But now I have another problem:
I had a strange error when I started TGW again:

"missing file in Art\Units\Dora\...\Tank\Tank Fidget.wav"

The thing is that i have the "tank fidget.wav" file but it is in the Dora folder instead of the sub folder. Can anyone help me with that and maybe tell me the correct path where the .wav file belongs too?

I read much of this thread (of course not everything cause its pretty long ;) )and I cant wait to start playing this scenario cause it seems to be the best ever.
Rocoteh and Sarevok you did a great job as it seems and I really respect you for that huge amount of free time you obviously spent on creating this scnario :goodjob:

One more question:
I read of the idea of simulating the october revolution by a research the germans could do. Is that in the game now? Because I think that would be a great idea. At last it were the Germans that took a look after that Lenin could return from exile in an armored train back to Moscow. Or am I wrong with that? It would be a great strategic element when looking forward to defeat the huge Russian Empire.

And by the way, imho I think the American War Entry is one of the best ideas I've ever heard of, cause I always most liked Scenarios that took place in the two World Wars but the main problem always was that it was nearly impossible to integrate the USA on an European map without making them to weak to be realistic.

But now I have another problem:
I had a strange error when I started TGW again:

"missing file in Art\Units\Dora\...\Tank\Tank Fidget.wav"

The thing is that i have the "tank fidget.wav" file but it is in the Dora folder instead of the sub folder. Can anyone help me with that and maybe tell me the correct path where the .wav file belongs too?
it seems that the civ3 engine is looking in the wrong place for the "tank fidget.wav" file.

this could be an INI error. it appears that the wav file's name doen't have spaces (TankFidget.wav).

i would go into the Dora INI file and remove the space so that the civ3 engine will look for the right file.

Michael II,

I am glad to hear that you liked TGW. Thank you.

I include a new Dora-unit with this post.
It should be pasted into the units-folder of TGW and TGW-DIV.

The Communist revolution have not been included yet.
If there was a way to include it within the current game-engine
it would be great. However, so far it have not been possible.

Rocoteh

Edit: Dora.zip removed after 4 downloads.

How can i play with other civs, except those six, which i'm able to play ? :rolleyes:

Crash757,

Open the biq-file with the Editor.
Choose Scenario Properties.
Choose Players.
Find the Civ you want to include.
Flag "Human".
Hit Execute.
Save.

Rocoteh

Download TGW-DIV 1.4:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

But now I have another problem:
I had a strange error when I started TGW again:

"missing file in Art\Units\Dora\...\Tank\Tank Fidget.wav"

The thing is that i have the "tank fidget.wav" file but it is in the Dora folder instead of the sub folder. Can anyone help me with that and maybe tell me the correct path where the .wav file belongs too?

well it should be placed right here -----> Art\Units\Dora\...\Tank\Tank Fidget.wav

Thank you all for your nice help
I just changed the path in the INI file and it worked. :)

Afterwards I see there are many solutions to this problem. All ways lead to Rome ;)
for myself: first think, then post :rolleyes:

@ El Justo: The game looked for the right file. It was my fault in that post to write "tank fidget" with a space in between.

Now I play for 16 hours without any serious interruptions and I just cant stop cause its so great. Seems I will be very busy the next time. I hope I can find some time to celebrate christmas :D

Im out to kick some frenchmens asses

Michael II,

I am glad to hear that the problem have been solved,
and that you like the scenario.

Rocoteh


Download TGW-DIV 1.4:


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

Hmm, that would be a good thing for simulating the Uboat warfare. But to introduce this AI has to be told how to use transports and escorting warships...

Adler


If Uboot warfare is implemented I suggest not only convoy units (see earlier post), but also wolfpack units. I don`t have thorough understanding on how to mod units, but my suggestion is the following: Made available at at certain tech, normal or slightly improved sub stats, increased HP to reflect many subs, blitz ability. Thus the unit may attack several times and have a better chance of survival, but limited movement will reduce their effectiveness. They will, as in history, be best if they can ambush rather than use movement to hunt ships.

Hmm. Wolfpacks were a tactic of ww2. Although the first ideas were made in ww1... So I would suggest a sub unit wolfpack later the game, but giving Blitz ability to Uboats even before from the beginning.

Adler

I really like the idea on blitz for subs.

It will be implemented in TGW-DIV 1.5. Notes have been taken.

Rocoteh


Download TGW-DIV 1.4:


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

Hi, i am new at this forum but i tried some scneario's before though. I really like this scenario, but i found an too easy win tactic. With Germany or Austria-Hungary i just trench my eastern borders against the Russians then i start mass producing siege guns. Then i dig at (first France) enemy cities and destory all occupants (defending unts) with my siege guns, i have about 75 now (end of 1914) and can take 3 cities per turn. Very good scenario but the siege guns win the day.

To find a more challenging game you should try to set up a PBEM with some human opponents as they use artillery effectively. Like you explained in your post, siege guns, especially in human hands, can lead to some very successful offensives.

BK

Hi, i am new at this forum but i tried some scneario's before though. I really like this scenario, but i found an too easy win tactic. With Germany or Austria-Hungary i just trench my eastern borders against the Russians then i start mass producing siege guns. Then i dig at (first France) enemy cities and destory all occupants (defending unts) with my siege guns, i have about 75 now (end of 1914) and can take 3 cities per turn. Very good scenario but the siege guns win the day.


Kessel,

Is this TGW-DIV 1.4? I ask since the ranges for artillery was
reduced in this version.
As BkGreatWarnut says the scenario is more realistic as PBEM.
I intend to launch a new version of TGW-DIV Multiplayer
within some weeks.

Rocoteh


Download TGW-DIV 1.4:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

for those who want real challenge, should play ottomans and put AI to deity and most aggressive. Russians will attack with (at least) 50 cossaks and infantry, and same time english are coming from egypt and arabs attacking to mecca. also greek navy will most propably sink half of ur navy, and enemy agents are sabotaging ur production etc etc :crazyeye: ...

I downloaded TGW 2.1 last week, but I couldn`t transform new leaders into corps, so I switched to TGW-DIV.
I think it`s even better because it`s easier to overview the troops.
I don`t know if you want to make TGW-DIV 1.5 but if it`s the case, here are some problems I found:

- the mine fields will be moved if you don`t make a contract with Denmark to use their territory (sorry I don`t know the english expression for that :rolleyes: )

- in the first turn I conquered Belgium, defeated all French units in my territory and fortified all tiles at the French borders. The effect was that the French took all their troops outside their cities ( about 50) and walked over the Alps, so I was able to conquer Paris and all the cities east of it in one turn. Thats propably something you cant fix cause it`s an AI problem but I just wanted to mention it.

-I also think it`s a problem that there is no city south of Paris. It is sometimes very annoying because you can`t move forward very fast when you want to conquer the southwest of France

- I don`t know if it is wanted but I saw that the Germans have no source of salpeter so I bought it from the Turks.

- some city names (I know that this is something you heard of a lot of times, sorry :rolleyes: ) are wrong Versallies is Versailles and if you use the english names Nürnberg is Nuremberg and Königsberg is Konigsberg(I think).

But these problems can`t force me to stop playing this scenario. I`m very interested in history, mostly in the history of my country between 1870 and 1950 and I think this scenario is very historically accurate. My computer has only 800 MHz and 128 MB Ram ( loading a game needs at least 5 minutes and loading the scenario from the beginning even needs about 35 minutes) but even that can`t stop me from playing.
I hope you wont stop working at this scenario, because it`s the best I`ve ever seen - not only in Civilisation III - and I`ve played a lot of games ;)

edit:
I forgot: I also think it was a good idea to shorten the range of artillery in TGW-DIV, because you need to build the very expensive railguns or the weak counterbattery artillery to have a range of 2 tiles.It makes infantry much more important again.

Michael II,

I will see if I can do anything to stop France-AI from
making the strange Alps-march you mention.

No city south of Paris. I will check that also.

Germany should have salpeter at start. I will change that.

Notes have been taken on city-names.

Thank you for the positive words on the scenario.
Its my intention to make both an new Multiplayer version and
later TGW-DIV 1.5.

The response on TGW was incredible the first 6 months after
release. Interest for the scenario is still high, and I intend to support it.

Thank you for your comments.


Rocoteh


Download TGW-DIV 1.4:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

I just played the first turn or so, and so far it's very good. I think it'd be nice if France, England and Italy had Flags instead of the regular heads from the game, but other than that it's very good.

the weapons will be silent for the next two weeks but i`ll be back to crush the Entente :p

I personally don´t think Germany should have Salpeter. Indeed it was so that because of the war no Salpeter could be imported. Germany needed the Chilenean Salpeter to produce ammo. And the ammo in stroe was only lasting for a month or so. Nevertheless the German chemicians found a way to produce ammo without Salpeter. So the war could go on.

Adler

I just played the first turn or so, and so far it's very good. I think it'd be nice if France, England and Italy had Flags instead of the regular heads from the game, but other than that it's very good.

Elrohir,

Thank you.

I hope you will post here again.

Rocoteh

I personally don´t think Germany should have Salpeter. Indeed it was so that because of the war no Salpeter could be imported. Germany needed the Chilenean Salpeter to produce ammo. And the ammo in stroe was only lasting for a month or so. Nevertheless the German chemicians found a way to produce ammo without Salpeter. So the war could go on.

Adler

Adler,

That is a very good point!
OK I leave salpeter as it is.

Rocoteh

the weapons will be silent for the next two weeks but i`ll be back to crush the Entente :p

Michael II,

I am looking forward to hear from you again.

Screenshots are always welcome as an addition to playtest-reports.

Rocoteh

Download TGW-DIV 1.4:

http://www.civfanatics.net/downloads/civ3/scenarios/TGW-DIV.zip

Elrohir,

Thank you.

I hope you will post here again.

Rocoteh

Ok, after playing for about 20 turns as Germany, only two or three problems so far, and I'm not sure you can help with most of them: First, After I invade Belgium France takes all her troops on the Western Front, puts some of them in her cities and moves the rest up north. I spent 10-15 turns before I seem to have finally finished destroying France's army, and now I'm finally starting to take over France. Second, nearly ever time I try to plant a spy he's caught! We're the Germans sucky spymasters or something? And Third, the tech tree: Things should be a little faster to research, by a third or so, because the turns are so long, and as it is it makes no differant whether I have 10% or 100% scientific research going on, it still takes the same 26 turns. Also the Modern Age with it's computers and microchips should be taken out.


Other than those few things, it's great.

Ok, after playing for about 20 turns as Germany, only two or three problems so far, and I'm not sure you can help with most of them: First, After I invade Belgium France takes all her troops on the Western Front, puts some of them in her cities and moves the rest up north. I spent 10-15 turns before I seem to have finally finished destroying France's army, and now I'm finally starting to take over France. Second, nearly ever time I try to plant a spy he's caught! We're the Germans sucky spymasters or something? And Third, the tech tree: Things should be a little faster to research, by a third or so, because the turns are so long, and as it is it makes no differant whether I have 10% or 100% scientific research going on, it still takes the same 26 turns. Also the Modern Age with it's computers and microchips should be taken out.


Other than those few things, it's great.

OK, notes have been taken.

Rocoteh

Happy New Year.
Winter made 2 phantastic models of a Wolfpack and a convoy:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=108867
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=108735
They could be used in thisscenario as well, although they belong to the ww2 era.

Adler

Happy New Year.
Winter made 2 phantastic models of a Wolfpack and a convoy:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=108867
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=108735
They could be used in thisscenario as well, although they belong to the ww2 era.

Adler

Adler,

Happy New Year.

These units looks very good. I have will have them in mind
for TGW-DIV 1.5.

Rocoteh

Sorry to keep bugging you with little things, but the Railguns: I researched them first, becuase I thought "Hey cool, the railguns were really powerful!" But....their NOT. Their only a little better than siege guns, and way more expensive, and harder to get. You should probably either take them out, or increase their range to a full two squares around, and make sure it has lethal bombardment.

Sorry to keep bugging you with little things, but the Railguns: I researched them first, becuase I thought "Hey cool, the railguns were really powerful!" But....their NOT. Their only a little better than siege guns, and way more expensive, and harder to get. You should probably either take them out, or increase their range to a full two squares around, and make sure it has lethal bombardment.

Elrohir,

Earlier there were many complaints that railguns were to strong.

Now they are to weak now compared to cost. I will change this in
TGW-DIV 1.5.

Thank you for the comment. There are still changes to do in TGW-DIV.

Rocoteh

HELP PLEASE!

I have a Pentium 900MHz with 128RAM - roughly how long should TGW take to load? (I waited for what felt like a long time but with no luck?)

HELP PLEASE!

I have a Pentium 900MHz with 128RAM - roughly how long should TGW take to load? (I waited for what felt like a long time but with no luck?)

jafa,

With 128 MB RAM I guess it will take more than an hour.
Maybe 80 minutes.

If you have less than 256 MB RAM I guess there will be long
loading time for many scenarios here.

Rocoteh

jafa,

With 128 MB RAM I guess it will take more than an hour.
Maybe 80 minutes.

If you have less than 256 MB RAM I guess there will be long
loading time for many scenarios here.

Rocoteh

Phew! no wonder I thought my PC had crashed! May have to get some more ram then

Phew! no wonder I thought my PC had crashed! May have to get some more ram then


Or get a good book to read while you are waiting :)

Phew! no wonder I thought my PC had crashed! May have to get some more ram then

jafa,

Yes, that is an good idea.

An upgrade should not cost much.

Rocoteh

My Problem with TGW war is that my CIV3 can't read the *.biq Scenario file. In my Civ3 scenario files must have the extention *.bic, other files are not displayed as scenarios. I tried to rename the file from *.biq to *.bic but then i get an error message saying the file is damaged. I have the german version of Civ3. Can anybody help me to solve this problem?

Thanks,

Seddto

My Problem with TGW war is that my CIV3 can't read the *.biq Scenario file. In my Civ3 scenario files must have the extention *.bic, other files are not displayed as scenarios. I tried to rename the file from *.biq to *.bic but then i get an error message saying the file is damaged. I have the german version of Civ3. Can anybody help me to solve this problem?

do you have conquests? it's needed if you want to play the scenatio.

Welcome to CFC!
Also you have to be careful with the unit names. There is a thread here somewhere about this, or you have to copy and rename the units. But it is worth to do so.

Adler

I play the Germans in week 37 1914 and I've conquered France. Only Bordeaux, Bayonne, Marseille and two other cities are still controlled by the French.
I also conquered Belgium and the Netherlands. Now I'm attacking the Russians and I just conquered Vilna and Pinsk (and of course all cities west of them).
The British fleet is nearly destroyed and my army grows bigger and bigger. :D :king:

But I found some problem:

You changed the position of Berlin in an earlier version of TGW-DIV, but you forgot to delete the victory point in the old position. The Swiss found that before I did, and now they control the VP. Maybe I should crush them, because they could win the game now ;)

I play the Germans in week 37 1914 and I've conquered France. Only Bordeaux, Bayonne, Marseille and two other cities are still controlled by the French.
I also conquered Belgium and the Netherlands. Now I'm attacking the Russians and I just conquered Vilna and Pinsk (and of course all cities west of them).
The British fleet is nearly destroyed and my army grows bigger and bigger. :D :king:

But I found some problem:

You changed the position of Berlin in an earlier version of TGW-DIV, but you forgot to delete the victory point in the old position. The Swiss found that before I did, and now they control the VP. Maybe I should crush them, because they could win the game now ;)

Michael II,

Your position seems to be good.

Thank you for the reporting the bug. I will correct it.

Rocoteh

I'm going to DL this,but not sure when I will find the time to play it; WW2Global seems to have my attention right now. ;) I didn't read a lot of the thread, about 30 pages, but I notice you had someone say the French,e.g. were sending their troops in silly places and not defending their cities properly. Maybe you could do what you did in the WW2Global game to some extent. I mean subtract some of their starting infantry brigades, and put some immobile garrison units in each city as you see fit to force the AI to actually defend themselves. :p Not the best solution,but it has some possibilies I think.

I'm going to DL this,but not sure when I will find the time to play it; WW2Global seems to have my attention right now. ;) I didn't read a lot of the thread, about 30 pages, but I notice you had someone say the French,e.g. were sending their troops in silly places and not defending their cities properly. Maybe you could do what you did in the WW2Global game to some extent. I mean subtract some of their starting infantry brigades, and put some immobile garrison units in each city as you see fit to force the AI to actually defend themselves. :p Not the best solution,but it has some possibilies I think.

Sasebo,

I will look over French forces in TGW-DIV with regard to what you mention.

I do plan a version 1.5 for TGW-DIV. Its not sure there will any
more versions of TGW-BRI though.

Rocoteh

end of week 39 1914:
I completely conquered continental France. Their fleet is destroyed (Only the ships in the mediterranian sea are out of range so far).
The Royal Navy has been reduced to 1 Destroyer, 1 Light Cruiser, 3 Battle Cruisers and 3 Pre-Dreadnoughts. So I decided to land near London and Portsmouth. Time to conquer the Empire! ( I can't wait to plunder the scotish whisky :crazyeye:
My offensive in the east will continue later, cause I want to conquer the British first to make my French cities safe from naval attacks.

@Rocoteh:
The idea of Sasebo sounds good, but the "Alprunners" were defending troops outside the cities so the idea of immobile div's propably won't work. For me the problem was solved when I had one "bordertile" without defense (--> the Alprunners turned around and invaded me at the undefended tile)

One thing about (first) loading times:
My computer has 128 MB SD-RAM and 800 MHz. The loading time is shorter than you thought. About 40 min
I also tested it with an other computer: 512 MB DDR-400 Ram and 1833 MHz
The loading time was 5 min :goodjob:

For all the others who think about playing this scenario:
No matter how long the game will load for the first time, it's f***ing worth it!! (But only if you have time, cause you won't be able to stop playing ;) )

Sorry for my sometimes "strange" english, but as you can see I'm just a Kraut ;)

end of week 39 1914:
I completely conquered continental France. Their fleet is destroyed (Only the ships in the mediterranian sea are out of range so far).
The Royal Navy has been reduced to 1 Destroyer, 1 Light Cruiser, 3 Battle Cruisers and 3 Pre-Dreadnoughts. So I decided to land near London and Portsmouth. Time to conquer the Empire! ( I can't wait to plunder the scotish whisky :crazyeye:
My offensive in the east will continue later, cause I want to conquer the British first to make my French cities safe from naval attacks.

@Rocoteh:
The idea of Sasebo sounds good, but the "Alprunners" were defending troops outside the cities so the idea of immobile div's propably won't work. For me the problem was solved when I had one "bordertile" without defense (--> the Alprunners turned around and invaded me at the undefended tile)

One thing about (first) loading times:
My computer has 128 MB SD-RAM and 800 MHz. The loading time is shorter than you thought. About 40 min
I also tested it with an other computer: 512 MB DDR-400 Ram and 1833 MHz
The loading time was 5 min :goodjob:

For all the others who think about playing this scenario:
No matter how long the game will load for the first time, it's f***ing worth it!! (But only if you have time, cause you won't be able to stop playing ;) )

Sorry for my sometimes "strange" english, but as you can see I'm just a Kraut ;)

Michael II,

Thank you.

No problem with your english.

It should be interesting to see if you can conquer the British isles.
My guess is that AI will have great problems defending them.

On the "Alprunners": Yes I will make some playtesting on this problem.

Thank you for the info on loading-time.
With regard to TGW I think loading-time is reasonable.

Welcome back

Rocoteh

1 year for TGW.

1 year ago, January 25, 2004 TGW was launched.

TGW was met with a incredible respons from players, that would
continue for more than 6 months.

Today the interest for TGW have somewhat run out of steam.
However the scenario is not dead. I plan to make TGW-DIV 1.5
and TGW-DIV Multiplayer 1.1.

When I write this the different versions of TGW and TGW-DIV have
been downloaded 8 618 times.

If CIV 4 will give important new tools for scenario-creation, TGW will
no doubt be a candidate for upgrade.

With regard to scenario-creation I will remember 2003 for my part
of the ACW-scenario. The same holds true for TGW and 2004.
I guess 2005 will be WW2-Global.

Rocoteh

Congratulations Rocoteh and Sarevok.
Hopefully htere will be a TGW for Civ 4. Although I have doubts that the UU are available from the very beginning and there is anbility also to upgrade the units. It is the flair of UU mostly that makes a scenario intersting. This scenario is as near as perfect as a civ 3 scenario can be.

Adler

Congratulations Rocoteh and Sarevok.
Hopefully htere will be a TGW for Civ 4. Although I have doubts that the UU are available from the very beginning and there is anbility also to upgrade the units. It is the flair of UU mostly that makes a scenario intersting. This scenario is as near as perfect as a civ 3 scenario can be.

Adler

Adler,

Thank you.

Your role in the development of TGW-DIV was crucial.

With regard to Civ 4 I hope that there will be possible to determine
when a nation shall go to war and that aspects like strategic warfare
will be included.

Rocoteh

Thanks, but I think you exaggerate with my role...

Adler

Thanks, but I think you exaggerate with my role...

Adler

Adler,

No, in fact development is very important if a scenario
shall get really good.

I consider 1.4 much better than 1.0.
Even if there is still room for a 1.5, its clear that any heavy
improvement from the current position needs a new game-engine.

Rocoteh

Indeed. I think Civ 3 is modded nearly. More is nearly not possible.

Adler

hi i would like to play this mod with one of my friends. but i do not know how to get the computer to play the rest of the nations. There seems to be only room for 8 players in total. anybody please help?

Use the MP Version...TGW Div Multiplayer 1.0...I don't think a new version has been released yet...

Use the MP Version...TGW Div Multiplayer 1.0...I don't think a new version has been released yet...

Yes that is right. I hope to release Multiplayer 1.1 within 3 weeks.

Rocoteh

end of week 42 1914
I conquered England, Scotland and Wales. Ireland will follow.
The strange thing is that I was able to transport my siege guns to England, but I couldn't transport Artillery 210 mm.

And there is a destroyer bug: The AI is able to make bombardement with their destroyers, but I'm not :confused:

I don't really know what some buildings are good for:
Barracks
Mass Production Center
Port
Major Port
Bombshelters

I thought they would propably work the same as in original C3C, but I saw that a cities production didn't increase after building the mass production center. And the Barracks don't produce veteran units, so I decided to ask what those buildings are good for.

Sorry for asking so many questions :mischief:

end of week 42 1914
I conquered England, Scotland and Wales. Ireland will follow.
The strange thing is that I was able to transport my siege guns to England, but I couldn't transport Artillery 210 mm.

And there is a destroyer bug: The AI is able to make bombardement with their destroyers, but I'm not :confused:

I don't really know what some buildings are good for:
Barracks
Mass Production Center
Port
Major Port
Bombshelters

I thought they would propably work the same as in original C3C, but I saw that a cities production didn't increase after building the mass production center. And the Barracks don't produce veteran units, so I decided to ask what those buildings are good for.

Sorry for asking so many questions :mischief:

Michael II

Both Destroyer Bombard and Artillery 210 that will not load are bugs.
Thank you for reporting it.

Barracks: A bug. Increases production now. Should produce veteran units.

Mass Production Center: Increases production.

Port: . Produces veteran naval units. Auto-production: 1 Destroyer unit with
frequency 12.Increases food in water

Major Port: Increases trade in water and production.

Bombshelters: Increases defence.

Corrections of bugs will be implemented in TGW-DIV 1.5.

Thank you and welcome back.

Rocoteh

Important message:

In a PM to me Thunderfall confirms that "long threads"
soon will be closed.

I find this unacceptable!

If Sarevok share my opinion I think TGW shall not restart from schratch if the CFC-staff choose to close it!

Thus the CFC-staff is 100% responsible if they kill the most
popular scenario ever released here.

Rocoteh

Important message:

In a PM to me Thunderfall confirms that "long threads"
soon will be closed.

I find this unacceptable!

If Sarevok share my opinion I think TGW shall not restart from schratch if the CFC-staff choose to close it!

Thus the CFC-staff is 100% responsible if they kill the most
popular scenario ever released here.

Rocoteh

Actually, If they close any of them Ill walk out. The great efforts we have taken for months... and even years... to be ruined? I will not see it.

I cant care less if this forum runs "slower". 1 thread isnt doing it. If they want space, go burn up OT. Nobody looks at threads more than 5 days old there anyway, so it wont be bad to see them go. However, destroying an immense amonut of effort and time put into these is a grave insult. I guarantee that the day it happens, I will liquidate every scenario I have on this forum.

Since I was planning to "wake up" sometime soon, this is not a good thing. I will make it clear that the scenarios will be gone forever after I delete them. I will not relocate them to GCF, or CDG, or any site. This also means that BRB 1.2 which has been steadily building for months will never be released.

Aside form the snotty jealous people who would love to see me go (I dont like you either), who wants this to happen?

I think it is indeed unacceptable. Is there any solution, a possibility? I mean such good scenarios and mods need long threads. Is there a possibility to cut the first 500 posts or so into a kind of archive (without download pages of course)? If this isn´t possible CFC makes a self destruction.

Adler

I think it is indeed unacceptable. Is there any solution, a possibility? I mean such good scenarios and mods need long threads. Is there a possibility to cut the first 500 posts or so into a kind of archive (without download pages of course)? If this isn´t possible CFC makes a self destruction.

Adler

I would accept that, but the 1st page of posts would have to remain in a main thread, as they are the most important considering they include the scenario file itself.

Actually, I think this is a problem that dosent just affect me. Id be furious is any of these major scenario or creation threads were closed. The Idea that years of hard work and effort to be removed and destroyed sickens me.... no matter who made it.

I don't see the point in closing highly active threads either. There are a lot of old threads that no one looks into anymore. Why do they choose a size criterion instead of a time/attractiveness criterion for closing threads? This thread has been among the top threads during the last weeks (not to mention all the time of its existence!!). So, I would think they must see that there is still a lot of interest in this thread.

CellKu

I don't see the point in closing highly active threads either. There are a lot of old threads that no one looks into anymore. Why do they choose a size criterion instead of a time/attractiveness criterion for closing threads? This thread has been among the top threads during the last weeks (not to mention all the time of its existence!!). So, I would think they must see that there is still a lot of interest in this thread.

CellKu
And burning it will create firestorm that I will do my best to feed until there is nothing left of the scenario creation business.

I discovered this thread 2 month's ago and so I'm not really a "longtime user", but I decided to join this forum only because I was so much impressed by this great work of Sarevok and Rocoteh. For me it would be some kind of "abuse of art" to close this thread. I would lose my respect for this forum if such an action would happen.
I hope the responsible persons will understand that this plan is a mistake.
You have my full support, cause it would be an enormous loss to see all your work dying.

sincerely, a fan ;)

Nevermind. I got it.

Adler

I discovered this thread 2 month's ago and so I'm not really a "longtime user", but I decided to join this forum only because I was so much impressed by this great work of Sarevok and Rocoteh. For me it would be some kind of "abuse of art" to close this thread. I would lose my respect for this forum if such an action would happen.
I hope the responsible persons will understand that this plan is a mistake.
You have my full support, cause it would be an enormous loss to see all your work dying.

sincerely, a fan ;)

Michael II,

Thank you for your support. I really appreciate it.

As I have stated earlier there must be a technichal solution when
the thread reach the new limit 3 000 posts.

Best Regards

Rocoteh

Sorry for the noob question, but where do I download the art files to?

How about closing threads that have not been active for 2 or more months??? This is close to the amount of time that goes along with lack of interest. I know there are several PBEM games as well as scenarios (one of mine) that are no longer active and haven't been since almost october...

Look through and delete all those annoying, not used ones and that will save a lot of space or whatever it is called...

2 months is a pretty good number for that...

How about closing threads that have not been active for 2 or more months??? This is close to the amount of time that goes along with lack of interest. I know there are several PBEM games as well as scenarios (one of mine) that are no longer active and haven't been since almost october...

Look through and delete all those annoying, not used ones and that will save a lot of space or whatever it is called...

2 months is a pretty good number for that...

BkGreatWarnut,

Yes I also think that old threads could be closed.

However I have understand from the PM-exchange I have had
the last days with Thunderfall that he will not leave his current position
on the issue.

Rocoteh

Sorry for the noob question, but where do I download the art files to?

rbis4rbb,

You will find them at Post 1.

Welcome back if you have any problems with loading.

Rocoteh

http://community.allhiphop.com/showthread.php?t=80627

That thread has 14,000 replies...so a 3,000 reply one shouldnt hurt this forum.

well, the crisis is over...

Well I don't know if its some kind of computer error or if I'm just technological inept but I can't get this to work :mad: . Just for refrence I have Civ Complete Vesion 1.22 and the loading stops 3/4 done with a problem with "text/pedia/con.text" :aargh:. But I do like the potential of the scenario plus Italy sahould not begin as an Enente (allied) power it was neutral until 1915 and they were originally Central but because the war was aggresive they left the alliance.

Two minor things I think should be changed:

1) I played with the British and when Nikosia expands in culture it takes a square of Turkey. It shouldn't be a big deal just that the Ottommans pillage the square and loose the railroad in there and cannot move troops as fast as it should. Maybe you should increase the nearby cities culture.

2) It's not very realistic that someone who wants to travel on road from Faro to Lisbon has to go through Spain.

This is an excellent scenario btw :)

Two minor things I think should be changed:

1) I played with the British and when Nikosia expands in culture it takes a square of Turkey. It shouldn't be a big deal just that the Ottommans pillage the square and loose the railroad in there and cannot move troops as fast as it should. Maybe you should increase the nearby cities culture.

2) It's not very realistic that someone who wants to travel on road from Faro to Lisbon has to go through Spain.

This is an excellent scenario btw :)

krazydude,

Thank you.

OK, notes have been taken with regard to TGW-DIV 1.5.

BTW: The different versions of TGW and TGW-DIV have now been
downloaded more than 9 200 times!

Rocoteh

Well I don't know if its some kind of computer error or if I'm just technological inept but I can't get this to work :mad: . Just for refrence I have Civ Complete Vesion 1.22 and the loading stops 3/4 done with a problem with "text/pedia/con.text" :aargh:. But I do like the potential of the scenario plus Italy sahould not begin as an Enente (allied) power it was neutral until 1915 and they were originally Central but because the war was aggresive they left the alliance.

NecromancerElf,

There seems to be a problem with Civ Complete and some scenarios
including this one. I do not know the reason.

The problem with Italy if its starts neutral is that it will be 50/50
which alliance it will declare war against.

Rocoteh

NecromancerElf,

There seems to be a problem with Civ Complete and some scenarios
including this one. I do not know the reason.

The problem with Italy if its starts neutral is that it will be 50/50
which alliance it will declare war against.

Rocoteh
it is also no guarantee that all members of that alliance will side with italy.

Aww, I really wanted to play this scenario :( .

BTW: The different versions of TGW and TGW-DIV have now been
downloaded more than 9 200 times!

Rocoteh

Big congrats, Sarevok, Rocoteh, and all your other guys and gals who made this thing possible! This is a great scenario. :goodjob:

Aww, I really wanted to play this scenario :( .

NecromancerElf,

My advise is to check that you really have the two downloads
in the scenario-folder of Conquests.
They are often placed in the wrong folder.

Rocoteh

Big congrats, Sarevok, Rocoteh, and all your other guys and gals who made this thing possible! This is a great scenario. :goodjob:

ElBagOCrap,

Thank you for the positive words.

Download rate (of the different versions) is still at 70-80 each
week, so TGW is still alive.

Its possible I will release a TGW-DIV 1.5 later this year.


Rocoteh

Hey this scenario is really great! :goodjob:
I love it!
My first game I played as German Empire. Was successfull in the west but had some trouble in the east. :spear:

Hey this scenario is really great! :goodjob:
I love it!
My first game I played as German Empire. Was successfull in the west but had some trouble in the east. :spear:

Samez,

Thank you.
I am very glad to hear that.

Welcome back with more comments.

Rocoteh

im suprised this thread hasnt died yet.

Rocotech I love the TGW, but why why I ask can't germany build the corp unit in Berlin even when it has the military academy?? Why???? I think this is a bug. Also for germnay when you get a leader-created from battle you can't rush-build or create a army with it! This is only the case for Germany. I don't know why.

Rocotech I love the TGW, but why why I ask can't germany build the corp unit in Berlin even when it has the military academy?? Why???? I think this is a bug. Also for germnay when you get a leader-created from battle you can't rush-build or create a army with it! This is only the case for Germany. I don't know why.

music_theory7,

This is very strange! Do you refer to TGW or TGW-DIV?

I just checked TGW-DIV 1.4 and did not locate any bug that
should trigger what you mention.

Rocoteh

Rocotech I love the TGW, but why why I ask can't germany build the corp unit in Berlin even when it has the military academy?? Why???? I think this is a bug. Also for germnay when you get a leader-created from battle you can't rush-build or create a army with it! This is only the case for Germany. I don't know why.

This is easy - you don't have enough cities to support additional Corps. In TGW, you need 5 cities per corps. Until you capture your 30th city (or lose a Corps) you won't be able to build more. Leaders can't rush.

On another note, I have the kill-all solution for the brigade version of this scenario:

SPOILERS (of a sort) BELOW

#1 : To ruin the stagnation of trench warfare you need mobility. I.E. unit speed. The fastest units out there are the various cavalrys. But they are pretty poor attackers. Unless they are in a Corps. With all the artillery and bombarding air and naval units, within a month or two nearly any power can amass enough artillery to redline all units in a city in one salvo (and kill many with Siege and Rail Guns). Cavalry corps are the coup de grace (pronounced koop duh gracie :mischief: ). For any city that is on the border, each cavalry corps can finish off 4 redlined defenders, MGs or not. Even if the target city has a square of padding, each cavalry corps can finish off 3 units, with little risk of losing anything. In my latest Germany - Marshall (Sid) game, after a methodical first two months of build/conquer/defend, my artillery piles and cavalry corps are taking 2-4 cities per turn. This is my current OOB on turn 8:
Field Guns: 36 (all captured: 12 dutch, 12 belgian, 12 russian)
Lt Artillery: 38 (21 orig+ 17 captured: 7 french, 2 belgian, 1 dutch, 6 russian, 1 british
Field Howitzers: 18
Siege Guns: 14
Rail Gun: 1
All Cav Corps: 4
All Inf Corps: 3
Inf: 168
Flamethrower: 2 [built] (useful if they veteran, but die easily)
Armored Car: 5 orig
Maxim MGs: 35
Engineers/Workers: 24
Air: 2 Observer, 3 Biplane, 9 Zeppelin
Sea: 7 DD, 2 CL, 2 CA, 4 BC, 3 BB (I'm building 4 SuperBBs - brit BBs all dead)

Cities captured:
1) Arnham, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Anterp, Ypres, Calais
2) Liege
3) Brussels
4) Nancy (stack of 60 french destroyed; brit BBs finished off)
5) Verdun (stack of 35 french destroyed)
6) Chalons, Reims, Arras, Lodz
7) Warsaw (BEF destroyed)
8) Paris, Versailles

#2 - Abuse the AIs stupidity. To keep the enemy where you want them, just build a wall of MG/Inf stacks in trenches/strongpoint and leave open a spot for them to go through. As Germany, I got an RoP from Austria and just built a wall of units from Krakow to north of Memel and wherever his roads/RR cross the border put an MG/Inf/Inf in a Strongpoint. Russia currently has near 500 inf units (in the editor I gave them like 25 more cities and bumped inf strength to 6/8). The AI wastes them in stacks of 20-50, slowly fumbling around in the Carpathian hills and mountains. They've attacked my wall of MGs once, with a Corps. After capturing a city, I roll in the Engineers and instantly rebuild/move the MG wall. I have yet to see the AI build a single trench in any game I've played ...

Anywho. Plus this is a >bump< :goodjob:

Maybe later versions could include the immovable garrison/fortress units of Global WW2.

-b

#2 - Abuse the AIs stupidity. To keep the enemy where you want them, just build a wall of MG/Inf stacks in trenches/strongpoint and leave open a spot for them to go through. As Germany, I got an RoP from Austria and just built a wall of units from Krakow to north of Memel and wherever his roads/RR cross the border put an MG/Inf/Inf in a Strongpoint. Russia currently has near 500 inf units (in the editor I gave them like 25 more cities and bumped inf strength to 6/8). The AI wastes them in stacks of 20-50, slowly fumbling around in the Carpathian hills and mountains. They've attacked my wall of MGs once, with a Corps. After capturing a city, I roll in the Engineers and instantly rebuild/move the MG wall. I have yet to see the AI build a single trench in any game I've played ...


I am planning to possibly start up another PBEM game of WW1 (the first one haulted because of failure for turns to send...). Anyways, I think you would better appreciate the historical accuracy if you were to play with other humans. As you pointed out the AI is stupid. They fail to build trenches, properly use artillery...and their biggest flaw is their constant failure to place greater importance on corps. As you said corps are "coup de car," and since humans realize this, they are ussually the target of an enormous counter-bombardment and attack if they are in range.

5 cities? I didn't notice that! That is why! Thanks! Also I think Helgoland should be placed back in. Also the graphics for the BC must be different because they have different purposes to the BB esp for the UK I kept getting confused which of my ships were the battlecruisers.

Edit: This is for TGW 2.1. I only play TGW. It is better :D

If you have any questions concerning TWG please mention
if you refer to TGW or TGW-DIV.

There are many differences. For example you need only 1 city to build
a Corps in TGW-DIV. In TGW you need 5.

Rocoteh

I am planning to possibly start up another PBEM game of WW1 (the first one haulted because of failure for turns to send...). Anyways, I think you would better appreciate the historical accuracy if you were to play with other humans. As you pointed out the AI is stupid. They fail to build trenches, properly use artillery...and their biggest flaw is their constant failure to place greater importance on corps. As you said corps are "coup de car," and since humans realize this, they are ussually the target of an enormous counter-bombardment and attack if they are in range.

BkGreatWarnut,

"(the first one haulted because of failure for turns to send...)"

I am not sure I understand you right. Can you clarify?
Where there a bug that crashed the game?

Rocoteh

BK Walnut when and where are you going to start one? Be sure to let me know I really would like to play.

BkGreatWarnut,

"(the first one haulted because of failure for turns to send...)"

I am not sure I understand you right. Can you clarify?
Where there a bug that crashed the game?

Rocoteh

We are guessing that it was a problem with sending the game by e-mail... That and Detlef has sort of disappeared (he was the Ottomans) has caused the game to conclude as a majority ruled Entente Victory.

I don't think it was a problem with the game as much as it was with the encoding in e-mail and decoding...

I came to this site a few days ago: http://www.worldwar1.co.uk
There are all losses of the Navies in ww1 listed. Here is a list:

Germany: 1 BC, 1 PDN, 6 AC, 19 CL, 108 DD = 135 ships
Austria: 2 BB, 1 PDN, 2 AC, 6 DD= 11 ships
Turkey: 2 PDN, 1 CL, 3 DD= 6 ships

Britain: 2 BB, 3 BC, 11 PDN, 12 AC, 6 CL, 6 Monitors, 3 CV (sea plane carrier), 75 DD= 118 ships
France: 4 PDN, 4 AC, 13 DD
Japan: 1 BB, 1 PDN, 2 AC, 1 DD= 5 ships
Italy: 1 BB, 2 PDN, 4 AC, 2 Monitors, 14 DD= 23 ships
USA 1 AC, 1 CL, 2 DD= 4 ships
Russia: 2 BB, 1 PDN, 4 AC, 21 DD= 28 ships
Rumania and Greece a DD each

All in all the Central Powers lost 152 big war ships while the Entente lost 201 ships. It is surprising that Germany lost more ships in total in contrast to the British. However Germany was the main actor against the Entente. Also most of these losses are destroyer and light cruiser. Nevertheless only the CL were negative in the bilance of the Central powers in contrast with the allies. Remark: Protected cruiser are here in the list with Armoured cruiser. The bilance for the Entente is especially bad with the Capital ships (AC to BB). Here they lost 55 ships, while the Central Powers lost only 14! In this list included are also losses because of sabotage or accidents. Of all 8 BB only one was sunk in the battle, the Austrian SMS Szent Isthvan (Sp.?), which was torpedoed by Italian FAC. The others were mined, scuttled or sunk after accidents. But how is the bilance in total of all warships
According to Januz Piekalkiwicz, Der Erste Weltkrieg, p. 589:
Britain: 197 warships, 555.000 ts
France: 54 ships, 111.000 ts
Italy: 29 ships, 76.000 ts
Japan: 9 ships, 50.000 ts
USA: 4 ships, 17.000 ts
Total: 243 ships, 809.000 ts.

Germany: 354 ships (including 205 U- boats), 350.000 ts
Austria: 25 ships, 65.000 ts.
Total: 379 ships, 415.000 ts.

Summary: Excluding the Uboats and the Entente lost twice the room the Central powers lost.

I think this figures are interesting.

Adler

Adler,

Very interesting stats and link.

Thank you!

Rocoteh

New record for TGW!

156 individuals have posted in in the TGW-thread.

That is a new record.

No other scenario-thread have so many posters.

Rocoteh

You mean you counted / checked that ????

:lol:

You mean you counted / checked that ????

:lol:

I count and also remember most things........

Rocoteh

Hello, just registered to congratulate the creators on this great scenario.

However, I´d like to make a few remarks on some minor things I noticed.
1.) The A-H flag should rather look like one of these: A-H flags (http://www.deutsche-schutzgebiete.de/kuk_flaggen.htm) (from left to right: war flag, national flag, trade flag)
2.) The Austrian Emperor´s name should be "Franz-Joseph I.", not "...-Jozef...".
3.) How about naming "Ljubljana" Laibach instead? For further reference on contemporary A-H city-names, this map (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/shepherd/austria_hungary_1911.jpg) isn´t bad, I think.
4.) Austria-Hungary wasn´t an absolute monarchy, rather a quite special construction called "Doppelmonarchie" (= "Dual Monarchy") which, among other things, featured two separate parliaments - not all that efficient, actually. To make my point: adding unique forms of government to the main powers would be great.
5.) Which leads to my last point: how to represent the Russian Revolution.
I don´t know if the following has been proposed already (and I have next to no experience with the editor), but how about representing the inner struggles that led to the Tzar´s downfall by giving them an unique form of government with really high corruption, unit upkeep and war weariness while, at the same time, providing a wonder (in St.Petersburg or perhaps a more remote city) that negates these effects.
Now the Central Powers should have two options to trigger the "revolution": either by capturing the city the wonder is located (which should be rather well-defended and hard to reach, of course) or by researching a certain tech (only available to them) that makes said wonder obsolete.

No idea if this could work, but it´s a formidable scenario even without it.
Thanks again for sharing it with us!

Hello, just registered to congratulate the creators on this great scenario.

However, I´d like to make a few remarks on some minor things I noticed.
1.) The A-H flag should rather look like one of these: A-H flags (http://www.deutsche-schutzgebiete.de/kuk_flaggen.htm) (from left to right: war flag, national flag, trade flag)
2.) The Austrian Emperor´s name should be "Franz-Joseph I.", not "...-Jozef...".
3.) How about naming "Ljubljana" Laibach instead? For further reference on contemporary A-H city-names, this map (http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/shepherd/austria_hungary_1911.jpg) isn´t bad, I think.
4.) Austria-Hungary wasn´t an absolute monarchy, rather a quite special construction called "Doppelmonarchie" (= "Dual Monarchy") which, among other things, featured two separate parliaments - not all that efficient, actually. To make my point: adding unique forms of government to the main powers would be great.
5.) Which leads to my last point: how to represent the Russian Revolution.
I don´t know if the following has been proposed already (and I have next to no experience with the editor), but how about representing the inner struggles that led to the Tzar´s downfall by giving them an unique form of government with really high corruption, unit upkeep and war weariness while, at the same time, providing a wonder (in St.Petersburg or perhaps a more remote city) that negates these effects.
Now the Central Powers should have two options to trigger the "revolution": either by capturing the city the wonder is located (which should be rather well-defended and hard to reach, of course) or by researching a certain tech (only available to them) that makes said wonder obsolete.

No idea if this could work, but it´s a formidable scenario even without it.
Thanks again for sharing it with us!

kafkaesk,

Thank you for the positive words.

On your suggested changes: They are interesting. However with regard
to the Russian Revolution the game-engine will not allow it.

I do not think there will be any more versions of TGW.
Its possible there will be one more version of TGW-DIV.

Rocoteh

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

Not to derail the thread, but the vast majority of history books that I have seen record this event as an assassination by a terrorist.

It sort of depends on what your view point of what is a terriorist and what is a rebel because the lines can become blurred and open to interpretation and opinions of each person.

Just because someone belongs to a group does not mean they may or may not be a terrorist or the group is either a rebel group or a terrorist group. Few terrorist groups seem to give themselves the label of terrorist.

The First World War has just begun after the assasination of Franz Ferdinand in June by a Serbian terrorist

He wasn't terrorist.Gavrilo Princip was member of rebel organization "Mlada Bosna".You should read more history before writting description.Rebel and terrorist are not same.

tentakl,

Sarevok wrote the text and I assume he will make a comment
on your post.

So will I:

The Bolsheviks used terror. Remember all the political killings.
Vietcong used terror. Remember Hue.
ANC used terror. Remember "necklazing".

They all thought "the cause" justified it.

The assasination of Franz Ferdinand was no doubt a political murder
and thus an act of terror.

Conclusion: I think Sarevoks description is correct.

Rocoteh

Gavrilo Princip was without doubt a terrorist.

Adler

Austria took Bosnia from Yugoslavia , they were provoking local population with milittary trainings ,they wanted Balcan teritory , Austria was trying to find a reason to declare war on Serbs and that murder was perfect reason to attack Serbia. That was political murder no dobt. However u can't say that he is terrorist like Osama bin Laden.He was rebel , rebels fiht for a freedom or
against ocupator , they don't terrorize innocent people.
Gavrilo Princip was without doubt a terrorist. You said that just to be "patriot".You should better learn history instead of sayig stupid things.Let's stop this disscusion here.OK? :)
Peace!

Tentakl, I know about different history poin t of views in Europe (for instance Franco- German war is seen as an agression in France but a justified one in Germany (mostly)). Nevertheless I have to correct you that there was no Yougoslavia in 1914. It was developed at first after ww1. Also some facts: Bosnia was Ottoman before it became Austrian. There was a big Serbian population living. And in Serbia there was a right wing government demanding (with Russian aid) a Great Serbia. They supported the Black Hand movement in AH and it was so dangerous for the Serbian Prime minister for his own life he couldn´t give further detailed infos to the Austrians when he got to know what was planned. The Black Hand was an organization to fight against the Austrians even with assassinations and the murdering of own people who collaborated. Don´t get me wrong but this is the classical definition of a terrorist. Although I admit that the difference is very fluent to a freedom fighter. It depends on the point of view. But assassinating someone is in no way legitimized. I mean murdering not killing in combat. So take your own conclusions but for me he is still a terrorist.
However peace also with you. Shalom and As- Salem Aleikum. _\\//

Adler

I would also say he was a terrorist even if he was of a serbian group (with a name I even can't speak). The Al-Quaida is also a group and they are also called terrorists and not rebels.
I would say a rebel in this view is a person who fights against an enemy in his homeland(!) (for example the "Resistance" in France while the German occupation) and I would say he didn't fought for the freedom oh his homeland because the serbians wanted an "Great Serbia" and these also includes an occupation of non-serbian territority...
Also a rebel wants a peace at the end and a terrorist only wants to kill and to destroy the others - the murder of Franz Joseph wasn't an act to reach peace because he wasn't the ruler at this time - only the crownprince - and for everybody it has to been clear that the assassination of him would cause a war a not a peace at the end...
I would say: don't discuss with a German about the reason of the first world war because we have to inform ourselfes about this theme after "Versailles" (There was said that only Germany caused the war!!! - That is still hard and so we wanted to inform all the others that it isn't right and to inform them about the real cause -> so our knowledge is a result of the history.)
A political murder is always something terroristic - there are special cases you could say it was an act of a rebel but in this case?! No.

But everybody can see the history as he or she wants. So everybody has to decide hisself/herself about the question: rebel or terrorist. I have only wrote the reasons why I think he was a terrorist.

This is my last reply on this topic.Austria "anexied" Bosnia from Yugoslavia.Bosnia was part of Yugoslavia.There is no Big Serbia , Austria wanted to have Balcan territory and thats that. Peace!

Tentakl, there was NO Yougoslavia before 1920 or so. Only a kingdom of Serbia and one of Montenegro. Bosnia was part of the Ottoman Empire when it was annexed! It was no part of Serbia. The Black Hand also had the aim of a Great Serbia, which they want to achieve with terror provoking a war with Austria in the hope the Russians would help. So in no way Princip and company were freedom fighters but terrorists.
You should read a non biased and non rewritten history book.

Adler

Guys , I am sorry to bother you with this question of mine , but I need help . What files should I download in order to play the game ? It's always dificult to find the right files when updates have taken place . Up to now I have downloaded the 55 Mb file from the 1st page of this topic ( which actually redirected me to page 42 ) and I also got the file called "TGW2.1.zip" which I got it directly from page 1 . It's this ok , or should I download something else ? Should I also use the file called "TGW-DIV 1.4.zip" and which I can get it from page 42 ? Please help me . . .

The first download are the files for the units etc. The second is the scenario. The third is another version of the scenario. Try it if you want. There are less infantry units but enhanced naval combat IMO.

Adler

Could you please provide me some links ?

TGW Art: http://www.civfanatics.net/download...nd_Text_2.1.zip
TGW version 2.1: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=76570
TGW Div Art: http://www.civfanatics.net/download...ios/TGW-DIV.zip
TGW Div 1.4: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1694069#post1694069

Adler

Thanks , but it seems that the first link
http://www.civfanatics.net/download...nd_Text_2.1.zip
is not valid . . .
However , which is the larger version ? I don't want to lose ant action ! If the Div version is the bigger , then it's ok , but if not then I wonder where can I find the art folder . . .

OK , I've solved the problem . The file can be downloaded from the first page :
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=76570&page=1&pp=20
and the link to it is under the fraze :
TGW Art & Text Files 2.1:
I am writing this just in case someon else has the same problem as me .
But I observe that this file is smaller than the "Div Art" folder . Does this mean that the game will last less if I use this one ?

The Div files are bigger mostly because of the enhenced Naval system. you have to see what is your favourite version. Time for the turns should not differ much.

Adler

Well there's still problem . I have put the "TGW-DIV" folder and the "TGW-DIV 1.4.biq" file inside the the "D:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Conquests" directory and when I start the game , though I can select which side to play with , when the game is about to start and see the map , it gets stucked . I can see the loading mesage on my screen ( it sais "Configuring scenario ..." ) but nothing more . . . Oh , there is something more : without having finished the loading , the Culture Advisor pops up and tells me that the Germans build a meracle . . .
Is there anything I can do ? I also installed the above files in the "Scenario" folder , but it's the same problem .

Well there's still problem . I have put the "TGW-DIV" folder and the "TGW-DIV 1.4.biq" file inside the the "D:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Conquests" directory and when I start the game , though I can select which side to play with , when the game is about to start and see the map , it gets stucked . I can see the loading mesage on my screen ( it sais "Configuring scenario ..." ) but nothing more . . . Oh , there is something more : without having finished the loading , the Culture Advisor pops up and tells me that the Germans build a meracle . . .
Is there anything I can do ? I also installed the above files in the "Scenario" folder , but it's the same problem .
first of all, i think you have to install it in the D:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\scenarios folder. secondly, this is a huge scenario, so loading takes a long time. you'll just have to be patient. the fact that the culture advisor pops up indicates that the scenario is loading. give it some time.

I had also tried that folder too ( I forgot to mention that above ) . However something seems to be wrong . You know the screen at the setup where you choose which side you will play ? Where you can choose among German empire , British etc ? Well , though on some of the countries their leader is replaced by a flag ( which makes me think that the scenario was loaded ) on some other countries their leader is the one shown in the Conquers too . I could say "well that's fine" , but though the British Empire has a man as its leader ( I can't remeber right now his name ) , in the picture is shown Queen Elisabeth ! ! ! This made think that firstly the game loaded data from the TGW folder and next kept loading from the CivIII folders and actually replaced files that had the same name . . . I don't know what to say . . . By the way : exactly at this moment I checked my CivIII , which is running , and it still doesn't go any further . It's been stucked for 15 minutes . . .
I can only imagine one solution : make my own WWI scenario by taking data out of TGW folder and using its map , but on the other hand I don't want to do that ; it's like stealing somebody's else work . . .
Just in case you wonder : I have a Pentium 4 at 3000 MHz with 1024 MB RAM , so that the problem it's not some poor PC .

OK ! You were right . I just had to give it some time ( and also press the OK on those two advisors that come out , so that I don't have to wait 15 minutes ) . My opinion is that this game is great ! I haven't seen other scenarios , but the naval units look great !
A great thanks to the creators .

OK ! You were right . I just had to give it some time ( and also press the OK on those two advisors that come out , so that I don't have to wait 15 minutes ) . My opinion is that this game is great ! I haven't seen other scenarios , but the naval units look great !
A great thanks to the creators .

glad to know that it worked out. i actually had the same problem last year when i first loaded this scenario; i didn't realize it would take this long. regarding the leaderheads that you were talking about (elizabeth for the male leader of GB), maybe they did not give the flag to GB, and instead put elizabeth's leaderhead as a substitute cause there might not be a King George III (I think) leaderhead made yet.

:scan: Load Error:Missing Entry: "text/ Pedialocns.tex" ANIMNAME_PROTO_Field :scan: Uhh can someone help me :D

What Civ edition do you have ? It should me Conquests one . Download the files as listed above and unzip them in the following directory :
D:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\scenarios

OK ! You were right . I just had to give it some time ( and also press the OK on those two advisors that come out , so that I don't have to wait 15 minutes ) . My opinion is that this game is great ! I haven't seen other scenarios , but the naval units look great !
A great thanks to the creators .

iliekater,

Thank you.

I am glad to hear that the problems have been solved.

Rocoteh

Just to clarify in case this issue has been address before, I haven't bothered to read any previous posts. So if this issue has already been brought up, then nevermind.

In TGW-DIV version, there's a major problem with the trench war side of the game. The AI does not try to defend their trenches AT ALL; they simply take the troops out of the trenches and cram them into their cities and go on suicide rushes towards pointless goals. Playing as either France or Germany, you can EASILY take over the trenches within the first few turns and then it's just a matter of systematically taking down the enemy's cities with massed artillery and armies from there.

The only thing I can think of to make the AI actually want to fight for the trenches with at least a few troops would be to put VPs on every single trench. This way, the AI will commit at least 2-3 troops per VP point trench. The value of the VPs will have to be reduced accordingly, however.

Just to clarify in case this issue has been address before, I haven't bothered to read any previous posts. So if this issue has already been brought up, then nevermind.

In TGW-DIV version, there's a major problem with the trench war side of the game. The AI does not try to defend their trenches AT ALL; they simply take the troops out of the trenches and cram them into their cities and go on suicide rushes towards pointless goals. Playing as either France or Germany, you can EASILY take over the trenches within the first few turns and then it's just a matter of systematically taking down the enemy's cities with massed artillery and armies from there.

The only thing I can think of to make the AI actually want to fight for the trenches with at least a few troops would be to put VPs on every single trench. This way, the AI will commit at least 2-3 troops per VP point trench. The value of the VPs will have to be reduced accordingly, however.

IXIRandyIXI,

OK, I will see what I do to change this should there be a
version 1.5 of TGW-DIV.
Its possible TGW 2.1 and TGW-DIV 1.4 were the last versions
of this scenario though.

Should CIV 4 present important new tools for scenario-creators
its possible the scenario will be redesigned.

Rocoteh

An update:

I placed VPLs on all the trenches in Europe and along the A-H and Italian border (for a total of 60 VPLs around the entire map) and lowered the VPL value to 20. The AI defends its own trenches and goes for the other trenches much more aggressively now. It only puts 2-3 troops in each trench, but that's still better than nothing.

In case you want the changed .biq, I'll attach it to this post so you can look at it. I really think the change is for the better. :goodjob:

IXIRandyIXI,

OK, I will see what I do to change this should there be a
version 1.5 of TGW-DIV.
Its possible TGW 2.1 and TGW-DIV 1.4 were the last versions
of this scenario though.

Should CIV 4 present important new tools for scenario-creators
its possible the scenario will be redesigned.

Rocoteh
They probably were.

Bad news but understandeable.

Adler

Sorry to hear that. :(

It's a fun scenario.

It was a bit slow playing for my taste, but nevertheless it was
very well done.
I can certainly understand that there comes a point where it's
simply time to move on to other things.

I think the Russians should be greatly nerfed in this scenario. Lots of units, but make the units very weak. It would be much more realistic. In the first world war the Russians had a few very strong divisions. However most of their army was illiterate and didn't even have the proper amount weapons, shells and equipment to fight. Some of the soldiers didn't even have boots. They had only about half the required artillery shells to put up a proper defense, and about half of the Russian soldiers in 1915 didn't have rifles.

That is true.

Well, who knows. I may make another version... someday.

Perhaps we should think to do this for civ 4. Of course depending on the editor.

Adler

Thats what I have in mind actually.

If the Civ4 editor is really as good as promised it should be a valuable tool in the master's hands. :)
And perhaps we will then get the Russian revolution included...

If the Civ4 editor is really as good as promised it should be a valuable tool in the master's hands. :)
And perhaps we will then get the Russian revolution included...

CellKu,

Thank you and welcome back to the thread.

I agree the Russian revolution should be included.

I will not rule out there will be a TGW-DIV 1.5, but in such
a case it will have to wait several months.

Rocoteh

On the assumption the Civ4 editor will allow event scripting,
I would suggest that the Russian Revolution be contingent on
Russia doing badly, as it was in reality. It seems to
me that if Russia is successfully prosecuting the war, that
having the Revolution occur anyway is kind of silly.

Or to put it another way, why would a human player want to
play Russia in this scenario if events predicated on the historical
collapse of that country's army happen no matter what they
do?

Serutan,

Yes, I think what you say is correct.

Without the debacle in the war there would probably been
no revolution.

Rocoteh

Well one reason for Russia going for war was internal troubles. However when war came Russia was ill prepared. The attack on East Prussia came too early. I mean even if they would have been able to take Königsberg it is highly questionable they would have come much further since the Germans would then have mobilized every force to attack the Russians. Russia in the war was ever on the edge of a revolution. A revolution which only could have been avoided if the Czar gave up more power. But Nicholas II. was unwilling to do so. When he went to war Russia was not ready nor it would become ready ever in ww1. A fast peace with Germany would have been the best, most likely demanding the Austrian retreat out of Serbia when invading Eastern Prussia. This was the only chance. But so Tannenberg was a catastrophy and the first step towards revolution. Remember there were two revolutions! The second only because Kerensky didn´t want to make peace. Russia and the Czar could have escaped out of the catastroyphy by making internal reforms. The lack of these reforms lead into the catastrophy. This was inevitable. The katalysator was only the war. And even a winning Russia would have suspended the revolution for a few years.

Adler

I've never downloaded or played this and I don't want to read 145 pages of posts, but I recently read a book about the huge (negative) impact on German morale when they realized that the English would take prisoners instead of just murdering soldiers who surrendered. This leads to my idea.

Do you have VP scoring? If you do, you could make late-war infantry that are similar in most respects to whatever came before them except that they can "enslave" POW units that could be disbanded for VP, representing the effect of the realization that surrendereing was an option on the morale of the troops.

Just a thought. I'd like to try this one, but so many scenarios, so little time!

CellKu,

Thank you and welcome back to the thread.

I agree the Russian revolution should be included.

I will not rule out there will be a TGW-DIV 1.5, but in such
a case it will have to wait several months.

Rocoteh
It's good to hear that you are still thinking about improving TGW. But if you wait several months that means that you are contemplating a Civ4-TGW version, as well, doesn't it?
Hopefully, the forum members will then be able to quickly respond to the new graphic design and add new Civ4 unit graphics etc.

Btw, does anyone know a website which provides an intro to python-scripting? I would like to start acquainting myself with it to better understand the possibilities of Civ4.

And btw, thanks Adler, it's always nice to read your posts on history. :)

CellKu

I've never downloaded or played this and I don't want to read 145 pages of posts, but I recently read a book about the huge (negative) impact on German morale when they realized that the English would take prisoners instead of just murdering soldiers who surrendered. This leads to my idea.

Do you have VP scoring? If you do, you could make late-war infantry that are similar in most respects to whatever came before them except that they can "enslave" POW units that could be disbanded for VP, representing the effect of the realization that surrendereing was an option on the morale of the troops.

Just a thought. I'd like to try this one, but so many scenarios, so little time!

Interesting idea that POW thing.

If you don't have much time to try all scenarios (well, who has...), you should still think about playing this one. It's one of the "must-have-played" scenarios here in the forum. :)

CellKu

Yeah, I'll probably give it a shot later in the summer. Right now I'm caught up in Rise and Rule and Island Conquests. I like mods that still let you go through every era, but WW1 is a war that Civ could really do justice to.

One question, PLEASE tell me there are St. Chamond tanks in this! I really hope there are! (I'd say the same about A7V, but you MUST have included that one, to not do so would be a travesty, its got such a cool, unimaginative shape!).

Well one reason for Russia going for war was internal troubles. However when war came Russia was ill prepared. The attack on East Prussia came too early. I mean even if they would have been able to take Königsberg it is highly questionable they would have come much further since the Germans would then have mobilized every force to attack the Russians. Russia in the war was ever on the edge of a revolution. A revolution which only could have been avoided if the Czar gave up more power. But Nicholas II. was unwilling to do so. When he went to war Russia was not ready nor it would become ready ever in ww1. A fast peace with Germany would have been the best, most likely demanding the Austrian retreat out of Serbia when invading Eastern Prussia. This was the only chance. But so Tannenberg was a catastrophy and the first step towards revolution. Remember there were two revolutions! The second only because Kerensky didn´t want to make peace. Russia and the Czar could have escaped out of the catastroyphy by making internal reforms. The lack of these reforms lead into the catastrophy. This was inevitable. The katalysator was only the war. And even a winning Russia would have suspended the revolution for a few years.

Adler
They thought a succesful war would unite the nation.

Well one reason for Russia going for war was internal troubles. However when war came Russia was ill prepared. The attack on East Prussia came too early. I mean even if they would have been able to take Königsberg it is highly questionable they would have come much further since the Germans would then have mobilized every force to attack the Russians. Russia in the war was ever on the edge of a revolution. A revolution which only could have been avoided if the Czar gave up more power. But Nicholas II. was unwilling to do so. When he went to war Russia was not ready nor it would become ready ever in ww1. A fast peace with Germany would have been the best, most likely demanding the Austrian retreat out of Serbia when invading Eastern Prussia. This was the only chance. But so Tannenberg was a catastrophy and the first step towards revolution. Remember there were two revolutions! The second only because Kerensky didn´t want to make peace. Russia and the Czar could have escaped out of the catastroyphy by making internal reforms. The lack of these reforms lead into the catastrophy. This was inevitable. The katalysator was only the war. And even a winning Russia would have suspended the revolution for a few years.

Adler

Adler,

In fact the Russian revolution is one my favourite subjects in history.
I do not agree with all that you say, but I do not intend to start a debate
over it.

I wish to state this though:

All scenarios of this type are "what-if" scenarios. Thus I want to
avoid "locking" of certan issues such as there must be a Russian
revolution.

Assume for example that a new Stolypin appears late 1914.
(Stolypin was the only man that could have saved the Czar-regime.
He was murdered 1911.)
That would for sure have had great impact on history!

Rocoteh

It's good to hear that you are still thinking about improving TGW. But if you wait several months that means that you are contemplating a Civ4-TGW version, as well, doesn't it?
Hopefully, the forum members will then be able to quickly respond to the new graphic design and add new Civ4 unit graphics etc.

Btw, does anyone know a website which provides an intro to python-scripting? I would like to start acquainting myself with it to better understand the possibilities of Civ4.

And btw, thanks Adler, it's always nice to read your posts on history. :)

CellKu

CellKu,

Its possible that the best solution will be to wait for the release
of CIV 4. Time will tell.

On python-scripting: I hope you will find time to learn it.
My guess is that it will be of incredible value once CIV 4 have
been released!

Rocoteh

Czar Nicholas II. was the problem. Of course if he managed it to delegate power to the Duma a revolution was much more unlikely. But he was the main problem. A revolution was under his form of reign too likely. Inevitable, well 100% inevitable is nothing but in this case, if you consider there were already revolts, veeeerrrryyy likely. The only man who had influence on the Czar to give up power was a guy called Rasputin. And he was obviously no Stolypin. Then the catastrophy of the war and the revolutions came.

Adler

Oh, in a civ2 scenario I played long ago Russia got the communism technology in 1917 or after the fall of Riga. So the revolution was simulated, however it was not the best way indeed.

Adler

(psst... do it at my forum. It would be fun) :)

BUG REPORT: The Austrian capital of Wien has no buildings in it, nothing.

BUG REPORT: The Austrian capital of Wien has no buildings in it, nothing.

Gabryel Karolin,

Thank you for reporting the bug.
The bug seems to be with TGW 2.1. TGW-DIV 1.4 has no such bug.

Rocoteh

TGW-DIV 1.4 has another bug, though. Settlers are buildable and the Swiss are colonizing Siberia in my scenario :p .

this is one of the best scenarios out there. it might just be the best. i like how the infantry units have higher defense than attack. it is perfect because of the trench war-fare --- you had to sacrifice so much for so little. i love this scenario!!!
and i was playing as germany- destroyed the dutch, belgians, and the swiss, took half of paris, including paris, took all northern russian territory up to tallin and helsinki down to grodno, took all of main land italy-by turn 25 i think it was, and then SAVED OVER IT WITH THE STUPID BRITISH!!!!! JEEZ , i spent so much time on it to, at least 20 hours if not (probably 30 hours) more!!!!!

TGW-DIV 1.4 has another bug, though. Settlers are buildable and the Swiss are colonizing Siberia in my scenario :p .

Gabryel Karolin,

I am not sure what you refer to.

One can not build settlers in TGW-DIV 1.4.

Rocoteh

this is one of the best scenarios out there. it might just be the best. i like how the infantry units have higher defense than attack. it is perfect because of the trench war-fare --- you had to sacrifice so much for so little. i love this scenario!!!
and i was playing as germany- destroyed the dutch, belgians, and the swiss, took half of paris, including paris, took all northern russian territory up to tallin and helsinki down to grodno, took all of main land italy-by turn 25 i think it was, and then SAVED OVER IT WITH THE STUPID BRITISH!!!!! JEEZ , i spent so much time on it to, at least 20 hours if not (probably 30 hours) more!!!!!

Hubschrauber,

I am glad to hear that you liked the scenario.

Welcome back with more comments on it.

Rocoteh

Gabryel Karolin,

I am not sure what you refer to.

One can not build settlers in TGW-DIV 1.4.

Are you sure? Im my game Spain, Switzerland, Albania and a few other of the minor civs have all built new cities on remote places.

Are you sure? Im my game Spain, Switzerland, Albania and a few other of the minor civs have all built new cities on remote places.

Gabryel Karolin,

Yes, I checked TGW-DIV 1.4.

No CIV can build settlers.

Rocoteh

:confused: Im utterly confused, what could be the problem then?

:confused: Im utterly confused, what could be the problem then?

Gabryel Karolin,

I agree, but I have no answer yet.

Rocoteh

very odd.....

very odd.....

Yes.

I have checked if some other unit by mistake have been
flagged as settler, but so is not the case.

Rocoteh

I swear I had that in like the original version. I dont even think you could make settlers in the BETA...

What the hell...

Should I send you a save file or something? Im telling you, settlers are buildABLE :crazyeye: .

Is the scenario suitable for multiplayer??

i haven't even played the scenario yet but I always had a problem with railroads. unlimited movement capabilities? come on. this isn't realistic. and for world war 1, i don't think there were that many railroads connecting every city in a country and every terrain square in a city radius. this is just my opinion. i think in civ4 there should be a 1/6 movement capability in railroads. makes more sense to me.

i have a bit of a problem. every time i load tgw it gets to the configuring scenario part and then my screen goes blank. question. is there anything i can do about this?

You have to wait a bit. Starting the scenario can last from about half an hour to several hours depending on your PC. So start the game and do something else, like sleeping going to school/ work, watching TV. After the time it needed it will be there. You won´t be sad of doing other things in the mean time...

Adler

You have to wait a bit. Starting the scenario can last from about half an hour to several hours depending on your PC. So start the game and do something else, like sleeping going to school/ work, watching TV. After the time it needed it will be there. You won´t be sad of doing other things in the mean time...

Adler

yeah, but my screen isn't supposed to go completely blank, is it? the loading bar and everything disappears.

Is the scenario suitable for multiplayer??
no, this scenario is too big for that.

yeah, but my screen isn't supposed to go completely blank, is it? the loading bar and everything disappears.

Hmm. THAT shouldn´t happen. Did you try to let him load the game for a few hours, I mean did you give the PC time to load? Perhaps only your monitor got out of work to save the screen?

Adler

For now i conqured mainland france, belgium, some parts of russia, northern italy as German Reich.
But now there are some questions:
1. are new leaders disabled or was it till now just bad luck?
2. if I will conquere London or Moscow will I also get the additional Anzac/Russian reinforcements or is a special english or russian resource needed to do so?

Andnot to forget... big up yourself one of the best scenarios :goodjob:

Samez

1. You can get new Great Leaders; the AI's luck always seems
to be better than mine.
2. No, you won't get the reinforcements, because the units
are only available to one Civ (i.e. only Britiain can produce
British Inf.).

Hmm. THAT shouldn´t happen. Did you try to let him load the game for a few hours, I mean did you give the PC time to load? Perhaps only your monitor got out of work to save the screen?

Adler

no my monitor isn't resting because it goes completely blank after like 30 seconds. but will continue with this experiment more. i'll see how long i can abuse my pc with loading time if it is even loading.

I've tried the regular version but 10 minutes between turns was :aargh:

It seems a good scenario, but 10m means 1h30m for each 10 turns! :(
I still played around 15 turns but, when my PC crashed (as I was doing other things while waiting) I decided to give up.

I was playing with Russia. Germany moved a lot of troops on the first 2 turns just next to my cities. They damaged some land, destroyed some roads and left... not a real invasion.

I found it very hard to attack, as terrain bonuses are very high (75% for hills?) and Russia doesn't not have any strong attack unit nor expects one soon. So the war was pretty much at a stalemate for the initial 15 turns. I lost no city, conquered no city. I did not notice any changes elsewhere, neither. It seems a very static scenario.

Just one thing: I could not clear pollution. What tech does allow pollution cleaning?

I see there are other options, I will try them, because this seems a good scenario.

well i gave it a wait this time, 6 hours to be exact. cuz thats how long i slept. and still nothing. interestingly enough i don't if this has anything to do with it but a minute into loading it gives me a popup that say germany is building the schlieffen plan and if you click on it, a second later it will tell you austria is building the schleffen plan. last time i clicked both of them and then shortly after the screen went black. this time i clicked neither and slept 6 hours with still no change. the great war scenario is turning out to be trench warfare in loading time.

well i gave it a wait this time, 6 hours to be exact. cuz thats how long i slept. and still nothing. interestingly enough i don't if this has anything to do with it but a minute into loading it gives me a popup that say germany is building the schlieffen plan and if you click on it, a second later it will tell you austria is building the schleffen plan. last time i clicked both of them and then shortly after the screen went black. this time i clicked neither and slept 6 hours with still no change. the great war scenario is turning out to be trench warfare in loading time.
if you don't click those windows the game will halt right there and never move forward. you have to click them. fortunately enough, at least on my comp, they come up pretty quick, so after i get rid of them, it takes about 20 minutes to half hour to load the game. in yours it might take longer but since you see those windows, it means that the game is loading. i can only suggest to give it time after closing those windows.

IndustrialGod, what kind of PC do you have and what Windows system?

Adler

What the hell...

Should I send you a save file or something? Im telling you, settlers are buildABLE :crazyeye: .

Gabryel Karolin,

I do not doubt that.

However I can not explain the reason.

Rocoteh

Is the scenario suitable for multiplayer??

Alex2001,

I had an an multiplayer-version of TGW-DIV that I removed
some months ago. Its possible I will make a version 2 of it later
this year.

Rocoteh

For now i conqured mainland france, belgium, some parts of russia, northern italy as German Reich.
But now there are some questions:
1. are new leaders disabled or was it till now just bad luck?
2. if I will conquere London or Moscow will I also get the additional Anzac/Russian reinforcements or is a special english or russian resource needed to do so?

Andnot to forget... big up yourself one of the best scenarios :goodjob:

Samez,

Thank you.
I am glad to hear that you like the scenario.

I see that your questions have already been answered.
Welcome back with more comments.

Rocoteh

I've tried the regular version but 10 minutes between turns was :aargh:

It seems a good scenario, but 10m means 1h30m for each 10 turns! :(
I still played around 15 turns but, when my PC crashed (as I was doing other things while waiting) I decided to give up.

I was playing with Russia. Germany moved a lot of troops on the first 2 turns just next to my cities. They damaged some land, destroyed some roads and left... not a real invasion.

I found it very hard to attack, as terrain bonuses are very high (75% for hills?) and Russia doesn't not have any strong attack unit nor expects one soon. So the war was pretty much at a stalemate for the initial 15 turns. I lost no city, conquered no city. I did not notice any changes elsewhere, neither. It seems a very static scenario.

Just one thing: I could not clear pollution. What tech does allow pollution cleaning?

I see there are other options, I will try them, because this seems a good scenario.

Luthor_Saxburg,

On waiting time: Its hard to reduce further, given the scope
of the scenario.

On attack versus defense:
Since the defense had its zenith during WW1 it should be very hard to
attack. However playing Russia in this scenario is not maybe the most
interesting choice among the playable Civs.

In TGW-DIV 1.4 you should be able to clear pollution in one turn.

Rocoteh

IndustrialGod, what kind of PC do you have and what Windows system?

Adler

it is p2 and windows 2000 professional

Luthor_Saxburg,

On attack versus defense:
Since the defense had its zenith during WW1 it should be very hard to
attack. However playing Russia in this scenario is not maybe the most
interesting choice among the playable Civs.
Rocoteh

I guess it depends on how you define "interesting". When I played Russia,
I played strictly defensively until I could build up enough artillery and
Cossacks to be able to attack with a sustainable number of
casualties. Once you can steal Siege Guns and Advance Production, then
you can get rolling. But it takes a while, and patience.

I guess it depends on how you define "interesting". When I played Russia,
I played strictly defensively until I could build up enough artillery and
Cossacks to be able to attack with a sustainable number of
casualties. Once you can steal Siege Guns and Advance Production, then
you can get rolling. But it takes a while, and patience.

Serutan,

Yes, I agree.

What I mean is that the first times you play the scenario,
Germany, France or Britain can be the best choices since you need
patience to play for example Russia or Austria-Hungary.

Rocoteh

Serutan,

Yes, I agree.

What I mean is that the first times you play the scenario,
Germany, France or Britain can be the best choices since you need
patience to play for example Russia or Austria-Hungary.

Rocoteh

Yes, I see your point. I guess I'm one of the locos who likes
empire building as much as the fighting. :crazyeye:

it is p2 and windows 2000 professional

Okay but how fast is your PC and how many RAM do you have?

Adler

Okay but how fast is your PC and how many RAM do you have?

Adler

uhh.. slow i guess and i got 64 mb RAM

uhh.. slow i guess and i got 64 mb RAM
thats probably why.

I assume I am missing something. But I get this error and have no clue what to do next:

http://www.after-hourz.com/misc/slyk/loaderror.jpg

Slyk,

You must have both the downloaded folder and the file in the
scenario-folder of Conquests.

A common reason to crash is that downloads are placed in scenario-folder of Civ 3 instead.

Rocoteh

uhh.. slow i guess and i got 64 mb RAM


With 64MB Win 2000 won't run all that fast, much less
Civ3. You really need at least 256MB to get a halfway
reasonable scenario load time with Civ3.

Indeed. So my only advice is: Enhence your PC or buy a new one. This is all you can do that the game will run properly.

Adler

my bad, i'm sorry i actually have 128mb ram. and i can run mods at a decent load time. it's just this one that's buggin me with the whole blank screen thing.

Indeed. So my only advice is: Enhence your PC or buy a new one. This is all you can do that the game will run properly.

Adler
Ive never heard of this happening before.

Well, Einstein says everything is relative... ;)

Adler

:blush: I have tried to play this scenario. I get all the way to the point where the computer is "configuring scenario" and the game locks up (I get a "not responding" in the task manager). could you help me figure out what is going on?

Cole, there´s nothing wrong. It last only a certain time to load. 30 minutes to several hours depending on your PC (processor and RAM). Wait only a bit.

Sarevok, perhaps we should make here a faq what to consider with scenarios generally...

Adler

Cole, there´s nothing wrong. It last only a certain time to load. 30 minutes to several hours depending on your PC (processor and RAM). Wait only a bit.

Sarevok, perhaps we should make here a faq what to consider with scenarios generally...

Adler
Good idea.

Let´s do that in a seperate thread and ask someone if this could be made sticky. It should be called Important FAQ concerning MODs and scenarios or similar. This question and the question with other non English Civ3 variants should be in.

Adler

Well a FAQ is a very good idea!

64 mb ram is much too less! when I started playing civ3 I also had just 64 but if playing with more than three opponents or on huge maps the game slowed domn extremely. But for now I play with 1 gb ram and that runs well...

I play the normal 2.1 version not the division, so I got in real trouble with pollution cause it takes a long while to research the tech to clean it up... :nuke: hmm but all in all all it was running quite well...

My system specs: P4 1.7 CPU, 1 Gig Ram, Nvidia FX5700.
I am in week 2, 1915. Average AI turns run 5-10 mins total. I am playing Germany and the initial turns were longer with the Brit and French navies giving me a lot of trouble. But. Both AI parked their fleets within move/bombarb/retreat range of Breman. Well, by late November of 1914 I had sunk most of the British navy and some French ships (bombard with BBs and cruisers, attack/sink with BCs with no losses!!). In late December I captured Calais and destroyed 90% of the French fleet there. After each turn as I decimated the enemy fleets, the game sped up. Now the Russians are bogging things down terribly with their hordes of cav and infantry.

Turning the 'Animate Enemy Moves' to OFF will really speed your game. I still leave combat animations ON though, but my turns are 3 or 4x faster with this setting.

Berlin has a pop of 23 but, despite the huge food surplus isn't growing... is that on purpose?

Any buildings that should be built in order to allow it to grow even bigger?

Luthor, you need Aquaeduct and Hospital to grow...

Adler

Alder's right. I don't recall off the top of my head, but a large
number, if not most, of the cities are lacking a Hospital, even
though they have been given large populations.

My system specs: P4 1.7 CPU, 1 Gig Ram, Nvidia FX5700.
I am in week 2, 1915. Average AI turns run 5-10 mins total. I am playing Germany and the initial turns were longer with the Brit and French navies giving me a lot of trouble. But. Both AI parked their fleets within move/bombarb/retreat range of Breman. Well, by late November of 1914 I had sunk most of the British navy and some French ships (bombard with BBs and cruisers, attack/sink with BCs with no losses!!). In late December I captured Calais and destroyed 90% of the French fleet there. After each turn as I decimated the enemy fleets, the game sped up. Now the Russians are bogging things down terribly with their hordes of cav and infantry.

Turning the 'Animate Enemy Moves' to OFF will really speed your game. I still leave combat animations ON though, but my turns are 3 or 4x faster with this setting.

Slyk,

Does this refer to TGW or TGW-DIV?

Rocoteh

TGW. I was stunned to see so many British ships show up and try to blast my minefields, once I realized they would eventually park and barrage the mines, I just moved all my ships in, sent out the BBs and cruisers to weaken the Brit/French battleships and then finished them off with my BAs. Went rather fast once I got the process down and capturing the Belgian ports helped. Neither the British nor French Navy was a factor by January of 1915. They've thrown some new ships at me since trying to landing troops behind me, but I knock those ships out in the same manner.

Rocoteh, I saw the same behavior from the Royal Navy as did
Slyk, and handled it about the same way (TGW as Germany).

BTW, playing as Britain, I was able to pretty much wipe out
the Kreigsmarine by capturing Antwerp (i.e. pretty much the
whole fleet was holed up there when Antwerp fell).

TGW. I was stunned to see so many British ships show up and try to blast my minefields, once I realized they would eventually park and barrage the mines, I just moved all my ships in, sent out the BBs and cruisers to weaken the Brit/French battleships and then finished them off with my BAs. Went rather fast once I got the process down and capturing the Belgian ports helped. Neither the British nor French Navy was a factor by January of 1915. They've thrown some new ships at me since trying to landing troops behind me, but I knock those ships out in the same manner.

Slyk,

AI is really a problem!

Rocoteh

Rocoteh, I saw the same behavior from the Royal Navy as did
Slyk, and handled it about the same way (TGW as Germany).

BTW, playing as Britain, I was able to pretty much wipe out
the Kreigsmarine by capturing Antwerp (i.e. pretty much the
whole fleet was holed up there when Antwerp fell).

Serutan,

I think AI is at its worst level when handling naval units.
One can only hope for a change in Civ 4 although I do not think
one should expect to much.

Rocoteh

I love the scenario. The naval thing is a bit disappointing but I understand that is beyond your control. The only other bug like AI thing I have noticed is that the Russian Infantry just does not want to attack. Their Cossaks do so very actively, but the standard infantry just keep dancing around; so I have produced a ton of Seige Guns and I just pound their stacks into dust... but there are SO many of them. It is late-April 1915 and I must have killed off 300 Russian Infantry and there are just as many on the map. I am wondering if there is a way to better stagger the reinforcements? The Russian pool was very deep, but will it start to run dry?? Anyway to slow their deployment?

I have concentrated my army in the West, to defeat France (very well in hand) and although I don't have all the French cities, the end is near. It is only a matter of time to shift East. Although I have looped through Eastern Poland to cut off the Russians and driven them into a pocket around Lubin, there are still hundreds of Russian Infantry around and no end in sight. I have captured Riga, Warsaw, Lodz, Kaunas, Vilna, Grodno, and Litovsk. I have Minsk under siege and cut virtually every road/rail line into the region as deeply as Moscow. But they keep coming.

Just wondering in the big picture, is there eventually a man-power drain for all the nations? Will the reinforcements start to slow? By means other than city captures? 'Hearts of Iron' depicted this very well. I can't imagine the 'Ruhr Factories' producing Infanty every two turns until the end of time. Just a random thought. Not sure what the game code offers for options.

@Slyk - The only way to reduce production of all those Russian infantry is to conquer (IIRC) Moscow, which has the Russian Reinforcemnt wonder. And also the Russians start out with
lots of infantry. BTW, I think the reason the AI doesn't attack with them is that the Russian infantry sucks at attacking.
I found out the hard way. Of course, this does accurately
simulate the real Russian ineptness on offense (with the
exception of the Brusilov offensive).
All they're really good for is
garrison duty, and protecting stacks of artillery & Cossacs.

Serutan, that is what I assumed but got off track with my own post. I guess the bigger picture is 'can' the game be configured to tier or level down production? I assume not. My guess is the best you could get is to have a larger starting number of units, increase cost for production and force the AI/player to ration use of troops and really apply some strategy to maximize resources.

In the meantime, every 'army' that I have will be marching directly to Moscow, screw this unified front theory, I'm going for the 'kill' hahahaha....he said with such lofty hopes. Wonder what that will cost me?

This map is to easy as Germany. Simply build a trench/machine gun shield on the western front to contain France then do an all-out offensive against Russia. From Switzerland to the Belgian coast put 5-10 machine gunners with trenches on each square with a few reserves behind them, then throw everything else at Russia. Although, since Austria well-ny useless it takes a while to beat Russia to her knees.

Btw, historically the Germans should have to use quite a number of their soldiers to help the Austrians, as the Russian military was able to defeat the Austrians at several times!

I must tell some mistakes about Turkey.

-Capital city is İstanbul since 1453.When Turkish armies conquered Constantinopolis from Byzantium Empire in May 29 1453,its name changed.So true name is İstanbul in 1914.

-There is a railroad line from İstanbul to Arabia and Iraq in 1914(constructed by Germans before the war).Arabian line destroyed by Arap rebels(or freedom fighters,it is up to you)(leading by Lawrance,British agent) in war.

-Turkish map has so few cities.And most of them are too advanced.There weren't factories and some other important buildings in all the cities in 1914.I don't know other countries but i guess there must some mistakes like that.

-You should use mountains instead of hills on East Turkey.Because there are a lot of high mountains like Ağrı(more than 5000 metres).

They are my first foundings.I will send other messages if i find something else.But i must thank you for this scenario.You made a great job!Good works.

Thanks.

I must tell some mistakes about Turkey.

-Capital city is İstanbul since 1453.When Turkish armies conquered Constantinopolis from Byzantium Empire in May 29 1453,its name changed.So true name is İstanbul in 1914.


Read post 18, 19 and 20!

Byzantium change to Constantinopel in 1453.
Constantinopel change to Istanbul in 1924.

cram']Read post 18, 19 and 20!

Byzantium change to Constantinopel in 1453.
Constantinopel change to Istanbul in 1924.


I read them already.But you are wrong.Greece cities and Roman Empire used Byzantium to call it.When Roman Empire collapsed Byzantium Empire founded on Balkans and Anatolia.They changed its name to Constantinopole(May 11 330).Almost 1000 years later,Turkish attacks begun to Byzantium Empire.Finally in May 29 1453 city conquered.And history of Byzantium Empire ended.After that day Turks changed its name and it became İstanbul.
You said 1924.In 23 october 1923 Republic of Turkey founded.But İstanbul was already Istanbul.

I read them already.But you are wrong.Greece cities and Roman Empire used Byzantium to call it.When Roman Empire collapsed Byzantium Empire founded on Balkans and Anatolia.They changed its name to Constantinopole(May 11 330).Almost 1000 years later,Turkish attacks begun to Byzantium Empire.Finally in May 29 1453 city conquered.And history of Byzantium Empire ended.After that day Turks changed its name and it became İstanbul.
You said 1924.In 23 october 1923 Republic of Turkey founded.But İstanbul was already Istanbul.

In the 20th century the city was renamed Istanbul. The renaming became official in 1930.(From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantium)

So yes i was wrong. ;)

TGW-DIV Fast 1.0

VERY IMPORTANT:YOU MUST HAVE INSTALLED TGW-DIV
TO PLAY TGW-DIV Fast 1.0

Credits for TGW-DIV 1.0: CellKu for resizing the map.
Without the excellent work of CellKu this fast version
of TGW-DIV would not have been possible. Other credits:
See TGW-DIV 1.3.

Rocoteh
Sorry is a little fuzzy for me. I want to run the fast Div version, so what do I have to download and install?

Thanks

Sorry is a little fuzzy for me. I want to run the fast Div version, so what do I have to download and install?

Thanks

QBaTrack,

You shall download and install the TGW-DIV folder and
the TGW-DIV Fast 1.0 file.

Rocoteh

I must tell some mistakes about Turkey.

-Capital city is İstanbul since 1453.When Turkish armies conquered Constantinopolis from Byzantium Empire in May 29 1453,its name changed.So true name is İstanbul in 1914.

-There is a railroad line from İstanbul to Arabia and Iraq in 1914(constructed by Germans before the war).Arabian line destroyed by Arap rebels(or freedom fighters,it is up to you)(leading by Lawrance,British agent) in war.

-Turkish map has so few cities.And most of them are too advanced.There weren't factories and some other important buildings in all the cities in 1914.I don't know other countries but i guess there must some mistakes like that.

-You should use mountains instead of hills on East Turkey.Because there are a lot of high mountains like Ağrı(more than 5000 metres).

They are my first foundings.I will send other messages if i find something else.But i must thank you for this scenario.You made a great job!Good works.

Thanks.

Justifier,

Notes have been taken with regard to version 1.5.

Thank you.

Rocoteh

This map is to easy as Germany. Simply build a trench/machine gun shield on the western front to contain France then do an all-out offensive against Russia. From Switzerland to the Belgian coast put 5-10 machine gunners with trenches on each square with a few reserves behind them, then throw everything else at Russia. Although, since Austria well-ny useless it takes a while to beat Russia to her knees.

riley555,

Do you refer to TGW, TGW-DIV or both of them?

Rocoteh

Btw, historically the Germans should have to use quite a number of their soldiers to help the Austrians, as the Russian military was able to defeat the Austrians at several times!

Kristian95,

Yes, you are right. However its almost impossible to reflect
within the current game-engine.

Also: Welcome back to the thread.

Rocoteh

True, with the reports on modability for CivIV I think we have something to look forward to there :)
Btw, thank you for the WB Rocoteh :) I've been reading this thread all along, just haven't had anything intelligent to add for a while ;)

It seems anacurate WW1 scenario would be near impossible.
No movement in Real war.

True, with the reports on modability for CivIV I think we have something to look forward to there :)
Btw, thank you for the WB Rocoteh :) I've been reading this thread all along, just haven't had anything intelligent to add for a while ;)

Kristian95,

After that I have got CivIV I plan to spend at least 3-4 weeks
to analyse all aspects of the new game-system.

BTW: Sarevok reports on his own site that he plans a huge
industrial-era scenario for CivIV.

Rocoteh

It seems anacurate WW1 scenario would be near impossible.
No movement in Real war.

I am the Future,

You have really a point there.

Still I have plans for a new WW1-scenario where I will
try to simulate the stalemate in the war.

Rocoteh

Rocoteh, I am sure you will be be succesful! Just look at this wonderful Scenario that Sarevok and you were able to make even with the limitations in the current AI and engine :)

Rocoteh, I am sure you will be be succesful! Just look at this wonderful Scenario that Sarevok and you were able to make even with the limitations in the current AI and engine :)

Kristian95,

Thank you.

It will probably be a World War I Global scenario.
The other alternative is a map of Europe and part of North America.

Rocoteh

Wyrm has made the Goeben BC. That would be a good addition to the game. Amazingly since over a month nobody posted here...

Adler

Wyrm has made the Goeben BC. That would be a good addition to the game. Amazingly since over a month nobody posted here...

Adler

Adler,

On the Goeben BC:

Yes I agree. However I think recon1591 have stated that
scenario-creators outside SOE may not use the new units until
several months after the release of the latest version.

On TGW: 20 months after its release the scenario or at least the thread
seems to be stonedead.

Maybe the scenario will have a new life with a new map and a new thread.

Rocoteh

Actually I gave EL Justo a taste of the Yavuz for his project when I saw him incorrectly using my Casemate BB for his ship.

Well I think we can persuade him since this is only one originally ww1 unit for a ww1 game...
A new map? That could be a huge world map. Interesting to see the global version...

Adler

Actually I gave EL Justo a taste of the Yavuz for his project when I saw him incorrectly using my Casemate BB for his ship.

Wyrmshadow,

I see.

The Goeben/Yavuz should work very well as an Battlecruiser unit
in a future WW1-Global scenario.

Rocoteh

Well I think we can persuade him since this is only one originally ww1 unit for a ww1 game...
A new map? That could be a huge world map. Interesting to see the global version...

Adler

Adler,

Yes I will probably go for a WW1-Global scenario instead of a
Europe+North America map. Then I will use a expanded TGW-DIV file
for the units. I guess there will not be any TGW-DIV 1.5.
I do not think Sarevok ever will return to scenario-creation so this thread
will probably fade away after some time.

Rocoteh

That´s not so good, only 14 posts remain to the number of 3000 ;). However I think we can ask recon if we are allowed to use that single unit.

Adler

That´s not so good, only 14 posts remain to the number of 3000 ;). However I think we can ask recon if we are allowed to use that single unit.

Adler

Yes I agree.

17 posts during a month is right now the minimum,
so 3000 posts will no doubt be reached.

Rocoteh

Indeed there I have no doubts ;).

Adler

For Civ, I don't normally enjoy later era scn's especially "war" ones.
But this one has been interesting so far. I think it's very well made.
Playing TGW DIV Fast as the British. Doing ok so far.
Dying to see how the American War entry wonder is going to work.
I was happy to see the High Seas Fleet come out right away
and challenge the Royal Navy. Attrition really got the better of them.
Wish I had some minesweepers though.
Bombardment doesn't work against (no hits after 30+ tries)
I don't know why only Central Powers has those minefields though.
Scapa Flow feels too vulnerable.
Gotta play a bunch more turns before I get the real flavor of this.
It's been fun so far. Thanks..

jonnytal, the mines are there to evade the bombing of German coastal tiles, espeicially the cities, by the RN. AI ships tend to do so. The problem is that AI is not good in naval combat. Have fun.

Adler

jonnytal, the mines are there to evade the bombing of German coastal tiles, espeicially the cities, by the RN. AI ships tend to do so. The problem is that AI is not good in naval combat. Have fun.

Adler

Funny you should mention that. It's the only thing the Turks have been
doing to Salonika over and over. Thank God for the Italian Navy though.
After they destroyed the Austrian Fleet they came over here and are
sinking the Turkish fleet. Otherwise the ai has done nothing over there
even though I've written Greece off for now.

btw - are you from Schleswig-Holstein? Part of my father's family
came from that area (4-5 generations ago)

And what's to stop the Germans from doing the same to Western Powers?

At first I live here. My family however has roots in Hannover, North Schleswig, Bavaria but mostly Prussia.
And what's to stop the Germans from doing the same to Western Powers?
Erm, the Royal Navy?
No serirously the German AI is too stupid to wait on chances to beat the British. They come out of the harbours. However as British you can stop them. As Germans this might not so possible, so there are mines. It is annoying if the British ships bomb German tiles without the chance to kill them as they retreat too soon. Try to play it as Germans and you see what I mean!

Adler

Erm, the Royal Navy?

At first I live here. My family however has roots in Hannover, North Schleswig, Bavaria but mostly Prussia.
Adler

Royal Navy :lol: That's a good one
I know ai can be silly that's why I don't normally for these kinds of
scenarios but this one I like so far.

that's a good family mix. My father's family is mostly from
Pomerania and Prussia but there is a branch that goes to Schleswig.

thanks..

Thanks. You can also give here play reports. Although Rocoteh said there will be no other version, it could still be of value for a possible ww1 Global or a civ IV scenario.

Adler

For Civ, I don't normally enjoy later era scn's especially "war" ones.
But this one has been interesting so far. I think it's very well made.
Playing TGW DIV Fast as the British. Doing ok so far.
Dying to see how the American War entry wonder is going to work.
I was happy to see the High Seas Fleet come out right away
and challenge the Royal Navy. Attrition really got the better of them.
Wish I had some minesweepers though.
Bombardment doesn't work against (no hits after 30+ tries)
I don't know why only Central Powers has those minefields though.
Scapa Flow feels too vulnerable.
Gotta play a bunch more turns before I get the real flavor of this.
It's been fun so far. Thanks..

johnnyjal,

Thank you for the positive words.
I appreciate them.

Its possible TGW-DIV will be continued in a WWI-Global scenario
or a CIV IV version.

Rocoteh

In that case I would vote for a Civ4 version... :) With so many new possibilites in Civ4 that would be really awesome. Many of limitations you have to struggle with right now will be gone then (well, hopefully!).
(Finally, a Russian revolution...) :)

CellKu

I think so. But then I also would vote for a ww1 Global civ IV version.

Adler

In that case I would vote for a Civ4 version... :) With so many new possibilites in Civ4 that would be really awesome. Many of limitations you have to struggle with right now will be gone then (well, hopefully!).
(Finally, a Russian revolution...) :)

CellKu

CellKu,

Welcome back!

I will make a decision when I have made an analyse of the
CIV IV editor. I also hope that a CIV IV version will be a joint
project with Sarevok.

Rocoteh

I think so. But then I also would vote for a ww1 Global civ IV version.

Adler

Adler,

I will consider that also.
A CIV III WW1-Global is also still possible.

Rocoteh