer rate!

In the next few turns, I have successfully invaded Norway and Switzerland without losing a unit again using the 'bomb and take' strategy. However, this strategy isn't really work as well in France due to the now actively defending British Royal Airforce and the remaining French fighters. The hilly terrains in Southern France and the healing time required also delayed me to take over the last French city. All of these completed by May 1940. After that, I have signed a peace treaty with France. There are many French cities left in Africa and else where but they are not in my priority now. Neutralizing the French navy is more rational at this stage.

My attention then turned to the east. Bomb and taking Yugoslavia and mainland Greece took me only two turns. While there is no way I can send any sea transport to the Mediterranean, the one Paratrooper given at the beginning make itself useful. After enough bombing the Paratrooper landed at Crete and finish off Greece.

I have completed all the military operations as history before the invasion of Russia. There are now various options for me:
1) Invade Russia as history, which I didn't like because I have enough enemy already (but if America didn't declared war on me already, I might follow Hitler's footstep too)
2) Invade Britain. However, the lack of sea transport and the super promoted defend units in Britain discouraged this plan.
3) The neutral states in Europe, such as Sweden and Spain. I also decided not to destroy my friendly neighbors again due to my current difficult diplomatic environment.
4) Going for middle east, which is what I have chosen at the end. The oil and the defenseless cities encouraged this plan.

Now after I conquered Greece, Turkey has been smartly asked to be my vassal. I accepted and safe him from being annihilated. I used at least two to three turns to move my units into Iraq, an open-boarder friendly nation of mine, and use the cities as my base for invading Saudi, Egypt and the British in Middle east. Took me not much effort to took over all of them.

I am now at Feb 1941 with my units spreading in Europe, Africa and Asia. I have conquered almost 3 times the number of cities as compared to my original 11 cities. However, none of these cities are able to help in producing units yet. All of these cities are producing theatres for them to produce cultural defense.
After I skipped Iraq and Iran and attacked Afghans and is able to invade India, I found out the Indian is surprisingly well prepared. Because of my vast land to defense now and the long distance of India, it will take me some time to prepare a full invasion. But thats my plan.

Hope you enjoyed reading.

Sounds like great fun!

Today I will start a new game!

India is an incredible powerhouse. I'm playing it since 32 turns only ... and already managed to catch up to the tech lead. USA traded plastics to me for fission to laugh out loud.
Away from that I was able to take all important minor/barb cities except those that will fall to russia by culture anyway (Kashgar, Aksu and those north from there). Oh ... and did I mention that Persia is now Indian? Winston was kind enough to give me oil ... long enough to allow me to build 2 bombers and 1 tank. Could have build more, but I'm using Bombay only as military production city, all others are going for civil expansion.

So maybe India needs to be tuned down a bit. If things keep going as they do, Iraq will be indian by end of 1943, and China should follow in the next 3-5 years.

India is an incredible powerhouse. I'm playing it since 32 turns only ... and already managed to catch up to the tech lead. USA traded plastics to me for fission to laugh out loud.
Away from that I was able to take all important minor/barb cities except those that will fall to russia by culture anyway (Kashgar, Aksu and those north from there). Oh ... and did I mention that Persia is now Indian? Winston was kind enough to give me oil ... long enough to allow me to build 2 bombers and 1 tank. Could have build more, but I'm using Bombay only as military production city, all others are going for civil expansion.

So maybe India needs to be tuned down a bit. If things keep going as they do, Iraq will be indian by end of 1943, and China should follow in the next 3-5 years.

Yes, I feel India is much powerful than I expected.

Since you have been playing India, which aspects you feel should be reduced? number of cities? City improvements? technology? units?

Noticed a plantation on a winery spot right next to Jerusleum. ;)

Playing Italy on Immortal (I only notice that America's lead is growing faster)... So far I have repeated my Monarch game only through late 1941 so far. France is Italy's Vassal and all of French Africa is now Italy, as is Egypt and the middle east oil fields formerly British. I expect Italy to control all of africa except for "Spanish/Portugese" holdings by the end of 1942. All of the Med Greece, Serbia, Beruit etc... all in Italy's hands. German again appears to be doing very little. Germany took one French city then sent everything at Bern and failed.

Japan also seems to be bogged down. I think without more fighters Japan is too weak.

Can the AI be confused as to what to do from a "Attack/Defend" perspective due to all the forces in play? For example Germany has enemies on three sides with a -50 to -100 does the AI therefore play defensive?

However America has been expanding its lead every turn (much faster than on Monarch). Like in the real world, I think America will be very hard to beat with its industrial base + its use of corporations.

Sorry if some of this makes little sense I type while I am sleeping :crazyeye:

Well the generell problem for all nations (but especially India) is that the GPP pool isn't filled up yet. So the GP come in douzens ... and a philosophical nation with lotsa additional pop can be quite successfull in that game. I don't know if its possible to pregenerate a GPP pool, to slow down GP production, but that might help general balance.

Oh, and research is SIGNIFICANTLY to fast. By a factor of 4 or 5 I'd say, and its too fast for all nations.

India also benefits from being a vasall. Winston hands out all his techs -> India isn't backward anymore.

Actually, even while ahistorical I'd make India not a vasall but an ally of the UK. This would set them back scientifically. Maybe even take away a tech or two (

Here my current strategy to get most out of India:

Calcutta is set to get a GM asap, as you want Sid's Sushi. For one it gives you food, and allows you to kick that money draining cereal out. But more important you can use it as border pusher, which becomes especially important once you border Russia.

Research Fission, as this tech will be skipped early on, and you can trade it for plastics.

Stay a vasall till Winston has given you all techs.

Produce infantry in your strong cities, except Patna, which gets you hindu missionaries. Improve the weaker cities.

Use your fighter and your new build infantry to catch all barb and minor cities around. Asap get Iran, you'll need that oil close to Teheran, as traded oil isn't reliable enough.

Next GP you should try to go for is a GE, as you'll want the Three Gorges Damm.

Stay with Representation and Pacifism for as long as possible. Switch the others (especially Emancipation and Enviromentalism) once you run into to many red and green smilies.

You should be #3 in less then 4 years.

Not sure I think the GPP issue is that big of an issue, not trying to start a debate, just thinking the biggest issue is the lack of fighting :crazyeye:

Not sure what can be done. I am now mid way into 1943 as Italy on Immortal and it is pointless to continue. With all of Africa, Middle East, Med, under my control, 600+ Gold a turn for Christ and Jewish buildings, large fleets and troops, it is just point and click. It would be an entirely different scenario if I needed to worry about being attacked.

England moves its fleets back and forth, India, Australia, etc.. are no longer Vassal's (made peace with everyone I could) so I can decide which to attack one at a time.

Germany does nothing, Hungry Does nothing, Japan appears to have done nothing (I gave them all Oil early in the game so they could build still nothing).

Also, Russia and USA still not at war with anyone.

Sure wish I had an answer - I too have a few nit picking items but the combat is one nut I can't crack atm.:cry:

Isn't there an aggressive AI setting? Can it be activated via map-command? No time to test, gotta finish my world domination as Mahatma. ^^

But honestly I haven't fought wars either yet, more "skirmishes". The barb/minor skirmish, the Iran skirmish, the Iraq skirmish and in year 1943 just finishing the Saud skirmish. After the following Thai skirmish I'll reconstruct my armies around the mechanized infantry and then start just three wars:

China
Japan
Russia

Its sad but true, but as a builder you gotta get stuff to build from, don't you?

Had another game using China. Emperor difficulty. As one would imagine, the game was very tough on me. Neither I or the Jap can launch a war to the other - it was a stalemate on the frontline as history.

Rather than keep building up the frontline army which wouldn't be great enough to conquer a city of Jap, I spent my first two years to conquer the rest of China (Xinjiang, Tibet and Communist) and at the same time, only maintain enough defense at the frontline. It was risky and there were one or two cities close to being captured. But in general, the Jap didn't launch anything too serious on me except keep bombing my improvements and units. By about, 1943, this mission is completed.

After I solidified the western territories, I start to build up my frontline forces. Then slowly, city by city, I have managed to capture 4 cities from Japan's hand. I was expecting the counter reaction from Japan should be smaller now, but in fact, it is completely the other way around. I was back to the defensive mode and keep building fighter to defend my improvements. This was already 1945.

Then all the sudden, Russia declared war on Jap and few turns later, America also declared war on Jap! It was a really a good timing because my defense line was about to broke! The next few turns, I saw intense naval battles in the pacific. What surprised me was that the America actually landed and captured nearly all the island cities of Jap's in the pacific. The American is obviously technologically more advanced than the Jap. The Jap is losing the sea quickly.

But the Jap didn't weakened its land force. The Jap continue to attack my cities and at once, a stack of nearly 20 mixed units was about to take one of my cities! I needed to drain most of my cities' defense to that one city. Lucky the Jap didn't turn his attention to other cities!

BUT THEN, at around 1946, the Jap surrendered to the American! As the Jap becomes vassal to the American, I automatically put to peace with Jap, which makes my game basically ended.

Based on the observation from this game, I believe the AI need sometime to 'learn' the settings before it can launch a sizeable, concentrated attack.

wow.. Did I see a war going on!

Great fun.

I am trying 1500AD Incan ATM.

I will go back to 1940AD after I kick Spain and Portugal out of my home:)

Also for my game of 1940AD using Chinese, when I open map editor at the end of my game, I saw German has more than twenty tanks and many other units running around France and France also having a stack of about 20 units in Paris. All units are injured meaning there were intense war in the western front as well.

The German in my game managed to capture Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Zagreb, Belgrade, Thessalonica and Athens. They had peace with France for a while and then resumed war sometime around 1945.

wow.. Did I see a war going on!

Great fun.

I am trying 1500AD Incan ATM.

I will go back to 1940AD after I kick Spain and Portugal out of my home:)

Wo, that would be a challenge! Have fun!

Started last night I try to improve this scenario:

Aim: making India less powerful.

1) I suggest and tried NO_TECH_TRADING just for the 1940AD scenario. This is because it uses a non default calendar (1 month per turn) and research is too fast at the moment. The vassal civs such as India are also growing too fast by receiving free tech from their master.

2) Pakistan and Bengal (east Pakistan) are now own by British. After reviewing the Indian history during WW2, I think this is also historical other than just for gameplay purpose. During WW2, the Indian Muslim League (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_League) is quite independent of the Indian Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_National_Congress) and play a more co-operative role to Britain as compare to the Congress, lead by Gandhi, launched the Quit India campaign.

3) Jaipur is now own by minor nations as well because this should also be a princely state governed independently.

4) Removed some improvement and some city buildings.

After these changes, India now only has 8 cities and is very weak in strength.

Aim: making German AI invade more cities.

1) I first try to pre-arrange units on the transport on sea tiles and hope that the German AI will attack Norway. It fails to do so. Each time, it will just land the units back to the homeland and do nothing.

2) I also tried to put some German units on Sweden (note that it is not allowed to start with units on enemy territories - Norway) and hope that German AI can invade Norway. All the AI is doing, after about 5 turns, is have all 8 units stand still 2 tiles away Narvik which has only one infantry!

3) Moving out all the French units from the lowlands and hope that the German AI will be able to grab the two cities. It also fail.

4) relocate one German tank on the spot closest to Copenhagen hoping it will take it on the first turn. It just doesn't!

5) What I observed is that, at the first turn, The German AI will try to move away the units on the western front to the east, possibly to defend itself from the Yogoslavia. What I might try is to neturalist Greece and give the two Yogoslav cities to Greece so hoping the AI will not have any fear on the east.

If this still doesn't work, I will probably give up.

Just proved that neturalising Greece and Yogoslav doesn't work either. The German AI can't take more cities from Netherland, France and Norway.

Germany

Could it be a "unit" issue?

Too few units for the enemies around or wrong mix?

Any way of placing more units if an AI is running Germany than the player?

Maybe start the Scenario just after Germany takes the low countries?

Japan
I still think two to four more fighters are needed.

Germany

Could it be a "unit" issue?

Too few units for the enemies around or wrong mix?

Any way of placing more units if an AI is running Germany than the player?

Maybe start the Scenario just after Germany takes the low countries?

Japan
I still think two to four more fighters are needed.

I am hesitate to change the unit balance as at the moment, the unit distribution is relative to the real situation.

Moreover, I suspect even giving more fighters to Japanese would make any difference. If there are any, it would probably just making the Japanese being able to cripple the Chinese, which is not historical. On the other hand, I doubt it would declare war to the American just because it has more fighters.

Actually Germany can waltz through France in 3 turns and kill all units with minimal losses as is. The AI just doesn't know how to do so. So no need for more units.

So far this one is the best world war 2 one to date for BTS.I started as Japan.Oil needs to be fought for as that was part of the reason for Japan to attack the Allies in Southeast Asia.Having Oil near Naha without the plastics tech is also a nice touch so i researched that first hoping to avoid a war with Britain and the Dutch East Indies.
The war is China proved to be a bitter battle for Wenchow,Langchuan and Changsa as well as fending off raiding parties from French Indochina.Air superiority i used with great success in 1940-43 is now being contested every turn from july 1943 by China.I got plastics tech in march 1944 and in April of that year America attacked Iwo Jima and now has a land base to attack Japan.
I now face a war on 3 fronts with China,America and France.All other nations ive managed to keep out of the Pacific theater through negotiation or bribery.
Hong Kong is still british as is Singapore and Dutch East indies and i may have made a mistake not attacking them early.The good news is that ALL my starter fleets are intact including all my carriers i began with.

All i gotta say is GREAT JOB so far.This is better than the Road to War scenarios that the devs made and i thought those were good!:goodjob:

Joshua

P.S. Is this Mod hotseat compatible?Id like to control that vassel in Manchuria to support the war effort.

So far this one is the best world war 2 one to date for BTS.I started as Japan.Oil needs to be fought for as that was part of the reason for Japan to attack the Allies in Southeast Asia.Having Oil near Naha without the plastics tech is also a nice touch so i researched that first hoping to avoid a war with Britain and the Dutch East Indies.
The war is China proved to be a bitter battle for Wenchow,Langchuan and Changsa as well as fending off raiding parties from French Indochina.Air superiority i used with great success in 1940-43 is now being contested every turn from july 1943 by China.I got plastics tech in march 1944 and in April of that year America attacked Iwo Jima and now has a land base to attack Japan.
I now face a war on 3 fronts with China,America and France.All other nations ive managed to keep out of the Pacific theater through negotiation or bribery.
Hong Kong is still british as is Singapore and Dutch East indies and i may have made a mistake not attacking them early.The good news is that ALL my starter fleets are intact including all my carriers i began with.

All i gotta say is GREAT JOB so far.This is better than the Road to War scenarios that the devs made and i thought those were good!:goodjob:

Joshua

P.S. Is this Mod hotseat compatible?Id like to control that vassel in Manchuria to support the war effort.

I think hotseat should be compatible, although i never tried before. Actually, I think someone here has reported he played using hotseat to test varies players at the same time.

So far this one is the best world war 2 one to date for BTS.I started as Japan.Oil needs to be fought for as that was part of the reason for Japan to attack the Allies in Southeast Asia.Having Oil near Naha without the plastics tech is also a nice touch so i researched that first hoping to avoid a war with Britain and the Dutch East Indies.
The war is China proved to be a bitter battle for Wenchow,Langchuan and Changsa as well as fending off raiding parties from French Indochina.Air superiority i used with great success in 1940-43 is now being contested every turn from july 1943 by China.I got plastics tech in march 1944 and in April of that year America attacked Iwo Jima and now has a land base to attack Japan.
I now face a war on 3 fronts with China,America and France.All other nations ive managed to keep out of the Pacific theater through negotiation or bribery.
Hong Kong is still british as is Singapore and Dutch East indies and i may have made a mistake not attacking them early.The good news is that ALL my starter fleets are intact including all my carriers i began with.

All i gotta say is GREAT JOB so far.This is better than the Road to War scenarios that the devs made and i thought those were good!:goodjob:

Joshua

P.S. Is this Mod hotseat compatible?Id like to control that vassel in Manchuria to support the war effort.


And Welcome to GEM! :D

I think you should try to use a 40 civ version of this new AI (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=280857) for your scenario the changes that Jdog done with the calculation of closeness give somme good result for the Coquest strategy of AI in a normal game.
Maybe it will help you with your german problem.
BTW very good scenario you've done a great job :goodjob:

I already compiled this AI mod for 40 players and tested it a bit on the 1500 AD map. It was a bit hard for me to spot the differences though, I cannot really tell whether the overall behaviour is significantly improved.

Right now, I am running a test on the 1940 AD scenario, as you suggested. 20 turns into the game, Germany has all but wasted its starting army, is behind France in power and has only capturef Copenhagen, Amsterdam and Bern. So I'd say there is no major improvement.

Best Regards
Martin

I already compiled this AI mod for 40 players and tested it a bit on the 1500 AD map. It was a bit hard for me to spot the differences though, I cannot really tell whether the overall behaviour is significantly improved.

Right now, I am running a test on the 1940 AD scenario, as you suggested. 20 turns into the game, Germany has all but wasted its starting army, is behind France in power and has only capturef Copenhagen, Amsterdam and Bern. So I'd say there is no major improvement.

Best Regards
Martin

I also tried as France and kept thwarting German advances until i was actually able to launch an attack of my own towards bern.The German AI was only able to take Copenhagen and Amsterdam in my game while i took bern.Ironically it was the Italians in the south that actually almost broke through to Marseilles and wiped the entire French fleet i had there which i was able to bombard Rome only once then it was gone!lol!

I know if i choose germany i will be able to wipe france.I also chose russia and wiped finland clean but only once i combined my forces by blitzkrieg.What i mean is i would use my air power until his one fighter wing was destroyed,then the defenses,and finally the units themselves.This is the difference between a human controlled and AI controlled.The AI seems to just mass its units and tries to win by shear numbers and fails.

GK ,you might want to see if theres anything that will cause the german AI to make maximum use of air power and combined arms.Im not sure if there is as im no editor.Im having too much fun playing!

Joshua

I tried to modify the leaderhad.xml of napoleon (hitler in this scenario) by replacing the actual flavor by
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_MILITARY</FlavorType>
<iFlavor>10</iFlavor>
and
<UnitAIWeightModifier>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_ATTACK</UnitAIType>
<iWeightModifier>100</iWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifier>

instead of UNITAI_COUNTER

it seems that in five (2 without the leaderhead modification) test germany took beetween 2-4 cities more in 30 turns. But like i did that on 5 test only maybe its luck I don't know :crazyeye:.
For the configuration of the game i played on emperor and took an south american civ to don't bother the european theatre.
Can you post the dll of jdog please ace i'd like to test if it change something.

Armand.

I tried to modify the leaderhad.xml of napoleon (hitler in this scenario) by replacing the actual flavor by
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_MILITARY</FlavorType>
<iFlavor>10</iFlavor>
and
<UnitAIWeightModifier>
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_ATTACK</UnitAIType>
<iWeightModifier>100</iWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifier>

instead of UNITAI_COUNTER

it seems that in five (2 without the leaderhead modification) test germany took beetween 2-4 cities more in 30 turns. But like i did that on 5 test only maybe its luck I don't know :crazyeye:.
For the configuration of the game i played on emperor and took an south american civ to don't bother the european theatre.
Can you post the dll of jdog please ace i'd like to test if it change something.

Armand.
This is something I haven't really tried because I assumed Napoleon should already be agressive enough.
So which paramaters did you change?

Can you post the dll of jdog please ace i'd like to test if it change something.

I can post the DLL later tonight, when I get home. Currently, I am at work and unable to access my files.

Best Regards,
Ace

between the tag
<Flavors>
</Flavors>
I wrote :
<Flavor>
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_MILITARY</FlavorType>
<iFlavor>10</iFlavor>
</Flavor>

and between
<UnitAIWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifier>
i wrote:
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_ATTACK</UnitAIType>
<iWeightModifier>100</iWeightModifier>

you must put this instead of the old parametters.
There is a very good article on the leaderhead modification if you want here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=274966&highlight=iDeclareWarTradeRand) :).
But as I told you i did that on emperor level and its possible it was only luck.
What is sure is that the AI is very stupid, and you'll have lot of problem to manage that it does what you want :(

ps: the german took only one time in my try a french city. other times the AI took cities like belgrad or greeck cities. Maybe the french forces are overpowered.

One minor thing I would change in America is to add:

Jewish to New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago
Budhist to San Fran and LA
Muslim to NYC, and I forget if it was Chicago, Detroit or Cleveland which was the hub in the 40's.

One minor thing I would change in America is to add:

Jewish to New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Chicago
Budhist to San Fran and LA
Muslim to NYC, and I forget if it was Chicago, Detroit or Cleveland which was the hub in the 40's.

Not sure if this is appropriate. Originally when I made the scenario, I gave many religions to a lot of cities to represent the diversity. Because of this, those holy cities generated so much money that I have to cut back some. At the end, I have to cut down to include only the dominated religion in any city.

Kind of silly to have america with Free Religon and being Christian only

between the tag
<Flavors>
</Flavors>
I wrote :
<Flavor>
<FlavorType>FLAVOR_MILITARY</FlavorType>
<iFlavor>10</iFlavor>
</Flavor>

and between
<UnitAIWeightModifier>
</UnitAIWeightModifier>
i wrote:
<UnitAIType>UNITAI_ATTACK</UnitAIType>
<iWeightModifier>100</iWeightModifier>

you must put this instead of the old parametters.
There is a very good article on the leaderhead modification if you want here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=274966&highlight=iDeclareWarTradeRand) :).
But as I told you i did that on emperor level and its possible it was only luck.
What is sure is that the AI is very stupid, and you'll have lot of problem to manage that it does what you want :(

ps: the german took only one time in my try a french city. other times the AI took cities like belgrad or greeck cities. Maybe the french forces are overpowered.

I've read a bit more about leaderhead modding. I think what you have suggested here might not solve our problem. Those parameters are probably for the AI to decide what to be build next in cites and so it should have nothing to do with how it handles the currently available units.

Yes it didn't change how it handles the available unit :sad:, but it helps a little for the further production of the AI to product a little more military units, it did'nt do any miracle sadly ...
Armand.

Kind of silly to have america with Free Religon and being Christian only

OK, I have allocated some other religions as you suggested in v5.1.

Would I be stating the obvious if I say that you can slow down the research and great peoples from XML\GameInfo\CIV4GameSpeedInfo.xml

I'll try the mod by halving the speeds of both.

1000th post :goodjob:

Would I be stating the obvious if I say that you can slow down the research and great peoples from XML\GameInfo\CIV4GameSpeedInfo.xml

I'll try the mod by halving the speeds of both.

1000th post :goodjob:

Yeah. But then you are not just slowing 1940AD scenario, you are slowing all the scenarios as it is a global setting.

WOW this scenario and all these scenarios and maps look awesome!
If only I could play them, but the lag would be too much in between turns
I far exceede the reccomended requirements but even on a Huge sized Map with 18 civs I get much lag in between turns when at end game..like being able to see the entire world
Does this MOD make the lag lessen or anything to make it playable?

I just tested the scenario..
It looks like a fun map and very strategic
But at 6 minutes and 23 seconds in between turns(yes i timed it on my watch)..well it isnt for me..my comp well exceedes the recomended specs by 2-3 times in many areas...but still massive lag in between turns

WOW this scenario and all these scenarios and maps look awesome!
If only I could play them, but the lag would be too much in between turns
I far exceede the reccomended requirements but even on a Huge sized Map with 18 civs I get much lag in between turns when at end game..like being able to see the entire world
Does this MOD make the lag lessen or anything to make it playable?

If you are having trouble just playing 18 civs on a huge map, you will have problem playing 36 civs on a giant map.

If you are having trouble just playing 18 civs on a huge map, you will have problem playing 36 civs on a giant map.

yes and its stupid because even though I like many exceede reccomended specs not by just a little..but by a lot...yet cant play this board game with 3D graphics on a huge map with even as little as 18 civs:mad:

Just downloaded 5.1 yesterday, and tried playing as Germany

I started out taking Copenhagen, the lowlands, Paris and one more french city. Taking out tons of French units, and the british land troops as well

The French withdrew most of there forces from their defencelines to their remaining cities. Fortunately (by luck) I kept my naval forces inside the cities, and slowly concentrated them all near the english chanal. I had no intention of entering Brittish soil, but suddenly London was defended by only 2 (one of which very strong) ground units and 4 planes. I loaded attack units on both my transports (had built one more, lucky again), and hoped for an attack on London in the next few turns. To my luck, Churchill withdrew a large part of his navy to London :lol: and didn't reinforce with land troops :D

I took London, including 4 planes and 6 ships :D
I did loose 5 ground units and, several fighters and most bombers on the attack, but by now the UK are mine, and I can now shift my attention towards France. (haven't taken Norway, and don't plan to - whats the use...)

Next steps - France -> Minor Nations -> Greece -> ???

What's to say - I've enjoyed your Scenarios all along - but with your GEM-serie.... :goodjob: :goodjob: :goodjob: :goodjob:

Just downloaded 5.1 yesterday, and tried playing as Germany

I started out taking Copenhagen, the lowlands, Paris and one more french city. Taking out tons of French units, and the british land troops as well

The French withdrew most of there forces from their defencelines to their remaining cities. Fortunately (by luck) I kept my naval forces inside the cities, and slowly concentrated them all near the english chanal. I had no intention of entering Brittish soil, but suddenly London was defended by only 2 (one of which very strong) ground units and 4 planes. I loaded attack units on both my transports (had built one more, lucky again), and hoped for an attack on London in the next few turns. To my luck, Churchill withdrew a large part of his navy to London :lol: and didn't reinforce with land troops :D

I took London, including 4 planes and 6 ships :D
I did loose 5 ground units and, several fighters and most bombers on the attack, but by now the UK are mine, and I can now shift my attention towards France. (haven't taken Norway, and don't plan to - whats the use...)

Next steps - France -> Minor Nations -> Greece -> ???

What's to say - I've enjoyed your Scenarios all along - but with your GEM-serie.... :goodjob: :goodjob: :goodjob: :goodjob:

That's great ;)

Hello Kai,

could you put the version we used for the PBEM up for download as WBS file? That would be very helpful.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

Hello Kai,

could you put the version we used for the PBEM up for download as WBS file? That would be very helpful.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

The map is exactly the same as v1.2 in GEM v5.1 except the order.

Hello Genghis Kai,

As usual I have some feedback concerning my corner of the world (Turkey). I opened the scenario, looked around a bit, did most of the modifications I suggest below, and then started playing.

1- Ismet Inonu would best be Organized Protective, favoring Free Religion
2- Change starting civics to Universal Sufferage (hard to avoid with women politicians around) and Nationhood (this hasn’t changed for the past 100 years)
3- I left the speeds as they are, because I was playing a minor civ. By the time I was halfway through my first tech, big guys had 3-4 techs.
4- As far as I remember your original map did not have oil in Turkey – but the last time I saw it was about V1.2. I was surprised to see it here, and I removed it.
5- To somewhat balance the loss of oil (which apparently is a resource AI would die rather than trading), I added aluminum to the square west of Adana (Turkey mines its own aluminum from there - even if its quantity is not a large enough fraction of the world production to justify a resource icon, it is more reasonable than oil), and changed the wheat in the southwest to banana (I am always annoyed by the lack of representation of fruits in civ, especially being from the country that is the leading producer of many fruits, so I decided to treat banana as all fruits in general – for my taste, not a suggestion – I remember we talked about this last year and you decided a banana is a banana – and it would involve changing bananas all over the map). Still oil > aluminum+banana in the game, but it was good enough for me.
6- I removed 4 riflemen and added 2 cavalry (Turks have given most importace to cavalry until the cold war), 1 artillery, 1 fighter (we had a fleet of figters and bombers, but not a very large fleet – I decided to roll all of them into one fighter, also to honor world’s first female fighter pilot), 1 destroyer (historically it was 1 cruiser, a few destroyers, and 5 subs – I guess that merits 1 destroyer in civ) and 1 transport for historical accuracy.
7- Increased Izmir’s culture to 2000. Even then it could not compete with the two 10-culture wonders of Athens. I ended up being unable to use some sea and LAND squares on the Aegean coast until Athens fell (I’ll write about what happened in the game in the second half of this post). Also increased Erzurum’s culture significantly, to preserve the horse and the cow (both of which I remember were among the resources you allocated for Turkey, as I suggested their current locations around V1.15)
8- I was lazy to do this one, but I think you need it: move Bucharest to its actual place (one square north). To keep all cities at 3 squares fom each other, move the city in Transylvania one square west. Currently Istanbul and Bucharest, both large cities, are within each other’s city radius, whereas in reality they are quite far from each other. I am guessing you moved Bucharest there for Hungary to have a port – if that was the purpose, it could be achieved by moving Bucharest north of Danube and convert one land square to sea to give it a port, just for this scenario.
9- Some populations are slightly off from historical data I could find on the web: I changed Athens and Istanbul to 11, Ankara and Izmir to 6.
10- I added a Greek city on the island on the west (named it Corfu), with pop 1 and no buildings, In order to mark it as Greek territory.
11- All cities have just Islam, except Istanbul having Christianity and Judaism as well, and Adana having Christianity as well.
12- I changed the buildings in Turkish cities as follows:
Base: Barracks, Courthouse, Forge, Granary, Grocer, Hamam, Islamic Temple, Jail, Marketplace, Stable.
Ankara: Base + Airport, Bank, Castle, Colosseum, Factory, Hospital, Library, Monument, Security Bureau, Theatre, University, Palace, National Epic.
Istanbul: Base + Airport, Bank, Castle, Christian Temple, Colosseum, Drydock, Factory, Harbor, Hospital, Islamic Temple, Islamic Mosque, Jewish Temple, Library, Lighthouse, Monument, Observatory, Theatre, University, Walls, Hagia Sophia, Forbidden Palace (don’t put this if you keep the limit of 2 national wonders per city).
Izmir: Base + Airport, Bank, Colosseum, Customs House, Harbor, Hospital, Islamic Temple, Lighthouse, Monument, Temple of Artemis, Mausoleum of Mausolos.
Adana: Base + Bank, Christian Temple, Customs House, Harbor, Hospital.
Samsun: Base + Lighthouse, Harbor, Monument.
Erzurum: Base + Castle.


Other than all these, there are three changes I make to all civ mods, and this one was no exception. If you like any of them they are easy to implement. The first one fits very nicely in this scenario.
1- Add some withdrawal chance to all units. I hate the unrealistic idea that all units are suicidal. So I usually add 20 or 25, but I added 33 for this scenario due to it being combat-oriented.
2- I remove National wonder limit of 2 per city (I think it severely penalizes small civs, as if they need more disadvantages against bigger civs. Plus it makes no sense, it is an arbitrary limit)
3- I change the yields of cottage, hamlet, village and town to f, fg, fgg, pggg, respectively, where f is food, g is gold, p is production (again for flavor purposes – economy of most small settlements has always been based on food).


Now, it is storytime:
At the beginning Germany took Amsterdam and Copenhagen, then made peace with France (I think this is a big problem in your scenario, I suggest setting the diplomatic relations between Germany and France to -99 from the start). Italy also made peace with everyone. Then France took Brussels and Basel while Germany took Yugoslavia.

Knowing the war would eventually come my way, I busied myself with upgrading troops, industrializing cities and a war with a small oil-rich neighbor. I took Mosul and Baghdad, but couldn’t get any oil as I didn’t have any culture there yet. I was also eyeing French territory of Syria, which had 1 infantry per city. These were the first 2 years.

While waiting for the unrest in the newly conquered cities to die down, before taking the last Iraqi city, Germany finished aforementioned conquests, and decided to have a taste of me (Hungary is his vassal and my neighbor, so the panzers have easy access to me). Of course I took the trivial course of action – peace with Iraq, move everything (except 4 infantry left in Baghdad to prevent uprising) to Istanbul, and draft from there as well. Luckily Greece became British vassal, therefore at war with Germany. First Axis (Germany+Hungary) wave was thus divided – Greece lost Thessaloniki to Hungary while I defeated the army that came at me, counterattacked and took Bucharest (wouldn’t have been that easy if it were one square north). Then it turned into a stalemate with Axis occasionally attacking Athens, Bucharest and Istanbul versus me attacking Sofia and Transilvania. This continued for 2 years, towards the end of which my Iraqi cities generated enough culture to give me oil.

While Balkans turned into a bloodbath, nations of the world slowly gathered into groups. So it is UK and vassals (Nor, Neth, SAf, Can, Aus, NZ, Ind), France and vassal (It), Germany and vassal (Hun), USSR and vassals (Spa, Por, Thai, Fin, Pers, Arab, Mon), Japan and vassal (Mnch), USA and vassals (Col, Peru, Arg, Chl), and the few remaining indeps. UK et al except Greece was busy with conquering unnamed minors (by the way, Tibet and especially Sinkiang seem big enough to merit their own civs I think). Japan was patiently taking one Chinese city per year.

Don’t worry, Western Europe didn’t stay peaceful. At the end of the 4th year, USSR declared war on France – which effectively meant France and Italy ganging up on Spain, and fall of Barcelona. Balkan stalemate stopped being boring when 10 panzers rolled into Greece. Athens fell to 4 heavily wounded panzers that managed to get through (the rest didn’t die but were out of movement points). I sent my transport with 3 marines and one antitank (i.e. fodder). And the transport brought the marines back in the same turn, leaving only the antitank standing in Athens. Of course Germany got it back on the next turn, but that was the most fun combat trick I have done in civ. I left it at March’44.


It is a fun scenario in the overall, but I guess it wouldn’t be so without Germany attacking me. I was repeatedly surprised with the combat idiocies of the AI. If I can stop Germany with Turkey, I doubt I will do anything but trample the AI nations if I play with one of the major powers.

Hello Genghis Kai,
As usual I have some feedback concerning my corner of the world (Turkey). I opened the scenario, looked around a bit, did most of the modifications I suggest below, and then started playing.

Is great to have you back giving me feedback from that part of the world. Most people wouldn't even bother to try playing those minor civs in the scenario, not to mention even giving me feedback!


1- Ismet Inonu would best be Organized Protective, favoring Free Religion

traits are specify to the leaderheads. The choice we can have is either using SULEIMAN (imperialistic, philosophical, favor hereditary rule) or MEHMED (expansive, organized, favor vassalage)


2- Change starting civics to Universal Sufferage (hard to avoid with women politicians around) and Nationhood (this hasn’t changed for the past 100 years)

I might have been a bit harsh when defining which country to have Universal Suffrage in the scenario. Actually, no one country I gave Universal Suffrage in the scenario as I thought 'true' universal suffrage is something after the second world war, including US and UK. I probably haven't do enough homework on this issue.


3- I left the speeds as they are, because I was playing a minor civ. By the time I was halfway through my first tech, big guys had 3-4 techs.

I know the scenario tech research rate is too fast at the moment due to the 1 month per turn setting. But I really don't want to slow down it, as it would make scientific research becomes something useless it in the scenario (some suggest to slow down 5 or even 10 folds!)


4- As far as I remember your original map did not have oil in Turkey – but the last time I saw it was about V1.2. I was surprised to see it here, and I removed it.

Yes, it was none. I added in v5 when I increase the number of oil on the map globally. I think I added there for gameplay. But just looked at the reference I have, I think it is more correct to remove it.


5- To somewhat balance the loss of oil (which apparently is a resource AI would die rather than trading), I added aluminum to the square west of Adana (Turkey mines its own aluminum from there - even if its quantity is not a large enough fraction of the world production to justify a resource icon, it is more reasonable than oil), and changed the wheat in the southwest to banana (I am always annoyed by the lack of representation of fruits in civ, especially being from the country that is the leading producer of many fruits, so I decided to treat banana as all fruits in general – for my taste, not a suggestion – I remember we talked about this last year and you decided a banana is a banana – and it would involve changing bananas all over the map). Still oil > aluminum+banana in the game, but it was good enough for me.

Probably not. Turkey doesn't seems to produce enough aluminum to get one represented. For Banana, like you mentioned, in GEM I tried to represent the correct resource only to avoid dispute. However, if I there is really something I think really lacking, I can give some exceptions. Please tell me some stats as to why you think Turkey should include a Banana.


6- I removed 4 riflemen and added 2 cavalry (Turks have given most importace to cavalry until the cold war), 1 artillery, 1 fighter (we had a fleet of figters and bombers, but not a very large fleet – I decided to roll all of them into one fighter, also to honor world’s first female fighter pilot), 1 destroyer (historically it was 1 cruiser, a few destroyers, and 5 subs – I guess that merits 1 destroyer in civ) and 1 transport for historical accuracy.

It is hard to get military stats for the neutral countries during WW2. When I did it, I think I just use the current military size ~800000/40000 = 20. I think I I can do what you suggested.

Actually, just found this website. Would you agree with it? Interestingly, it can lead me to about the same size (In 1941, 43 divisions/2 = 21)
http://members.tripod.com/~marcin_w/index-2.html


7- Increased Izmir’s culture to 2000. Even then it could not compete with the two 10-culture wonders of Athens. I ended up being unable to use some sea and LAND squares on the Aegean coast until Athens fell (I’ll write about what happened in the game in the second half of this post). Also increased Erzurum’s culture significantly, to preserve the horse and the cow (both of which I remember were among the resources you allocated for Turkey, as I suggested their current locations around V1.15)

Culture is a very difficult issue. I need to make sure one city doesn't absorb other cities naturally. While it is true that Athens is a culturally rich, I am worry about Hungary. I can check.


8- I was lazy to do this one, but I think you need it: move Bucharest to its actual place (one square north). To keep all cities at 3 squares fom each other, move the city in Transylvania one square west. Currently Istanbul and Bucharest, both large cities, are within each other’s city radius, whereas in reality they are quite far from each other. I am guessing you moved Bucharest there for Hungary to have a port – if that was the purpose, it could be achieved by moving Bucharest north of Danube and convert one land square to sea to give it a port, just for this scenario.

I am not too concern about the see port, I am concern about Hungary doesn't have enough space. In contrast, at the moment, Istanbul still have many free space to the south or east. But I agree it is a more accurate location. I will have a look.


9- Some populations are slightly off from historical data I could find on the web: I changed Athens and Istanbul to 11, Ankara and Izmir to 6.

I've got this reference that basically list city sizes for EVERY CITY in the world in the last century. http://www.populstat.info (http://www.populstat.info/)

Base on that reference, in 1940, populations in thousands are:
Istanbul has 793.9 ~ 11 in game.
Ismir has 183.8 ~ 6/7 ( I took the greater)
Ankara has 157.2 ~ 6 ( I gave 7 since it is a capital)
Athens has 1124.1 ~ 12/13 (I took the greater as well)


10- I added a Greek city on the island on the west (named it Corfu), with pop 1 and no buildings, In order to mark it as Greek territory.

I thought of that too. But it is a bit crowded already so I decided not to.


11- All cities have just Islam, except Istanbul having Christianity and Judaism as well, and Adana having Christianity as well.

So no Judaism in all other cities except Istanbul? I just guessed this. I can change it.


12- I changed the buildings in Turkish cities as follows:
Base: Barracks, Courthouse, Forge, Granary, Grocer, Hamam, Islamic Temple, Jail, Marketplace, Stable.
Ankara: Base + Airport, Bank, Castle, Colosseum, Factory, Hospital, Library, Monument, Security Bureau, Theatre, University, Palace, National Epic.
Istanbul: Base + Airport, Bank, Castle, Christian Temple, Colosseum, Drydock, Factory, Harbor, Hospital, Islamic Temple, Islamic Mosque, Jewish Temple, Library, Lighthouse, Monument, Observatory, Theatre, University, Walls, Hagia Sophia, Forbidden Palace (don’t put this if you keep the limit of 2 national wonders per city).
Izmir: Base + Airport, Bank, Colosseum, Customs House, Harbor, Hospital, Islamic Temple, Lighthouse, Monument, Temple of Artemis, Mausoleum of Mausolos.
Adana: Base + Bank, Christian Temple, Customs House, Harbor, Hospital.
Samsun: Base + Lighthouse, Harbor, Monument.
Erzurum: Base + Castle.

I will review this using your info as a reference. However, keep in mind that we have to cut down the numbers globally for gameplay. For example, I don't think I can give 3 airports to Turkey, even Germany only has 3 in the scenario!


Other than all these, there are three changes I make to all civ mods, and this one was no exception. If you like any of them they are easy to implement. The first one fits very nicely in this scenario.
1- Add some withdrawal chance to all units. I hate the unrealistic idea that all units are suicidal. So I usually add 20 or 25, but I added 33 for this scenario due to it being combat-oriented.
2- I remove National wonder limit of 2 per city (I think it severely penalizes small civs, as if they need more disadvantages against bigger civs. Plus it makes no sense, it is an arbitrary limit)
3- I change the yields of cottage, hamlet, village and town to f, fg, fgg, pggg, respectively, where f is food, g is gold, p is production (again for flavor purposes – economy of most small settlements has always been based on food).

Probably not at this stage. It is tempting to change some of the default setting. I also have a list of things in my mind too, such as allowing bombing units to death (why only half?). But that these changes can have great impact to the game balance which I must do it very cautiously.


It is a fun scenario in the overall, but I guess it wouldn’t be so without Germany attacking me. I was repeatedly surprised with the combat idiocies of the AI. If I can stop Germany with Turkey, I doubt I will do anything but trample the AI nations if I play with one of the major powers.
AI is difficult to teach. I don't think I can make German AI as aggressive as it should. That's why I am trying to set up a PBEM game where this scenario should be play on. Interested? You can play Turkey and other neutral civs if you want.

Kai, in regard to leader traits, could you not just create some "fake" leaderheads, like the "fake" civlization?

You would not have to add unique units. You could just create a LEADER_ISMET_INONU which uses all the graphics from Suleiman, but has different traits and behaviour.

This way, you would not have to increase the size of the download (just adding some minmal extra xml data) while changing leader behavoiur.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

Kai, in regard to leader traits, could you not just create some "fake" leaderheads, like the "fake" civlization?

You would not have to add unique units. You could just create a LEADER_ISMET_INONU which uses all the graphics from Suleiman, but has different traits and behaviour.

This way, you would not have to increase the size of the download (just adding some minmal extra xml data) while changing leader behavoiur.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

Good idea!

Oh more work...

Sorry for causing you more work *blush*. I just thought it would be nice on some occasions, especially when Leaderheads were chosen for their appearance rather than for the traits / civic preferences that a certain leader possessed.

This would also add an opportunity to tweak leader behavoiur (production, trade) for key players in some scenarios.

By the way, speaking of leaders... Robert Menzies lacks any traits in the GEM 5.1 files. (does not matter much, as he is not implemented though). Just to let you know in case you decide to integrate him at some point.

I added him in my personal copy of the mod, and gave gim protective/organized.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

Is great to have you back giving me feedback from that part of the world. Most people wouldn't even bother to try playing those minor civs in the scenario, not to mention even giving me feedback!

well, you have spent thousands of hours to make this map and scenarios to help people have fun - feedback is the least you deserve :)


traits are specify to the leaderheads. The choice we can have is either using SULEIMAN (imperialistic, philosophical, favor hereditary rule) or MEHMED (expansive, organized, favor vassalage)

Ah, the problem arises from all your scenarios using the same files. I basically changed Suleiman's traits from the xml files, but that's me - I don't mind an hour of text browsing prior to a 20-30 hour game. I suppose adding all ww2 leaders would have been too much work.


I might have been a bit harsh when defining which country to have Universal Suffrage in the scenario. Actually, no one country I gave Universal Suffrage in the scenario as I thought 'true' universal suffrage is something after the second world war, including US and UK. I probably haven't do enough homework on this issue.

ok then, I didn't really check the other countries. By the way, it seems most AI countries make a revolution at the start.


Yes, it was none. I added in v5 when I increase the number of oil on the map globally. I think I added there for gameplay. But just looked at the reference I have, I think it is more correct to remove it.
(aluminum, banana)
Probably not. Turkey doesn't seems to produce enough aluminum to get one represented. For Banana, like you mentioned, in GEM I tried to represent the correct resource only to avoid dispute. However, if I there is really something I think really lacking, I can give some exceptions. Please tell me some stats as to why you think Turkey should include a Banana.

I am not really advocating for those. I thought you had that oil for game balance, and I thought I might be offsetting it. So I decided to add something else.

As for stats, I wrote the one below a long time ago, but items 3-5 apply here.Turkey is the country with
1- Highest tea consumption per capita.
2- Highest bread consumption per capita.
3- 74% of world's hazelnut production.
4- 25% (highest fraction) of world fig production.
5- 18% (highest fraction) of world apricot production.
6- 64% of known Boron reserves
7- 40% (highest fraction) of known Marble reserves
8- Almost all known meerschaum reserves
9- Oldest fortified settlement (Catalhoyuk, pop.10000 c.7500BC)
10- Oldest temple (near Urfa, c.10000BC)
11- First female military pilotThose are just the top productions - production of many other fruits and vegetables is quite big as well (although decreasing in the last two decades due to lack of government support to the sector). According to http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx (Food&Agri.Org.of UN) (take a look they have a bunch of excel sheets, makes me want to mod more resource types into the game:crazyeye:), Turkey has always been in the top10 of fruit and vegetable production, and as of 2004, it was #4 in the world. (Their data goes back to only 1979, but I don't expect much different demographics before that - if anything, the earlier governments put a lot more emphasis on agriculture).

It is more of a game problem than a mod problem. Civ has 3 grain-type foods, 4 meats, 4 seafoods, and a banana? ok, grapes are also in there. As far as game balance on a randomly generated map is concerned, resource#4 vs resource#8 doesn't really matter. But inadequate number of resources make simulating the reality more difficult, and #4 producer of fruits and vegetables end up getting a single grape (which is half luxury half food resource in the game).

So, what does all that tell us? Nothing, if you decide bananas are bananas. And I think it is the logical thing to do, otherwise you'll have to put bananas to other mediterranean countries, which have similar f&w production. Mine was just further customization.

It is hard to get military stats for the neutral countries during WW2. When I did it, I think I just use the current military size ~800000/40000 = 20. I think I I can do what you suggested.

Actually, just found this website. Would you agree with it? Interestingly, it can lead me to about the same size (In 1941, 43 divisions/2 = 21)
http://members.tripod.com/~marcin_w/index-2.html

That's an awesome website, thanks. Let's take a look, shall we?In 1939 the Turkish army ... altogether 132 regiments (60 infantry, six mountain troops, 21 cavalry, eight reserve cavalry, 20 field artillery, 10 heavy artillery, and seven fortress artillery)...
...in 1939, the Turkish navy contained 19 naval vessels and they included one armoured ship, one line cruiser, two light cruisers, two torpedo-boats, four destroyers, five submarines, and four other lesser ships (most vessels were obsolete); with a total displacement of 55 775 tonnes (the number of naval personnel stood at 9 200). The real combat value of the navy was insignificant.
By 1940 the Turkish air force was composed of four air regiments (each regiment contained six air companies), and had in possession a total of 370 aircraft (it had 8 500 personnel).I think you should base things on the 39 data for land, because army got restructured after the war spread to the Balkans. Assuming an average of 5 regiments make up a division (2+ make up a brigade and 2+ brigades make up a division) and 2 divisions make one unit for your scenario, Turkey gets 7 infantry (one of which have guerilla promotion(s) ), 3 cavalry, 4 artillery. I would also turn one of those infantry to machinegunner and one to anti-tank, as those kinds of civ units are rolled into the infantry in military terminology.
I think my 1 destroyer and 1 transport is good for the navy.
As for the airforce, it says 370. If I remember correctly, France had 2000 (or 2500?) and Germany had 3000 aircraft at the beginning of 1940. So I guess 1 fighter is good.


Culture is a very difficult issue. I need to make sure one city doesn't absorb other cities naturally. While it is true that Athens is a culturally rich, I am worry about Hungary. I can check.

Exactly my point, 4 of the 8 squares adjacent to Izmir became Greek during the game, even though I edited 2000 culture to Izmir. It seems the total culture of a city is concentrated on itself, and plot ownership is decided more by culture per turn accumulated. But I might be mistaken.


I am not too concern about the see port, I am concern about Hungary doesn't have enough space. In contrast, at the moment, Istanbul still have many free space to the south or east. But I agree it is a more accurate location. I will have a look.

I don't know, I just don't like cities being within 2 sq of each other in civ games. It lets tanks from one city move, attack, and withdraw back into the safety of the city all on the same turn. With all the health and happiness problems of resource-poor small countries in the game, I doubt either city will be using all of those squares anyway.


I've got this reference that basically list city sizes for EVERY CITY in the world in the last century. http://www.populstat.info (http://www.populstat.info/)

Base on that reference, in 1940, populations in thousands are:
Istanbul has 793.9 ~ 11 in game.
Ismir has 183.8 ~ 6/7 ( I took the greater)
Ankara has 157.2 ~ 6 ( I gave 7 since it is a capital)
Athens has 1124.1 ~ 12/13 (I took the greater as well)

ok, I rounded all of those down, and had a less reliable resource for Athens.
Once again, :worship: for the website.


So no Judaism in all other cities except Istanbul? I just guessed this. I can change it.

Wait, I guessed too. On afterthought, Izmir might have had some jews as well, as it had in the Ottoman times.


I will review this using your info as a reference. However, keep in mind that we have to cut down the numbers globally for gameplay. For example, I don't think I can give 3 airports to Turkey, even Germany only has 3 in the scenario!

I was guessing that. But it is at marathon speed, and I didn't want to be building things forever, so I decided to include a small airport like Izmir, or unimportant university of Ankara, or Banks and Grocers everywhere (all cities have grocers and at least one bank). So just pretend those are the maximums (I did some research to find out when Colosseums, Univs, etc were built in those cities), those cities had them albeit with varying degrees of importance. It is upto you to remove any number of them for game balance.


Probably not at this stage. It is tempting to change some of the default setting. I also have a list of things in my mind too, such as allowing bombing units to death (why only half?). But that these changes can have great impact to the game balance which I must do it very cautiously.

I wasn't suggesting you to implement those in, just telling you my usual modifications, maybe you'll like some of them and decide to give a try.

Bombing only half does not make sense, and is an arbitrary limit, but I think it is there for game balance. Even with the limit, I think airforce is quite decimating in the game. The only reason I could withstand wave after wave of Panzers with a handful of units and with negligible casualties is because I had 8 fighters in Istanbul. (4 panzers come, each are hit by 2 fighters and one land unit. The only thing that changes on my side is the xp)

Besides, without a limit, you can basically start conquering cities from the air.


AI is difficult to teach. I don't think I can make German AI as aggressive as it should. That's why I am trying to set up a PBEM game where this scenario should be play on. Interested? You can play Turkey and other neutral civs if you want.

hmm... the idea makes me drool, I'll think about it.

Turkey actually had large jewish and greek minorities. Several turkish officals saved many thousand jewish europeans from sure death during WW2.

On the other hand nationalist turks ethnically and religiously cleansed the country during the Istanbul Pogrom 1955. Though you have to add that the heads of the responsible gouvernment were sentenced to death after the pro-western military couped in 1960. Charges included the pogrom.

Turkey was and is known for a very ambivalent policy concerning its minorities. Armenians, greek, jews, christians and kurds ... all of them have seen pogroms and even genocides as well as rather liberal and integrating policies.

rather off-topic


Armenians, greek, jews, christians and kurds ... all of them have seen pogroms and even genocides as well as rather liberal and integrating policies.

Jews had no problem at all, to my knowledge.


On the other hand nationalist turks ethnically and religiously cleansed the country

not totally - I would still put judaism and christianity in Turkey in civ, no matter which period of 20th century I was modding.

I think you should base things on the 39 data for land, because army got restructured after the war spread to the Balkans. Assuming an average of 5 regiments make up a division (2+ make up a brigade and 2+ brigades make up a division) and 2 divisions make one unit for your scenario, Turkey gets 7 infantry (one of which have guerilla promotion(s) ), 3 cavalry, 4 artillery. I would also turn one of those infantry to machinegunner and one to anti-tank, as those kinds of civ units are rolled into the infantry in military terminology.
I think my 1 destroyer and 1 transport is good for the navy.
As for the airforce, it says 370. If I remember correctly, France had 2000 (or 2500?) and Germany had 3000 aircraft at the beginning of 1940. So I guess 1 fighter is good.


Two points I wanted to add:

1) May be both 1939 and 1941's data are not too suitable and I will attempt take an average of both. But I tend to lean towards 1941 since I also need to make sure Turkey can survive in the Balkans - Hungarian, Yogoslav and Greek armies are quite large in comparison.
2) Basing the calculation on regiments will lead to inconsistency with other nations that based on divisions. Usually, an infantry division is make up of not just infantry regiments, but also artillery regiments, machinegunners etc. In reality term, we usually don't see many divisions specifically for artillery or machineguns but we do in regiments. So, most nations in the scenarios gets infantry. I swap some of them (without reference) for machine guns and artillery on an ad hoc bases where I see a need. For example, I give machineguns to a lot of those neutral nations. Another thing is that I give Riflemen instead of Infantry to those nations that their military equipments are behind. These nations include Denmark, Netherlands, Turkey and most Asian countries.

Actually some states should get universal suffrage in 1940. But, not all.

Frex the USA didn't have complete universal suffrage (suffrage for all people independent of gender and ethnicy) until the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

Lets go through the nations:


- Germany: since 1928 BUT with the Reichsbürgergesetz of 1935 jewish inhabitants essentially lost their ability to participaty -> NO
- Italy: since 1925 for communes, since 1946 generell -> NO
- Britain: for unmarried women an communes since 1869, since 1894 for all women, since 1918 with severe age limitations for all votes, since 1928 full -> YES
- France: since 1945 -> NO
- Netherland: since 1919 active -> YES
- Spain: since 1933 -> YES
- Portugal: since 1931 with limitations, since 1976 full -> NO
- Norway: since 1913 (1915 with Danmark and Island) -> YES
- Sweden: since 1921 -> YES
- Finland: since 1906 -> YES
- Hungary: effectively since 1953 -> NO
- Greece: since 1949 -> NO
- Russia: since 1918 -> YES
- Turkey: since 1930/34 -> YES
- Saudi Arabia: NO
- Egypt: since 1956 -> NO
- Iraq: since 1980 -> NO
- Iran: since 1963 -> NO
- India: in theory since 1935, practically since 1950 -> NO
- Thailand: since 1932 and following, see India -> NO
- Mongolia: since 1924 -> YES
- Manchuria: NO
- Japan: since 1945 (limited) -> NO
- China: since 1949 unlimited -> NO
- South Africa: since 1930 ethnically limited -> NO
- Australia: since1902 limited, soon after unlimited -> YES
- New Zealand: since 1893 (only active) later unlimited -> YES
- America: since 1920 (ethnically limited), full since 1964 -> NO
- Canada: between 1918 and 1940 (Quebec) -> YES
- Mexico: since 1947 (communes), full since 1953 -> NO
- Colombia: since 1954 -> NO
- Peru: since 1955 -> NO
- Brazil: since 1932 -> YES
- Argentina: since 1947 -> NO
- Chile: since 1949 -> NO

Should now all civs with a YES get universal suffrage in the scenario? NO, because we got two other poossible civics: police state and representation.

The following states might have it. I'll give my suggestions for alternatives though:

- Britain: Representation
- Netherlands: Representation
- Spain: Police State (dictatorship)
- Norway: Universal Suffrage
- Sweden: Universal Suffrage
- Finland: Representation
- Russia: Police State
- Turkey: Representation
- Mongolia: Police State (soviet vasall)
- Australia: Representation
- New Zealand: Representation
- Canada: Representation
- Brazil: Police State/Representation (benign dictatorship)

Basically all of the commonwealth (except India and South Africa) and the scandinavian states might have universal suffrage, but only in the forming wellfare states of scandinavia (Sweden and Norway) I would see allready full flegded universal suffrage states.

Bastian-Bux:

Thanks! I will modify the civic as according to your list. Do you have any reference on that I can put into the reference list?

I fount Wiki got some good info on the topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_suffrage

But it is not as complete and specific to the scenario as your list is.

P.S. I always thought U.S. is the first nation who has Universal Suffrage. Obviously, I have been affected by another American propaganda.

^^, yeah you looked in the english wiki. ^^ I did use the german wikipedia, which usually is more thorough AND reliable then the english version. Germans being perfectionists is not (only) a prejudice. Sometimes this can work to your advantage. ;)

As far as I remember your original map did not have oil in Turkey

Actually, Turkey produces oil (production in 1973 was larger than Qatar; don't know about 1940 though).

Also, I don't think Athens needs 10 Culture Wonders, really (although I haven't actually checked which ones are in there).

Actually, Turkey produces oil (production in 1973 was larger than Qatar; don't know about 1940 though).

Of corse there is. But it is so tiny that it would be less than a tenth of a resource icon in the game. Oil was found in Turkey in 1934, but has never been enough for domestic usage. In 1940 extraction was about 4000ton/yr. Today it is 2.5 million ton/year, which is not even enough for 10% of domestic need. Qatar extracts about 25 times that. Qatar's lack of oil production in the past does not indicate lack of oil, but abscence of wells on oilfields, in civ terms.


Also, I don't think Athens needs 10 Culture Wonders, really (although I haven't actually checked which ones are in there).

It is not a matter of need. All the civ wonders (except space elevator) are buildings from the real world. And several of them are/were in Greece. As far as I remember, simulating the reality is one of the primary aims of Genghis.

But I think Oracle, Zeus, Colossus, Lighthouse, Gardens, Artemis, Mausoleum, Library wonders could all be removed from this scenario since they no longer stand.

It is not a matter of need. All the civ wonders (except space elevator) are buildings from the real world. And several of them are/were in Greece. As far as I remember, simulating the reality is one of the primary aims of Genghis.

But I think Oracle, Zeus, Colossus, Lighthouse, Gardens, Artemis, Mausoleum, Library wonders could all be removed from this scenario since they no longer stand.

I don't think there were 10 cultural building in Athens. In 1940 scenario v1.3, I have removed one or two i think.

I have play tested the new version of the scenario a bit. The findings are interesting.

Firstly, I played as Germany. It is much more difficult now to conquer France. The first turn I took Amsterdam, Brussels, Paris and Nancy. The next turn, I took only Copenhagen. Then it took me another 3 turns to take Nantes and Lyon. I anticipate to take another 2-3 turns to completely occupy France.

I think this opens the possibility of a human player for France. If France is played by a human, I don't think I can take over the other cities that easy although I think it would eventually happen. That opens the desire for both Germany and France to sign an armistice treaty as history.

The production balance should now be quite realistic. What I looked was to see how many cities can produce an infantry within 10 turns. I think the balance is something like this (i didn't record):

America ~ 25
Russia ~ 20
Germany ~ 11
Britain ~ 20
France ~ 10
Japan ~ 10
Italy ~ 6
China ~ 6
Australia ~ 5
Canada ~ 5
Brazil ~ 5

The second game I played Chile. I was just trying to see what the AI would do in this game. I play tested for 1 year.

To my surprise, Germany is doing better than it was in v5.1! In Jan, it took Amsterdam as usual, Feb, Copenhagen; March, Zagreb; May, Brussels; June, Thessalonica; Hungary took Belgrade; Sep, Nancy; Oct, Athens and made Greece a vassal (leaving only Crete in Greece hand).

Not sure would the AI Germany can continue to invade France. But the current result is already much better than it was in v5.1!

I don't think there were 10 cultural building in Athens. In 1940 scenario v1.3, I have removed one or two i think.

I meant 10-culture wonders, not 10 culture wonders. That means each of Zeus and Parthenon giving 10 culture points per turn.

Just started playing the UK atm. From a play balance issue I like the changes in India (India was too powerful beore). Not sure sure about the fleet changes atm, as currently forced to hide in the med until I bring reinforcements.. not a big deal as I am sure I will be able to turn the tied in a few turns (lost a carrier to your German U-boats in the Atlantic my 3 ship convoy was not big enough... forgot my history :wallbash: )

However, The one thing the changes have done is make the UK economy even further in the whole than before even at 0% science. While this is true to life it maybe over the top for game balance. This is not a definitive answer yet as I need to play further, will keep you updated. I think within ten or so turns I can take "Amsterdam" from the Germans and then the English will be set.

Keep you updated.

German's much more aggressive! Excellent!! They do tend to exhaust themselves (I took Amsterdam from them, do not think they can retake it).

Still can't drag the American's or Russians in to a war (I am playing the British).

Goal now is to take out Spain swing a large fleet into the Med and clean up Italy.

The English economy would collapse without golden ages, however control of the seas is a powerful counterbalance to economic woes, combined with the new India situation for drafting. Kinda roleplaying as Churchill so I keep everything colony maintence be damn and accept all vassals. :crazyeye:

I hope to play the scenario through this week and it will give me a better feel for balance.

As a human player, especially with the control of the seas and large population base, I am not sure I can lose this game... But not sure I can win it either.

Has anyone had the American's or Russian's in a war yet?
If yes did they have to bribe them? I still can't bribe them.
If not when did they enter the war and against whom?

Also the Japanese have been very quiet as well...

German's much more aggressive! Excellent!! They do tend to exhaust themselves (I took Amsterdam from them, do not think they can retake it).

Still can't drag the American's or Russians in to a war (I am playing the British).

Goal now is to take out Spain swing a large fleet into the Med and clean up Italy.

The English economy would collapse without golden ages, however control of the seas is a powerful counterbalance to economic woes, combined with the new India situation for drafting. Kinda roleplaying as Churchill so I keep everything colony maintence be damn and accept all vassals. :crazyeye:

I hope to play the scenario through this week and it will give me a better feel for balance.

As a human player, especially with the control of the seas and large population base, I am not sure I can lose this game... But not sure I can win it either.

Has anyone had the American's or Russian's in a war yet?
If yes did they have to bribe them? I still can't bribe them.
If not when did they enter the war and against whom?

Also the Japanese have been very quiet as well...

Great! I think the more aggressiveness of Germany comes from the use of Better AI in GEM v5.2. Otherwise, I can't explain why a weaker Germany and a stronger France would lead to the current result.

It is of course, still not as aggressive as it should be, be I guess that's we shouldn't expect more from AI.

I remember Bristish can still have 20% research, is it right? At least for the first turn.

American and Russian seems to quite for the first few years. However, as was reported, I had a game in v1.0 as China and Saw Russian and American declaring war to Japanese at about 1945. American did took over many islands from Japan and Japan eventually capitulated to America in that game. I think it could still very likely to happen in v1.3.

I saw Russia and Japan at war in every game I played so far. In my 5.1 game, Japan declared war on Russia right after they forced China to surrender and peacefully vassalized Portugal, Sweden and Finland, at about turn 35.

Have yet to see the USA declare war on anyone though.

Best Regards,
Ace

German's much more aggressive! Excellent!! They do tend to exhaust themselves (I took Amsterdam from them, do not think they can retake it).


Oh, and I forgot to mention that the leaderhead settings have changed too. Hitler could possibly be more aggressive due to the change of XML settings. Not too sure on this.

Have yet to see the USA declare war on anyone though.

In the game I played (before the most recent changes I think), Japan took its time vassalizing China, and then in the US-Japan war (which US initiated) they lost Tokyo. Still, they declared war on Russia and doing ok so far (1948).

In the overall, I am content with the amount of fighting I saw. It clearly became a world war, such that 3 turns ago there was no civ that was not at war. The only thing that could be changed is increasing the aggresiveness of Germany, which Ghengis apparently did for the new version :goodjob: (even without that, I had to fight against a Germany not at war with France or Russia - seemed agressive enough from my side of the border. Demographics say I killed 55 panzers in this game. I am still happy that I managed to push back that stack of 7panzers+2gunships. But I lost Thessaloniki to the wave after that, 1 turn before peace)

You can not run any research as the British not even 10% without a deficit (Unless in a golden age). You start the game in Pacifism. I could not spend the first three turns of the game in revolt (drafting, use of Airports, Courthouse, Forbidden Palace in India are all too critical early on). So I switched to a strategy of generating GP for golden ages, which though I am still in the early stages of the game 48 turns of Golden Ages in a row help a lot :P

Did you mean to place two National Epics in the British Isles or was one of them meant to be a Heroic Epic?

Even so… The British are just like history stretched quite thin needing to cover territory from the Atlantic to the Pacific.

I am hoping with the addition of the Mining Capital of Amsterdam that Old Churchill can pull out a victory… Not sure if he can as a few bad decisions or Russia (which is furious at us) deciding go to war with us would be a terrible.

Had to restart as my save would not load.

Playing again as England.

Wanted to report that in Feb 1940 America Declared war on Germany. :)

Quick update...

Like my game as Italy before the update... I am playing the English it is June 1941 Just took Rome. All of Africa is cleansed of Italian colonies, I will have the rest of Italy by the end of 1941 begining of 1942. I have taken out Spain proper and tried for German Amsterdam .... But it was a bridge too far :mischief:

I "think" when I was Italy my ability to control where I placed my fleets allowed me to concentrate my power and expand rapidly... It is more so with the English but they start off very very weak and would not have been able to compete if not for the Golden Age Strategy I have employed.

In any event I will think about suggestions to balance for Human vs AI.

However.. The English as computer AI has a tough time against a Human German player as well as the Italy.

A couple of questions and comments.

What made you have no tech trading?

I think a few Christian Monestaries should be sprinkled around (Rome, London, Berlin etc..) why they have no effect they do allow you to spread religon without switching to OR.

A couple of questions and comments.

What made you have no tech trading?

I think a few Christian Monestaries should be sprinkled around (Rome, London, Berlin etc..) why they have no effect they do allow you to spread religon without switching to OR.

There aren't a lot, but there are some around the world (a total of 5).

Can somebody help me, please.

Version 5.2 GEM is installed, and I cannot find (see) any of the scenarios (200, 1500, 1940) in the game menu.
I go to Advanced, load mod, load GEM of course, and play scenario, but none of these three scenarios are visible!

IN BTS, in Mods folder where the mod is installed, when I look at the GEM folder, in private maps all three scenarios are there!

Btw. I played GEM older version with 40 civs and have a great time until 1600AD, great map!

You need to load the mod first, then you will see the scenarios after the game restarts.

I wrote that I load the mod first, selected play scenarios, but I can not see 200, 1500 and 1940 scenarios!
Maybe someone had this weird issue, too?

I wrote that I load the mod first, selected play scenarios, but I can not see 200, 1500 and 1940 scenarios!
Maybe someone had this weird issue, too?

Where did you place your mod folder under? Have you tried both path (under where CIV is installed, and under my document)?

I don't know, may be also check your .ini file to see if custom scenario is allowed? However, if you have edit anything in the GEM mod, I can't see why this would be set differently.

Where did you place your mod folder under? Have you tried both path (under where CIV is installed, and under my document)?

I don't know, may be also check your .ini file to see if custom scenario is allowed? However, if you have edit anything in the GEM mod, I can't see why this would be set differently.

Hello,

Here is full path:
D:\Igre\Civilization 4\Beyond the Sword\Mods

This is the only folder with CIV on entire comp.

Your 5.2 GEM is the only mod present in that folder.
Mod can be loaded, after reloading in the right upper corner stands giant earth map, so mod is loaded ok.

I did not edit the GEM mod!


.ini file contains this line:

Specify a Mod folder (Mods\Mesopotamia), '0' for none
Mod = 0

I did not change anything here, neither!

Thanks

Did you check under My Documents/My Games?

Sometimes it can surprise you what gets stuck in there!

Did you check under My Documents/My Games?

Sometimes it can surprise you what gets stuck in there!

Ah, yes there is also one CIV folder, he he:lol:

But no luck, I have deleted GEM 5.2 from first location and moved it to the My documents-My games-BTS-MODS.
Still the same, not the single scenarios are visible, nor the as the Kai wrote, different resource location, depending of the date in the game.

What is really unusual is that 24000 people have this mod and no one has ever complained about this. I tried to find similar problem on GEM forum, to solve mine, and nothing.

If you guys just extract GEM to the MODS folder and it works fine, then I for sure do not have to edit anything...

Btw. I do not have installed Patch313.

Btw. I do not have installed Patch313.

You meant you have patched to 3.1.7 already or not?

You meant you have patched to 3.1.7 already or not?

I haven't patched to 3.1.3
It is still the basic version of BTS.

My version of the game does not allow me to patch it with the 313(cca 120mb ziped)

I played your first giant map with no problem, if that can help.

I haven't patched to 3.1.3
It is still the basic version of BTS.

My version of the game does not allow me to patch it with the 313(cca 120mb ziped)

I played your first giant map with no problem, if that can help.

Well then that is the problem. GEM v5.2 requires BTS patch 3.1.7. No other choices.

Yeah, that looks like the only thing left. I will try that. Thanks.

I have played this scenario a fair bit and still notice the same problem... I am doing most of the fighting. Even when USA is at war with Germany for five years it never send a unit. Japan and Russia at war for three years exchange one city. In my war with Gemany, Italy etc... Not once did I feel threatened as the English.

Not sure why this is happening or what can be done.

Anyone else have a "different" experience?

Is it the map?

Is it the number of units and "era" the scenario starts in?

Do the other scenarios have a more robust AI combat dynamic?

I have played this scenario a fair bit and still notice the same problem... I am doing most of the fighting. Even when USA is at war with Germany for five years it never send a unit. Japan and Russia at war for three years exchange one city. In my war with Gemany, Italy etc... Not once did I feel threatened as the English.

Not sure why this is happening or what can be done.

Anyone else have a "different" experience?

Is it the map?

Is it the number of units and "era" the scenario starts in?

Do the other scenarios have a more robust AI combat dynamic?

With regards to the sea/oceans I usually encounter the same problem in many scenarios as the AI rarely loads units on galleons/transport etc to invade and attack.

Unfortunately even installing the Better AI Mod, didnt help much.

If there is an ocean in between, even if a narrow one, with just a single sea square (like Gibraltar for Spain/Morocco), the civs tend to treat it as a major obstacle.

The AI is thick.

What I noticed is that to trigger "invasions" via sea, it helps if you actually place an aggressor unit into the enemy's mainland.
The unit gets annihilated but the aggressor AI "acknowledges" the existence of those lands and might consider attacking.

I wont lie though, it happens rarely.

On my mod, 1205 AD GEM, England very rarely gets attacked even though it starts at war with France.
However if I place enough french units in England so that they manage to take over one english city, then the AI start sending units from the French mainland into England.

I agree. In addition however, Not seeing much in the way of land battles either. It is clearly not as active as a normal game. My biggest hunch why is the number of units throws the AI's off on what to do, not a modder but wondering if the AI keeps to an objective or is reset somehow each turn due to the number of units?

Just tested the scenaio as italians ... hell are they overpowered. The problem is not so much their numbers ... but the promotions?

In reality the italian forces in WWII had just one promotions "get beaten by inferior forces and call for the germans for help". This happend three times: Ethiopia, southern France and Greece.

OK, this is a bit over overly ironic, but if you look at WHAT the italian forces did achieve ... its not much.

Not sure I agree on the promotion issue. It is more the combo of choke points, naval combat, and human strategic advantage that is at issue.

If you weaken them, they will be very easy for a human player to crush. They do not have many units to begin with

Just tested the scenaio as italians ... hell are they overpowered. The problem is not so much their numbers ... but the promotions?

In reality the italian forces in WWII had just one promotions "get beaten by inferior forces and call for the germans for help". This happend three times: Ethiopia, southern France and Greece.

OK, this is a bit over overly ironic, but if you look at WHAT the italian forces did achieve ... its not much.

What promotions are you complaining about Italian? There isn't any add-on promotions I gave to Italian. The only promotions they have are those included by default, such as Combat I for the gunpowder units for Aggressive Trait, Blitz for tanks etc.

As compared to Germany, Japanese, US, USSR or Britain, which all have units promotions up to 6, I don't see how Italian is overpowered by the promotions.

o.O ok ... this week has definitely seen me to often to late in bed ^^. Sorry my mistake I just got promotions rather quickly, and mixed that up somehow. ^^

Still Italy is doing incredibly well, maybe we have to look a bit deeper.

As I said all.... Having played both UK and Italy, the problem IMHO is the same. It is the AI's ability to deal with strong Human play combined with Naval forces. We can attack where they are not.

The solution for Human play is a self handicap "Immortal" etc...

For AI play the issue remains the same that combat is too limited with no conclusive engagements.

As I said all.... Having played both UK and Italy, the problem IMHO is the same. It is the AI's ability to deal with strong Human play combined with Naval forces. We can attack where they are not.

The solution for Human play is a self handicap "Immortal" etc...

For AI play the issue remains the same that combat is too limited with no conclusive engagements.

Yes, and a PBEM game solved the problem :D

Did it? Well the pbem shows three things:

1) don't give an army into Kais hands ... he is able to use it too well ;)
2) the axis has significant military advantages in this scenario which need further balancing (you did a good job with the germans there) ;)
3) the economic overweight of the allies is to slow in coming compared to that axis military power

Did it? Well the pbem shows three things:

1) don't give an army into Kais hands ... he is able to use it too well ;)
2) the axis has significant military advantages in this scenario which need further balancing (you did a good job with the germans there) ;)
3) the economic overweight of the allies is to slow in coming compared to that axis military power

Firstly, thanks for your positive comments on me :). I think I have an advantage because I know the map and setting too well for obvious reason.

But I am not too agree about Germany (or Axis in general) being overpowered. Fanda told me that in the other PBEM game he is simultaneously playing, Germany in that game is really suffering. Germany only able to take Copenhagen and Amsterdam and lost Amsterdam to the Allies in the second turn! Note that, they have a human player of France.

For our game, at this stage, it is still too early to say the Axis is doing better than the Allies. But if Germany in our current PBEM is doing better than your expectation, it could be due to 1) No human France and China; 2) The author is playing Germany.

Also, I did some interesting statistic over last week about the scenario. I can publish the numbers later, but out of my head, here are some interesting findings:
1) America is earning 4 times as much gold as any of the other major players. (Surprisingly Russia is not so rich, but still earn more than Germany).
2) America and Russia are approx. twice as productive as Germany. Russia being slightly higher than America.
3) Britain, America and Russia are producing 3 to 4 times as much food as Germany.
Do you still want to say the Allies economy is too slow? ;)

If we ever going to start another PBEM game, a human France and China would greatly decrease the Axis expansion rate I think. I wouldn't mind trying to be France and China if we have a chance.

No way is the Allies Economy too slow. Even though I am not playing with you, I agree from the unit layout that a French and China player (two key Allies) being run by the AI is a huge issue. All the French need to do is strip all their forces from all over to do additional damage to Germany beyond the AI's abilities to change the game significantly. Japan with a Human playing China would also make things interesting.

Even having one person playing both China and France so he/she is not frustrated might be a solution.

As the game is now, Russia and the US are free from worries of a major attack. No way can Germany make an early attack before Russia is ready to put him in stalemate.

Anyway.... I will stop typing and get back to my game as Australia taking over the world from humble hut in Sydney

The only case that "Germany is overpowered" can be said is one where Germany in the game does significantly better than what happened historically. So unless Genghis conquered entire Europe, the scenario is balanced... did he?

The only case that "Germany is overpowered" can be said is one where Germany in the game does significantly better than what happened historically. So unless Genghis conquered entire Europe, the scenario is balanced... did he?

Not quite yet ;)

Actually 6 months into the game he is doing incredibly well. But I think Germany was indeed toned fown considerably by the changes Kai made. I'm more worried about the italian and japanese successes. Not that they are ahistorical: yet.

Actually 6 months into the game he is doing incredibly well. But I think Germany was indeed toned fown considerably by the changes Kai made. I'm more worried about the italian and japanese successes. Not that they are ahistorical: yet.

Oh, it is already ahistorical in June, which hasn't arrived to you yet. I suppose you will know anyway so I don't think Martin and Fanda will mind if I told you. Spain has already become Italy's vassal while China has surrendered to Japan on June.

But I don't think we really need to ensure history to be repeated, as long as we think the balance is accurate, that is good enough. After all this is a game for us to change history is it not? In my opinion, the current game is coming to the current state mainly because Britain declared war to Japan, which was a serious mistake. In history, Britain was trying her best to not fighting Japan simultaneously for avoiding the situation it is now in our game.

^^ well, I couldn't do more then to advice it against doing so. ^^

Why in the heck would England go to war with Japan that early? The fleet and unit positions were terrible. Sounds like your Allies all drank too much :rolleyes:

Been playing this scenario single player, very fun.

Wish I could do the multiplayer but I am unreliable on time atm.

Why in the heck would England go to war with Japan that early? The fleet and unit positions were terrible. Sounds like your Allies all drank too much :rolleyes:

Been playing this scenario single player, very fun.

Wish I could do the multiplayer but I am unreliable on time atm.

Well, I think it is because AI France, Netherlands and Norway wanted to be his vassals in the first turn and he didn't resisted :p

We are actually doing 3-5 days per turn now as compared to our original planned 1 day per turn. I wish to make the turn faster, but I think it will be at least 2-3 days per turn in realistic terms. Not sure would this make your availability change.

I have made some changes to the scenario for the next release. The biggest change is adding Chinese Communist. Take a look at the first post for a bit more details.

Did you decide about the MP lineup yet? I'd suggest the following:

Germany
Hungary
Italy
Spain
Portugal
Japan
Manchuria
Thailand
Chiang China
Mao China
Russia
Mongolia
South Africa
New Zealand
Australia
Canada
Great Britain
India
Egypt
Turkey
Arabia
Iraq
Iran
Greece
France
Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
Finland
America
Mexico
Colombia
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile

Why this seemingly chaotic line up? This order allows for the greatest flexibility in the team composition.

As an example: You could combine all european axis powers, including Spain. Or you could split it into a northern and southern power (Germany + Hungary and Italy + Spain). Or make three groups, with Germany, Italy and Spain as group leaders, Hungary and Portugal attached to one ...

Same lower on the list. Thailand could be joined with Japan or Chiang China. Mao China could be independent, or be part of the Comintern.

The scandinavian countries could be split (Norway to France + Norway), or united ... fighting a war against Russia and Germany.

And so on. Maybe you can come up with an even more flexible order.

Did you decide about the MP lineup yet? I'd suggest the following:

Germany
Hungary
Italy
Spain
Portugal
Japan
Manchuria
Thailand
Chiang China
Mao China
Russia
Mongolia
South Africa
New Zealand
Australia
Canada
Great Britain
India
Egypt
Turkey
Arabia
Iraq
Iran
Greece
France
Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
Finland
America
Mexico
Colombia
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile

Why this seemingly chaotic line up? This order allows for the greatest flexibility in the team composition.

As an example: You could combine all european axis powers, including Spain. Or you could split it into a northern and southern power (Germany + Hungary and Italy + Spain). Or make three groups, with Germany, Italy and Spain as group leaders, Hungary and Portugal attached to one ...

Same lower on the list. Thailand could be joined with Japan or Chiang China. Mao China could be independent, or be part of the Comintern.

The scandinavian countries could be split (Norway to France + Norway), or united ... fighting a war against Russia and Germany.

And so on. Maybe you can come up with an even more flexible order.

I totally agree with the idea of reordering of the players by groups and try maximizing the flexibility as much as possible. But I suppose there are goods and bads of your list as compared to the list I have used in the multi-player version. I guess it depends on what kind of grouping we have in our mind (for example, we can't group China with France in your list; on the otherhand, we can't group Italy and Spain in my list). Nevertheless I will try absorbing your idea in your list in the new order.

Are most of the changes to balance for MP or for computer AI issues?

+ or - on Japan or Italy to weaken or strengthen against AI vs Human would take a different form.

I can't commit to MP at this time as my work schedule is quite crazy this summer. :cry:

Are most of the changes to balance for MP or for computer AI issues?

+ or - on Japan or Italy to weaken or strengthen against AI vs Human would take a different form.

I can't commit to MP at this time as my work schedule is quite crazy this summer. :cry:

I made those changes based on the production statistic I have gathered. (for example, Japan is currently more productive than Germany). These numbers are objective, I suppose. Hence the changes are not specific to address either Multi or Single player game issues.

I have also added a few more machine guns in the eastern border of Germany and also on the Russian side. Interesting, after I've made the changes, Germany can now take over all of Netherlands and most of France (including Paris) in the first year!

OK, this is the final order:

Germany
Hungary
Finland
Sweden
Italy
Spain
Portugal

Japan
Manchuria
Thailand

Turkey
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
Iraq
Iran

Russia
Mongolia

Communist China
Nationalist China

France
Netherlands
Norway
Greece

Britain
India
South Africa
Australia
New Zealand
Canada

America
Mexico
Colombia
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile

Minor Nations
Barbarian States

have you considered grouping PLA with USSR and Kuomintang with USA.

have you considered grouping PLA with USSR and Kuomintang with USA.

Yes I have. In the current order, Communist China can be grouped into the USSR team. However, I decided to place Nationalist China between France and Communist China because it is more likely for it to be grouped with Communist China or France as compared to USA in a MP game. USA by itself is already too big.

I've again made lots of changes. Check the first post for the detailed list.

The most significant changes are: 1) India is now fully controlled by Britain. 2) All the British Commonwealth countries are no longer vassals of Britain.

Especially the changes in Asia will make it more realistic I think. UK capturing all those Tibetan and Uighur cities was bugging me.

Is it possible to prohibit changing of civics? Your new civic changes are all good, but when I tried the previous version, many AI nations had revolutions in the first turn.

I thought of removing different civ's knowledge of Democracy, Fascism and Communism corresponding.

Trying to understand the mechanics of the German/UK Science change.

Germany can research faster than any other nation?

UK research at 50% of Germany?

How does this relate to the rest of the world?

Which country is the baseline and how do these and the other major nations research compare? How was it modified, Great Scientists, code, etc..?

Just trying to understand the method and amount of this change

Thanks!

I've again made lots of changes. Check the first post for the detailed list.

The most significant changes are: 1) India is now fully controlled by Britain. 2) All the British Commonwealth countries are no longer vassals of Britain.

IMO most changes add to the degree of realism.;)

Except: "15) Added two anti-tanks in Russia." I think I can understand why you did this, but I believe anti-tank weapons were developed during the war (i.e. for the Russians after June 1941). Most Soviet tanks in Europe were destroyed in the 1st six months; luckily development of the T-34 was just starting in late '41.

Well... I think the Anti-Tank weapons are actually representive of the Russian weather. Think of them as mobile mud holes which the German's found a wee bit troublesome. :rolleyes:

Trying to understand the mechanics of the German/UK Science change.

Germany can research faster than any other nation?

UK research at 50% of Germany?

How does this relate to the rest of the world?

Which country is the baseline and how do these and the other major nations research compare? How was it modified, Great Scientists, code, etc..?

Just trying to understand the method and amount of this change

Thanks!

I think you misunderstood what I said (or maybe I didn't express it correctly).

There were two examples I gave:
1) Germany can research at a faster rate
2) Britain can do research at 50% as compare to only 10% in v1.3 because of heavy city maintenance cost.

The research balance is now finalized (I did a lot to make this balance, can't tell you what I did exactly :lol:), But I can tell you the result:

Edit: deleted the list since it is outdated.

So realistically USA can have Rocketry in 12 turns. Britain, about 20 turns. and then Germany, Japan, Russia and France can get at about 30 turns. Italy, Nationalist China, Australia, Canada and Brazil can get at about 40 turns.

Also need to take into account is the fact that, Germany will take over France soon and Japan will also grow. So the rate for Germany and Japan can increase depends on how fast they expand.

IMO most changes add to the degree of realism.;)

Except: "15) Added two anti-tanks in Russia." I think I can understand why you did this, but I believe anti-tank weapons were developed during the war (i.e. for the Russians after June 1941). Most Soviet tanks in Europe were destroyed in the 1st six months; luckily development of the T-34 was just starting in late '41.

You are probably right. But well, there were already some anti-tanks in v1.3. I gave anti-tank to those minor nations that Germany should not invade, such as Switzerland and Sweden. So, giving only 2 anti-tanks to Russia I think is reasonable. Russia did cause a lot of German loses even early in the war, although they were losing quickly.

OK It wasn't finalized. It is too tempting to make further balancing. So this is the latest list:

Edit: The list is already outdated.

This is the balance for production.

Edit: The list is already outdated.

I gave a lot of effort to make Russia research at a much faster rate. It was however still limited by the fact that it is using State Property (i.e. less one trade route) and no open border with many nations.

And whats happening if Russia switches from State Property? Looking at real Russia it would need a decade or two at least to go through the following upheaval and get back to its former research rates. Maybe Russia is getting too strong in the game by a simple switch? Maybe we should look into that.

And whats happening if Russia switches from State Property? Looking at real Russia it would need a decade or two at least to go through the following upheaval and get back to its former research rates. Maybe Russia is getting too strong in the game by a simple switch? Maybe we should look into that.

Yes. I can test that and see. But I suspect it won't give a big push unless it can open border with the Americas/Oceania players.

You are probably right. But well, there were already some anti-tanks in v1.3. I gave anti-tank to those minor nations that Germany should not invade, such as Switzerland and Sweden. So, giving only 2 anti-tanks to Russia I think is reasonable. Russia did cause a lot of German loses even early in the war, although they were losing quickly.

Unless event-scripted, Germany might then also be deterred from invading Russia. (For non-intended war participants anti-tanks won't matter, but for intended participants it will. Also most German losses in '41 were by attrition and, in the case of Kiev, from sending tanks into a city - were they are most vulnerable.)

EDIT: As concerns civics, would it be possible just to lock these for all civs?

Well in reality, would you not agree that invading Russia was the biggest mistake Hitler has made?

Only the second greatest mistake, his greatest mistake was to exile or murder the most active parts of Germanies Economy and Academia: the german Jews. Without that he could have had the bomb by 1943 ... and both USA as well as USSR would have been delayed by at least 5 years. The bomb was discovered by germans: predominately jewish-germans in the USA and USSR got it by (partly) capturing the german V2 research teams.

About Russia: he didn't have much choice even from a military pov: he needed the oil from Baku and surroundings, as coal transmutation wasn't enough to keep the heavily motorized war engine going. The other "nearby" oil reserve was in the near east, an area Germany got only involved in to cover up for italian stupidity.

Both issues - invading Soviet Russia and virulent anti-semitism - weren't mistakes, but two - of the many - flaws in the Nazi mindframe. Both followed from Hitler's anti-socialist attitude and both were - in general, there were exceptions - followed, if not applauded, by the Wehrmacht. The mistake was that, due to sheer size, Blitzkrieg wouldn't work in Russia; once the battle for Moscow was lost, the die were cast. But Hitler was a warmonger, uninterested in the toil of daily politics; the Munich settlement of 1938 actually enraged him, because it deprived him of the opportunity for war. So he made sure that this wasn't going to happen in 1939 with Poland. Hitler's mistake was either a mental one - the belief that the result of WW I (the Treaty of Versailles) could be overturned - or a military one: a two-front war. As it was, this was exactly what he got: failing to defeat Britain, he invaded Russia anyway. (Thereby repeating the WW I situation.) But then, Hitler was not a military man...

Whether or not invading Russia is the biggest or the second biggest mistake, I think we all agreed it is a big mistake, right?

So come back to what we were discussing, I guess putting just 2 anti-tanks in Russia to start with (Russia can pump out 10s of anti-tanks in a few turns anyway) wouldn't make much difference, except to give a bit of discouragement for a human German player to not attempt a really early attack on Russia (I meant the first turn or second). This is what I wanted to avoid.

Makes sense. (Although the bulk of the Russian army in Europe should be on that border; this is why most of it was lost on the first week.);)

Makes sense. (Although the bulk of the Russian army in Europe should be on that border; this is why most of it was lost on the first week.);)
Ah, thats interesting. So in the scenario, would moving more of Russian's unit closer to the border actually ease German's invasion or not?

Yes.

To understand the situation you must understand two things:

the Ribbentrop-Molotow Pact and the Soviet Officer Cleansing

The Ribbentrop-Molotow Pact was a result of two failed alliance constructions: France and Britain failed to get USSR in their boat, and Germany failed to get Poland and several east-european countries in their boat.

So two completely unlikely partners made a deal: Germany and USSR. As a result when Germany invaded western Poland in late 1939, USSR did so with the western part. This is the main reason why large contingents of the red army where still at the german border in 1942. They where needed for "pacification". The Ribbentrop-Molotow Pact was only broken in 1942 when Germany initiated operation barbarossa -> the invasion of the USSR. Though some historians consider it also likely that Stalin was only waiting for a sign of weakness from the Germans which would allow him to attack the other way around.

The second fact is the "cleansing" of the red army. Stalin had secured its power by killing all Trozkists and other "counterrevolutionary" elements (basically anyone not stalinist enough) during the 20s. With his power secured Stalin started a strong drive to modernise the red army in the early to middle 30s, with german "Militärberater" as very valuable help. Many very good officers managed to form elite troops at that time, and the red army of that time would have been a worthy enemy for the german troops. But: Stalin was afraid of the growing power of that military leaders. Between 1937 and 1939 the NKWD arrested three of the five marshalls (Tuchatschewski, Blücher, Jegorow), thirteen of fifteen army commanders, and almost everyone of the upper officer ranks below that (polit commisars...). Over 90% of the experienced strategic officers where killed in those two years ... and even after that fear was widespread. Even in 1945 the two leading marshalls that where leading the red army towards Berlin had to be as afraid of being too successfull then of being not successfull enough.

The reason why Finland could survive in the winter war, and why the red army was such a pushover was: it was lacking heads.

I know the history too :) I was questioning whether "in the scenario", we should put more units closer to the border. It could be true too that more units concentrated on the border would be easier to destroy by Blitzkrieg.

On the historical aspect, I don't think Russia was should of heads. I think it was 1:4. It was tactics and like you mention, lack of experienced commanders that leds to Finland's survival in the winter war.

The problem with that (concentrating russian forces to the border) would be that civ has no supply mechanics. In the actual war Eastern front saw lots of encirclement and defeat of supplyless units. That tactic will not work in civ. So you'll have to be careful about balancing this.

I guess lack of experienced commanders can be simulated by promotionless units.

I know the history too :) I was questioning whether "in the scenario", we should put more units closer to the border. It could be true too that more units concentrated on the border would be easier to destroy by Blitzkrieg.

On the historical aspect, I don't think Russia was should of heads. I think it was 1:4. It was tactics and like you mention, lack of experienced commanders that leds to Finland's survival in the winter war.

I gathered that (you meaning "in the scenario"). Logically having the bulk of Russia's European at the Eastern border should work as a deterrent (lots of units to plough through). Tactically it's an advantage for the attacker (military advisors wanted a defense further east, but Stalin was opposed to it - which explains his total disbelief and disappearance from the public eye for a week following the invasion), as most of these units were undertrained and had outdated equipment and were facing veteran units with better equipment (both of which can be simulated in-game). Anyway, it seems worth a try.

The undertrained aspect can be simulated by less/no promotions which is already implemented in the scenario. The outdated equipment aspect is however quite difficult to simulate because we only have two choices - Rifleman and Infantry.

The balance of the scenario is updated. I am quite satisfied with it now :)

Research

The two numbers are: Research turn for Rocketry @100% and @+ve profit.
The first value indicates the limits while the second value is more realistic and the list sorted according to it.

Nation @100% @+ve profit
America 11 12
Britain 11 20
Russia 16 24
Germany 27 27
Japan 22 30
France 17 33
Italy 42 42
Australia 34 42
Canada 31 44
Brazil 36 44
Nationalist China 37 45
Netherlands 30 49
Mexico 62 69
Portugal 49 70
South Africa 71 71
Argentina 69 76
Spain 72 79
Norway 63 79
Peru 75 83
Hungary 86 95
Turkey 86 96
Greece 86 96
Sweden 89 98
Finland 97 108
Colombia 100 112
Chile 110 122
New Zealand 112 124
Egypt 120 133
Iran 137 137
Communist China 114 143
Iraq 146 146
Thailand 133 148
Manchuria 148 183
Saudi Arabia 211 211
Nepal 244 244
Mongolia 370 370


Production

Nation Million Tons
America 1217
Russia 1198
Britain 1040
Germany 741
France 649
Japan 622
Australia 349
Canada 345
Netherlands 332
Italy 322
Nationalist China 314
Brazil 307
Spain 188
Mexico 187
Argentina 164
Communist China 152
South Africa 145
Hungary 139
Portugal 128
Colombia 124
Iran 117
Turkey 116
Sweden 113
Peru 107
Chile 101
Egypt 92
Norway 91
Greece 84
Finland 77
New Zealand 73
Iraq 72
Manchuria 66
Thailand 55
Mongolia 51
Saudi Arabia 41
Nepal 33


Land

Nation 1,000 Sq. km
Russia 1057
Britain 540
America 493
France 453
Canada 394
Australia 277
Nationalist China 251
Brazil 202
Netherlands 195
Japan 177
Communist China 141
Mexico 117
Italy 108
Iran 97
Peru 94
Germany 91
Saudi Arabia 89
Egypt 84
Manchuria 82
Nepal 82
Mongolia 80
Portugal 74
Norway 74
Argentina 71
South Africa 64
Colombia 62
Turkey 58
Finland 58
Sweden 53
Chile 52
Iraq 46
Spain 43
Hungary 36
Thailand 36
New Zealand 28
Greece 16


Population

Nation Million
America 28.94
Britain 28.06
Japan 27.97
Russia 20.65
Germany 14.87
France 10.59
Italy 5.80
Nationalist China 5.51
Brazil 5.16
Canada 4.28
Netherlands 3.84
Australia 3.61
Argentina 3.52
Spain 3.02
Hungary 2.86
Mexico 2.81
Manchuria 2.45
Egypt 2.41
Iran 1.72
Portugal 1.72
Greece 1.60
Turkey 1.47
Norway 1.37
South Africa 1.30
Peru 1.16
Sweden 1.14
Chile 1.14
Communist China 1.12
Colombia 0.97
Thailand 0.96
Finland 0.83
Iraq 0.65
New Zealand 0.57
Nepal 0.33
Saudi Arabia 0.21
Mongolia 0.11


Military
Measure the total number of Army, Naval and Air units

Nation Units
Britain 155
Russia 145
France 137
Germany 134
Japan 130
America 100
Italy 96
Nationalist China 81
Netherlands 45
Communist China 38
Hungary 35
Sweden 24
Spain 21
Turkey 20
Australia 19
Greece 17
Canada 17
Brazil 17
Finland 15
Portugal 13
Argentina 12
Iran 9
Mexico 9
Thailand 8
Norway 8
New Zealand 8
Nepal 7
Colombia 7
Peru 7
Manchuria 6
South Africa 6
Saudi Arabia 5
Iraq 5
Mongolia 5
Chile 5
Egypt 4

The undertrained aspect can be simulated by less/no promotions which is already implemented in the scenario. The outdated equipment aspect is however quite difficult to simulate because we only have two choices - Rifleman and Infantry.

Well, I meant material equipment (tanks, planes, artillery). BTW, good job on the update.;)

I've been playing 1.3 for a little while (I'm up to about 1948 as I remember) as Greece as I was game for a challenge and it's been going surprisingly well.

Absolutely vital is getting hold of oil for the obvious units it provides so I was able to buy imports from UK by dropping my science slider down to 0 (it was taking a ridiculoous amount of turns to get to rocketry anyhow). I'll be keen to try the saem tactic with Finland and see if I can beat the Russians.

Anyway, Hungary were pretty easy to repel and for the first few turns luckily Germany were busy attacking the someone else presumably as their panzers and my lack of anti tanks would have been a problem.

Anyway Italy didn't defend its cities very wella nd I was able to take Tirana relatively easily with a few tanks and artillery/ fighters. The very next turn though I was lucky to hold onto Tirana as all the European axis plowed tanks and infantry into the city. Truth be told if playing against humans there would have been a pretty big opportunity to role all over Greece as i'd lost half my built up army taking that city, but I gambled i'd be able to hold off the AI and i did.. just.

Once i'd reinforced northern Greece with enough anti tanks especially I managed to capture Italy's North African oilfields, using Malta as a stop off to avoid having to take on the Italian navy. Italy's lack of promotions meant I really fancied seeing how easily I could take them so I paid Germany/ Hungary off with what was basically a turns worth of income (i was no longer paying for oil as I now had my own) and planned to build a force to take Rome and the religion centre bonus with it.

But first I was presented with an opportunity to have Egypt declare war on me (marriage insult random event) which I did and I got 3 cities off of them including Cairo before making peace.

I was now getting confident and whilst maintaining good relations with the nations that could potentially flatten me (Uk, Russia, maybe Germany) planned to take Italy. France had the same idea, but I got to Rome first and although they took 2 cities I got the rest on the mainland. With Germany out of the war this was pretty easy.

I then looked at what else I could get away with taking without running into 'you declared war on our friend' problems with some of my now far technologically advanced allies and took all of Arabia (and religion centre) and Iraq. My city growth of conquered territories is a bit poor though as alot of the tiles are swallowed up by neighbours culture, especially Britain who I can't really declare war on... yet.

So next plan is to take Turkey, who don't like Greece and then move on Hungary and Germany. My forces stilla ren't anywhere near the big powers but by growing out from the centre and not venturing too far (ie Iran) I hope to be able to move towards a point where I can then take on the big powers, before America wins a diplo victory (I disabled adding vassals so this didn't happen too soon and also took off space race as i knew i'd have no chance and don't like this condition anyway). Luckily th UN has also signed the nuclear non proliferation treaty as I'm a long way away from being able to use nukes.

So feedback... 1) i like the use of promotions for the status quo, this is a really good tool to use and represents troop and equipment quality really well. Do you also place military academies and resident great generals etc to boost military production?

2) I'm British, but on the whole i think Britian is too strong, fighting USA at the top of the leaderboard. This isn't really representative and I see you've addressed this in you removal of commonwealth vassals for 1.4.

3) I'd like to see it slightly easier to research technology for smaller nations as the time it takes otherwise is pretty inaccurate; technology transfer occurs much quicker than this. Ways of doing this would I guess include increasing city maintainance costs and reducing research costs in tandem, or allowing spies to easily take technologies. I don't pretend to have the exact answer but this could definitely be an area for development.

4) I like all the developments for 1.4 apart from Switzerland to Sweden as although I see why you've done it it jsut seems so inconsistent with your otherwise fantastic attention to realism and reality (place names in 200bc for instance).

5) I've mentioned it before, but how cool would this mod or a 2008 version be with double or more the amount of civs and no minor nations? If possible this would be awesome.

Anyway, thanks for a great mod and a great game for me to play. Of course as i've said to Ace should you guys ever want any help with research for anything I'd be happy to help.

4) I like all the developments for 1.4 apart from Switzerland to Sweden as although I see why you've done it it jsut seems so inconsistent with your otherwise fantastic attention to realism and reality (place names in 200bc for instance).

Well, although I agree this is losing some reality, it actually isn't that inconsistent - Norway and Denmark is combined; Finland and Baltic nations are combined; Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria are combined in the same scenario. May be the only inconsistency here is that the two civ combining are actually not neighboring.

I struggled too, at first, but decided that this is probably the best solution to divert the Axis forces away from Switzerland.

Guys. I just like to share with you all GEM lovers, history buffs, that I have found a treasure today!

Well, it is a book :) The title of the book is called "The economics of world war II, Six great powers in international comparison", edited by Mark Harrison, published by Cambridge U.

As the title suggest, the book gives lots of economical figures comparing different great powers during the world war II, which is nothing new. The reason why I said it is a treasure is that, unlike most books focused only on the Great powers (sometimes even just give Allies vs Axis figures), this book even includes GDP for places like UK dominions, UK colonies, French colonies, China, Norway, Switzerland and South America for comparison! This is something I've been searching for since day one building this scenario.

Now that I've got this book, I will give a try to make the scenario simulate more closely to the reality.

Great find!

For anyone who is interested, quite a large chunk of this book is available as preview on Google Books:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ZgFu2p5uogwC

For anyone who is interested, quite a large chunk of this book is available as preview on Google Books:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ZgFu2p5uogwC

Yeah, I found it on the web first, then I rush to the Library to get hold of the book.

I am going to push this scenario's setting 3 months earlier. So the game would start at the very beginning of the war. Poland still exist (just as a minor nation) and less Chinese cities got conquered.

The military balance would be adjusted as follow:
Germany: The forces will mostly distributed on the eastern border to Poland.
Italy: Reduced in strength. Not at war with the Allies yet.
Japan: Concentrated at Central China and southern coastal China.
Russia: At war with Japan.
France: Reduced in strength.
Netherlands: Reduced in strength.
Britain: Reduced in strength. No forces landed in France yet.
America: Reduced in strength.

I think this will hurt Axis AI more, due to its reluctance to attack.

I think this will hurt Axis AI more, due to its reluctance to attack.

I don't know. May be. But I think AI is better to fight with less enemies at the same time. The new setting is that Germany with not be at war with Norway and Netherlands. Italy will not be at war with any one.

I will try and if the AI really is not doing anything, I can revert it back.

Well, although I agree this is losing some reality, it actually isn't that inconsistent - Norway and Denmark is combined; Finland and Baltic nations are combined; Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria are combined in the same scenario. May be the only inconsistency here is that the two civ combining are actually not neighboring.

I struggled too, at first, but decided that this is probably the best solution to divert the Axis forces away from Switzerland.

Yeah, fair enough. You make a good point regarding the other combinations.

So any chance of a slightly bigger dll in upcoming versions for more civs? Or is this too much of a memory nightmare? I guess there's obviously a reason why you haven't done this...

Even 40 is asking for it...

I am going to push this scenario's setting 3 months earlier. So the game would start at the very beginning of the war. Poland still exist (just as a minor nation) and less Chinese cities got conquered.

The military balance would be adjusted as follow:
Germany: The forces will mostly distributed on the eastern border to Poland.
Italy: Reduced in strength. Not at war with the Allies yet.
Japan: Concentrated at Central China and southern coastal China.
Russia: At war with Japan.
France: Reduced in strength.
Netherlands: Reduced in strength.
Britain: Reduced in strength. No forces landed in France yet.
America: Reduced in strength.

Unless you playtest this to disprove it, I agree this is pushing the Axis AI: if Germany is not at war with Denmark/Norway and the Benelux, I doubt the AI will come up with the Ardennes push that decided the fate of France (especially since, in a Civ setting, there's no compulsive military reason to strike North). Also a Pearl Harbor event (plus accompanying East Asian strikes) will be very necessary for Japan.

But it might be interesting to try.;)

The only thing I see happening by this will be Germany attacking Russia after Poland. The AI will already not like Russia.

If the English are not at war with the German's and Italy is not at war with the allies I am concerned that this will prove to making the English even more powerful.

I do think the time rollback does change the nature of the war as itis hard for me to see the AI making even close to historic choices and without Germany attacking France & the UK with Italy I do not see anything but easy Ally wins.

Well I guess I will just have to see the new version... Hint :rolleyes:

No No. Germany will still be at war with France, Britain and all the Commonwealth countries. It is just not at war with the minor ones, Greece, Norway and Netherlands.

Italy is not at war initially. But I see AI in one of the previous version it always declare war on Greece anyway. So I suppose Italy will do better invasion to Greece without at war with Britain and France.

On the east, Japan is at war with Russia at the beginning but not at war with France.

Good, except Italy declared war on France when it was already beaten to get some of the spoils - which didn't pay off and this in turn motivated the war on Greece, which again didn't pay off until Hitler intervened on Mussolini's behalf. (So Italy being at war with France and Greece are interrelated.) Also, why should the Italians do well? They didn't: not in France, not in Greece, not in Egypt (where they started out with vastly superior numbers)...

On the east, Japan is at war with Russia at the beginning but not at war with France.

That would put Japan at great difficulty. Besides the last fighting between those two was in September 1939, so don't complicate things for a single turn of war.

That would put Japan at great difficulty. Besides the last fighting between those two was in September 1939, so don't complicate things for a single turn of war.

But they are really at war on Sept 1939. And I think it will be interesting.

I have almost complete all the changes I want to make for the 1940 scenario. That makes the most of the changes I've wanted to include for the next GEM releases, v5.3 (other changes include some minor generic mod change and 1500AD scenario changes). I am going to send it to the people who are playing the PBEM game for test play. JEELEN, Knight+, Halt and Traiano, do you guys want to try out the development version for test play? It would be good to balance out the opinions from multiplayer games and single player games.

If you are interested, could you please PM me your email address? I might have one or two of your email address actually but I guess it doesn't hurt to get it again :)

Genghis, my webmail allows 5 MB only ... so a dl link would probably be more helpfull. ;)

Yeah (I got 2 large size messages still stuck in my Microsoft Office Outlook Outbox - which is why I changed my e-mail). I appreciate the offer, but as I abandoned this project due to memory problems, I don't see how I can be of much practical help...

JEELEN: That's ok.
Bastian: OK, may be I will upload the development version here in civfanatic in a new download link.

YES I want to play!

I am so disapointed with Warhammer Online I need a new game

Genghis, did you already upload the testversion? Didn't get the DL link yet.

Genghis, did you already upload the testversion? Didn't get the DL link yet.

I was still doing some last minute changes over the last few days. I am uploading it right now.

Does anyone has any feedback on the beta release?

I already found out that the diplomatic situation does not turn out to be good. Netherlands and Italy, since they are not at war with anyone in the beginning, got all the minor civs as vassals.

Germany did quite well on Poland. I see all Polish cities fall to Germany within the first 10 turns. Some French cities also fallen to Germany, but then western front is stagnated. Netherlands even can grab away Cologne by culture.

I have just change the western diplomatic status back to the original as a test. The result is much better. Germany invaded Copenhagen, Amsterdam and even Oslo on the first turn while still able to grab Danzig and Wroclaw on the east. The Netherlands and Italy can no longer get vassals states.

Suggestions? Should I change back to the original setting at 1940? I actually quite like Poland being there. Just don't like Netherlands and Italy got any vassals.

Well, I suppose nobody minds it a lot if you go for a bit ahistorical situation.

I'd say let the scenario start septembre 1939, and let it end with the february 1953 turn (Stalin died early march 1953). This way the scenario ends, when all for major politicians of that time have left the stage:

Roosevelt April 1945
Hitler April 1945
Stalin March 1953
Churchill January 1965, but due to a second stroke in June 1953 he was out of business in general as well

You could also leave it open, but septembre 1945 to february 1953 is exactly 101 turns, so also a good number of turns to try to win.

I have reverted back to the 1940AD setting. It is not exactly the same as it was, however. For example, there are still Polish resistance forces in Polish area, although the cities are already under German and Russian control. Most of the German forces are still concentrated in Poland, meaning it is not possible for German to take any cities from France in the first turn.

I also kept Japan at war with Russia.

Please download beta 2 to try.

I got a work assignment so tied up for the next few days. Will play as soon as I can :)

I have tested a little the beta and i found it very good. I'm playing in emperor and i'm at the 50 turn and germany capured : coppenhagen oslo brussel amsterdam nancy lyon vichy marseille paris belgrade lvov riga odessa.
I've a little uuggestion maybe you should disable the space race victory because germany lost time to build appolo project.

PS: I play with the last better AI compiled for 40 player to be compatible with the mod i don't know if it change something.

Hi armand453,

Did you play with the 1939 Sep setting or the 1940 Jan setting?

It begins in January 1940.

Armand.

It begins in January 1940.

Armand.

That's good. We have also included better AI in GEM.

Creative Constructions is missing its HQ. Used to be in LA now it is gone.

Have not tried to play much as work is in the way atm, but noticed that right away

Ok. I can add it back.
Is weird. Sometimes the religion or the coporation HQ will disappear after saving in editing mode. I see that happen many times.

It might be me, but in the current public release, Judism is missing it's Holy City. It's hard for a Nazi to destroy Judism when there's no Jewish Jerusalem. :)

Yes, destroying Judaism is harder to accomplish than the Nazis thought. Seeing as Hitler saw Jews everywhere, it worked better the other way around.

No pun intended.

I'm not too sure why Russia starts at war with Japan in 1940 :confused:

I'm playing as Russia and while the AI seems much stronger with Germany, it is terrible with Japan ... I am steamrolling Manchuria / Japan with no real opposition - Japan seems content taking the odd Chinese city and constantly patrolling her fleet of the coast of Thailand instead of meeting my forces.

Also, I noticed that a Russian fighter starts the game in Yichang (Nat. China).

I'm not too sure why Russia starts at war with Japan in 1940 :confused:

I'm playing as Russia and while the AI seems much stronger with Germany, it is terrible with Japan ... I am steamrolling Manchuria / Japan with no real opposition - Japan seems content taking the odd Chinese city and constantly patrolling her fleet of the coast of Thailand instead of meeting my forces.

Also, I noticed that a Russian fighter starts the game in Yichang (Nat. China).

The Russian was at war with japan in late 1939 in the Mongolian-Manchuria border. The war actually stopped before 1940, but I think having it there could simulate the threat from the north for Japan.

The Russian fighter in Yichang is deliberate. The Russian gave a lot of aid to China before Barbarossa. There were even Russian air forces helping the Chinese during the battle of Wuhan and Changsha. The one fighter there was to simulate that situation. That's another reason why I need to keep Russia at war with Japan, otherwise, the fighter there wouldn't help.

By what you describing, it sounds like it is because a human Russia vs AI japan that leads to the fall of Manchuria on the Japan side.

Fair enough ... yet again I show my lack of historical knowledge.

With regards to the AI, I would at least have expected some Japanese resistance ... I have not tried playing Japan yet but with Fanda's success in the PBEM they must start with some decent forces so for the AI to do absolutely nothing seems a bit weird.

Guess it just proves that, while the AI is totally useless, this supurb Mod is perfect for the PBEM arena :goodjob:

Hi

Just wanted to share YET another go at this great scenario. Started once more as the Hitler, and have my own good loooong conquest going, but at the same time playing the map rahter peacefully.

The interesting part happened around 1947. After a succesfull japanese attack against Stalin ("ordered" by me :lol:) taking several cities. The American attacked Japan, as often before. However - within 20 turns the American has captured entire Japanese mainland - but nothing else...

The interesting part about this, is that the AI taking on that kind of invasion...this is the first time I've experienced that - interesting.

Note - this time playing on Monarch difficulty...

Yeah. I feel that playing on Monarch difficulty on this scenario could have better experience, i.e. more aggressive AI.

There is one suggestion that I would have for a multi-player version of this scenario: No pre-negotiated arrangements between civilizations. This occurred to me during our recent PBEM, where the in-game diplomacy of the nations in my team is all confused because of this.

Especially starting with initial "Open Borders" agreements can be a nuisance, since those cannot be canceled for the first ten turns, which is a rather long period of time for a PBEM.

Best Regards,
Martin / Ace

Hi, there are more civilizations in this game than my screen will allow. Is there a way to turn the side list into a scrollable one?

I turned the civ (name/score) list off, for that reason. Anyway, with my brandnew PC I was finally able to start up this scenario: looking good, Genghis_Kai!:goodjob:

Thanks. I kinda have random question too. I have Civilization IV Vanilla and Beyond the Sword. Can I download mods for Warlords or do I need to get the expansion first?

I'd think mods for Warlords would require Warlords, yeah. (And BTW, welcome!);)

Hmm, does anyone have any tips on getting this to run smoothly without crashing?

I thought 3 gigabytes of memory and a dual core t5800 would be enough.

Hmm, does anyone have any tips on getting this to run smoothly without crashing?

I thought 3 gigabytes of memory and a dual core t5800 would be enough.

It is. Click the link to the main page, below, and see post 3, which should help by allowing your computer to allocate more of its memory to the game. This should prevent crashes especially as your game progresses. Other than that, turn the graphics to medium. I have a similar spec to yours and this does the trick although you can't do anything about the map not running as quickly as a standard 18civ game.

The problem is with the civ engine not being kitted out to efficently run the map, probably not really your computer itself. You could have 8gig ram and I'm not sure it'd make any difference. (note the non-technical answer as I'm far from an expert with these things!)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=276594

Sweet, thanks man.

I'm gonna try it now.

This works great, the gaming is using far more than Windows Vista, around 1.2-1.3 gigabytes just upon the start of the scenario.

Utilizes around a gig and a half when doing something intense.

Hi just playing this scenario again and I noticed the city of St Petersburg in Russia. This city wasn't actually known by this name until the fall of the USSR in 1991, rather being called Leningrad from 1924 onwards.

Other than that I'm busy enjoying the scenario. Had a go as Spain and was doing really well conquering some of France and all French and British Africa as well as some of the Middle East. It seems that every time i play though the USA is really strong, overcoming Japan and then USSR by 1950 by which time it is really too late. Still trying to win a domination with a small ish country- same sort of story with Greece. Suppose that's realism for you!

I'm looking forward to taking up one of the small countries in 1860 also!

Hi just playing this scenario again and I noticed the city of St Petersburg in Russia. This city wasn't actually known by this name until the fall of the USSR in 1991, rather being called Leningrad from 1924 onwards.

Other than that I'm busy enjoying the scenario. Had a go as Spain and was doing really well conquering some of France and all French and British Africa as well as some of the Middle East. It seems that every time i play though the USA is really strong, overcoming Japan and then USSR by 1950 by which time it is really too late. Still trying to win a domination with a small ish country- same sort of story with Greece. Suppose that's realism for you!

I'm looking forward to taking up one of the small countries in 1860 also!

Great to hear you enjoy the new version!

I don't recall I have changed the city name from Leningrad to St Petersburg in 1940AD. My understanding is that the same was use to be called St Petersburg, (named after Peter the Great), changed to Leningrad during Soviet age and rename it back to St Petersburg. There were many of these Russian cities like this and I've spent quite a bit of time to work them all out.

Would it be because the AI Russia built its new city and name it St Petersburg?

About US, good to hear US is going stronger. Yes, it is my intention to do so.

Yep you're right. It was a settler. I would have been more sure if my geography was better as the city was a long way away from where it should have been!

Here is what has occurred in the latest game I have played, in case any of this info may help for development, or if anyone is interested;

First of all, not to brag at all, but I am a pretty experienced player. I know far less about the game than a lot of you here, but I can beat most scenarios on Deity pretty easily. This one has given me the biggest challenge of my civ life. It has also probably been the most fun I have had in this game. I have thanked Genghis Kai privately for making this, but it can't hurt to do it again here; Thanks bud! Best civ scenario ever IMHO. That is until you finish the one for the World 2009, of course. ;-)

Playing as Germany on deity. Please don't call me a Nazi, I tend to like the underdog. No camps or genocide in my Germany.

I started off smashing through France and the rest of western Europe. Russia wasn't causing me much trouble, the US was not a threat. I was thinking, oh great, another easy WWII scenario where I will take over the world with no resistance. Wrong.

I need more oil, so I start moving in to the mid east. I take out Saudi Arabia easily enough, plus the Brit cities on the peninsula. I invade Iraq and Iran, then force them to capitulate with just enough cities to make a nice little buffer zone between my cities and Russia and British India, respectively. Jerusalem has a lot of troops, it takes a few more years before I take it.

Meanwhile, I move all my bombers from western Europe and west Asia to the Russian front, and take out a really good chunk of their territory. It's a bitter fight that I eventually win, mainly because American and Canada are no where to be seen, and England isn't giving me much trouble, either by bombing France, or from India. Sorry, I don't know exactly what years all this is happening during, I can look at saved games if anyone cares.

By now I also have Jerusalem, and my ally (Hungary) has Beirut, which is a little annoying because it breaks up my sweet mid east empire. Egypt decides to become a vassal of, I think Russia, maybe America, either way I am forced to invade. No problem, they have weak units, 8 bombers and a few Panzers I had sitting in Jerusalem did the trick. But this opened up another huge, hard to defend front in Africa; with Britain, along with colonial France and Dutch (because I have all their European territory) attacking.

America seems to start off weak militarily, and then shoot up in terms of production. This could not be more perfect, it's what happened in reality. By 1945 they have by far the largest GDP, power, and production. So now, the American attacks start.

Meanwhile in Asia, Japan has made peace with Russia and China, and is now only fighting France. I can not for the life of me get them to attack America for any price... I guess the AI isn't open to attacking new countries while they are at war. I get no help from them.

So, I get 100% of the American onslaught. Every second turn is now D-Day for me. The US attacks with huge stacks, either dropping them in north western France, or invading Nantes or Bordeaux and dumping a stack there. Huge groups of ships, complete with multiple carriers and aircraft (thank you BTS!). Eventually they start coming from the south and taking Marseilles. I am totally under prepared for this, and it takes some luck and a massive amount of drafting to get this under control. At the same time, Canada has started taking my cities in Norway and opened up a whole new front there. Then, Britain I guess had built a huge army in India, and they start ripping through my Iranian vassal and moving quickly towards my territory there. I am now dominated in the skies, my few remaining bombers are useless everywhere but in Africa. It looks very likely that Britain will send a stack in to my territory that I can not repel. I hit them with as many artillery as I can muster, slowing them down a bit. They have occupied almost all of Iran, except Tehran. I was forced to withdraw the army I had in Iran, which until now, had been repelling the Brits.

All this time I have been focusing a lot on spying, and so other civs have shot past me in terms of techs. My only answer to the onslaught of British gunships is frantically turning my drafted infantry into SAM infantry, and then giving Panzers the gunpowder promotion to defend against their mechanized infantry. My superiority in arms has been reversed. (I'm not a WWII expert, but I think that also mimics history)

Russia had rebuilt its destroyed army, and brought it to the front line. Facing it would have meant a very costly battle, and possibly losses. I'm forced to make a hasty peace with Russia, even though I wanted to crush them into a vassal. This is breaking from reality on my part, since by now Russia had an agreement with the US and UK to fight until the end, but since my conquest of at least 50% of Russian territory is much bigger than what the Nazis had achieved, I figure it's possible. Anyway.

Now nukes come in to play. For some reason, no one had built the Manhattan project for a long time, but finally Spain did. Just before my first batch of nukes is built, Britain hits me hard in Nantes with two tactical nukes, wiping out a huge part of my army.

Here is where I get lucky; this combined with making peace with Russia are the only reasons I was not beaten back badly. My spying pays off, all of a sudden I can see what British cities are producing. London is 2 turns away from SDI! So I load up a transport, and on the next turn, hit them with two ICBMs and invade the city (sorry sacrificed Infantry, God speed. lol). After an ugly nuclear exchange, I manage to flatten all of their cities in England, and invade. This totally turned the tide, in fact I think it plunged them in to revolution (their stats shot down on the info screen, and then back up)

Russia then attacks Britain. I guess they want to take India to make up for their lost ground. This forced Britain to move some of their huge stack out of Iran, so I can breath again. I have since conquered British west Africa, but since France capitulated to Japan, I can't have it all. Since Japan was now at peace with everyone, this now opened up the opportunity to bribe them into fighting the USA (5500 gold, my entire treasury). This has forced the US to lighten up their attacks against me, but not stop them. Canada is now causing the most trouble, invading England nearly every turn.

And that's where I stand. I look to have won now, thanks only to my luck in London, and Russia's help. I think I will now look to make a global peace soon, and then begin a cold war vs a super powerful America.


My suggestions:

1) get rid of the space race. It happens to soon, plus WWII shouldn't end because someone launches a space craft! I know this is something I can simply change by playing a custom scenario, but you may want to consider making not having it default.

2) make it harder, if not impossible, to get SDI. In real life, right now the US is still at least 20 years away from any system like this. In the game, they had it by 1948.


Sorry for the novel.

Cool sounds fun. It is interesting to hear as I am currently also playing as Germany, although not on the higher levels (perhaps i should).

Question: why not just attack the British mainland earlier? Britain has only 5 cities there. Personally I preferred this to foraying far into Africa precisely for the reason you said. I did this as Spain once, but majorly paid for it when Brazil decided to invade west africa.

They had pretty good sized armies in all mainland cities, as well as complete control of the skies. Mainly though, I wanted to take Russia first, while I could.

I made peace with Brazil before they got too powerful. Now they are the masters of every Latin American country except Argentina, and they have a very large military. Italy is fighting them now, and paying for it in Africa. I figure I'll take the cities they capture for myself when I get a chance.

I should note, I'm currently in April, 1948, and the turn wait times are still less than 5 minutes. I don't have a great computer or anything. Decent at best.

@DVS, that really sound interesting. I don't know why, I never got the patient to play a game for that long to see those interesting AI revenges.

And thanks for reporting. Btw, which version were you playing? GEM 5.3 or GEM 6.0?

Sounds like Brazil is way too strong. (But see below.)

My suggestions:

1) get rid of the space race. It happens to soon, plus WWII shouldn't end because someone launches a space craft! I know this is something I can simply change by playing a custom scenario, but you may want to consider making not having it default.

2) make it harder, if not impossible, to get SDI. In real life, right now the US is still at least 20 years away from any system like this. In the game, they had it by 1948.

Good suggestions. (BTW, you forgot to mention at what level you were playing.)

Deity.

I think I mentioned it somewhere in my ramblings. Understandable how you could miss it!

Sounds like Brazil is way too strong. (But see below.)



Good suggestions. (BTW, you forgot to mention at what level you were playing.)

I disagree that Brazil is too strong. In my games they usually are vassals to the USA (as are most of SA). The reason they troubled me was because my West African territories were relatively hard to defend.

@Adhesive86- what level do you play on?

@Adhesive86- what level do you play on?

I tend to just go for the default (Noble?), but select a smaller nation. Does the level affect the inter AI diplo?

Reading your story, I may be tempted to shove this up a bit.

FYI: I get clobbered starting new maps on deity (starting with one settler and one unit or whatever). But pre-built scenarios, I always play on that level.

I think you should make this scenario available for the warlords and vanilla versions of the Giant Earth Map

Hi to all.

How can i access diplo screen with the civ which are out of playing screen?
The issue is major because i cant make any diplo move with the most power civs like US,France,Germany USSR.

Hi to all.

How can i access diplo screen with the civ which are out of playing screen?
The issue is major because i cant make any diplo move with the most power civs like US,France,Germany USSR.

You can enter using the F4 screen. easy using Techs screen. Just rightclick on the leaderhead :)

I will try it. 10x.

On topic, I have a similar question that I was thinking of last night.

Being one of many whose screen resolution won't show all civ scores on the main playing page, is there any way to get this from other menus? I know i can't get it on the main screen, but wondered if there's another way- f8 shows the victory conditions, but as i remember only shows your score vs the top score. Can this be drilled down to show others'?

Maybe I'm confused (and if so, please go ahead let me know, haha)

I have yet to play GEM 1940 (currently DL'ing).

But...I find BTS unplayable anymore unless I have Better AI 0.6. With GEM 1940 can I merge better BTS 0.6 with it?

I'm not exactly sure how GEM 1940 works (yet). Is it it's own mod with it's own DLL that I can't merge Better AI with?...

And...IF I CAN use Better AI 0.6 with GEM 1940 can someone give a quick run-through of any instructions to merge the two mods outside of using Better AI 0.6 as my default game (I actually replace Civ BTS with Better AI 0.6)?
Thanks for any help...

EDIT:

Nevermind, I'm an idiot

Doesn't GEM got Better BTS AI?

It sure does. But I guess Matty just realized that... at least that's what I gather from his postscript.

Best Regards,
Martin

Yeah...I didn't realize that Kai had it auto-updated in the GEM patch. My bad...

The advice up here really work.

If you go to the tech screen - all the AIs are listed there and with right mouse button click on their icon you can start a dialg with the AI.
:)

On topic, I have a similar question that I was thinking of last night.

Being one of many whose screen resolution won't show all civ scores on the main playing page, is there any way to get this from other menus? I know i can't get it on the main screen, but wondered if there's another way- f8 shows the victory conditions, but as i remember only shows your score vs the top score. Can this be drilled down to show others'?

Quick question:

With the scoreboard too large for the screen:

Is it possible to merge the Scrolling Scoreboard in with this mod? I imagine it is...but just asking...

The Hungary/Bulgarian/Romanian civ start as a vassal of Germany and it is little unfair to play with it.

I'm playing one game with them @Diety and i lost 1 year(1940) in war with germany to be able to actually begin the game. I used their demand for oil to declare war and then i managed to stop them. I used the culture slider very aggresive to make buffer zome with them. The germans had captured Beograd which i took from them. I also manage to took Prague latter and turn it back in excange of peace offer.

I don't know why but even after i killed quite a lot of german troops and took 2 cities they still were accepting peace only for a city.

So up to the winter of 1941 i was at last free from german problems.
I have build good stacks of tanks and took Greece, Turkey and Iraq in the next two years and i'm on a way to kill Iran too. I've manage to make pace with France just in time before Italy capitulated to them. I've also made peace with England. But up to now no chance to make peace with USA. Stalin force me to declare on Japan(my best buddies before that) because the danger from USSR is quite bigger.
Because Germany had no access to oil up to now they didn't advnce much in france and made peace at the begining of 43. I'm now in the begining of 43 and everything looks fine except my very slow teching - still need >40 turns to take my first tech Rocketry.

For 3 yars i manage to make Hugarian/Bulgarian/Romanian alliance a major power in the world but i'm still very week in tech (400 breakers per turn vs 3k for the bigest powers).
I'm 12 in soldiers and 11 in land.

After finishing Iran i am plaing a combined sea/paratroop invasion in egipt because i dont want to fight with England yet.

Hi hellwitch,

Thanks for your sharing. By the sound of your game, it doesn't sound like it is too bad for the Hungary civ?

I know it is a bit unrealistic to combine the three and make it the vassal of Germany to start with. But this is a scenario and I have to make those kind of decisions for better game play.

Yes now the situation is better but at the start it was very bad.

And this was my 3rd try when i succeed to break with germany in acceptable timeframe.

Yes you are right that this is scenario and this countries were somthing like vassals. IMO just one good defender in Budapest could make the start quite better(for example CG3 marine). The problem is that if Germany ask for oil on turn 0(they play before Hungary) you are supposed to defend yourself with rifles vs panzers and very high promoted infantry.

The situation with the rifles is also not very accurate historically at least fo Bulgaria and Romania - they have had quite good military by this time but less in number - IMO the number of the rifles is too big.

Hey man I really like your maps, and your scenarios are really good too, but I've got just one complain to do: I happen to live in Romania and the spot where you placed 'Baia Mare' is actualy the positioning of another Romanian city 'Brasov', didn't mean to offend you or something. Keep up the great work!
And sorry for my english.
Edit: I live in Baia Mare so I quite enjoyed seeing my hometown on civ4. :D

So why should you complaint? :)

I actually think the city should be Baia Mare. It is more further north than Brasov. May be because the map has quite a bit of distortion in Romania to make you think the way you are?

Anyway, thanks for your feedback.