WW2-Global

British (edited from Japanese - I have them on my mind!) - ver1.5 - Emperor
Weeks 1-26 1940

As we closed 1939 we were facing Japanese marines, Finn infantry, Italian units all infiltrated our Indian border with Russia and attacking Meshed and Kabul. In addition the Germans had taken three Turkish cities from the French and were threatening Damascus We had taken Thailand early and this had seemed to stem the tide and stiffen Chinese defense. We were concerned that we had nothing to stop the Japanese unless Matildas were forthcoming and could be put in place.

Week 1 1940

We take Asmara as our East Africa offensive continues while all new units are rushed to the Middle East/Indian front. Germans shift attack and take and raze Tabriz! Not looking good. Italy declares peace with Turkey - presumably they will grant ROP to the Germans. However, with Tabriz out of the way they could still reach me via the Russians.

Week 3
Japanese raze Kabul. We have the tech for Matildas but can we get them to the front fast enough? We rush some and this may save Teheran.

Week 4-7 A few Blackburn bombers are making the difference in holding back the Japanese. It actually has helped that they razed Kabul because our culture line is so far Quetta that we have a few chances to bomb. Tactic is just to hit each unit once. AI does not like to proceed with damaged units.
Meanwhile I note that the French still hold ALL continental cities plus La Caruna. Germans seem to be focusing efforts on the Middle East.

Week 8 Damascus falls to the Germans! We may have a problem here! We take Mega in Africa. Italian air power is more than annoying.

Weeks 9-10 Germans bombing. They have eliminated my units in Cyprus and actually eliminated a road. First time in this scenario that I have seen them attack an improvement. Prewar bombers attacking Japanese road/rail around Chungking and bombing Hainan (along with some US naval units).

Germans raze Amman - again a last minute shift since I had reinforced Jerusalem.

Weeks 11-20 D-E-F-E-N-S-E!! Matildas and Blackburns are the build orders throughout the empire. Multiple attacks by Japanese pushed back. Meshed remains under Italian artillery bombardment and Finn infantry attack. Finns also wander around Teheran and the vicinity looking for something to attack. Germans turned back at Jerusalem but now shifting attack towards Baghdad.

Week 21 - Plans complete to take the offensive. First goal - reinforce and finish East Africa campaign. We need to reduce number of fronts.

Week 22 - Port Moresby falls to the Japanese. I had foolishly reinforced with 6 ANZAC units but Japanese air power eliminated them.

Week 23 Obbia is ours as forces from England and Canada are deployed on new offensive in Africa.

Week 26 - Solomon Islands being bombed. Only a matter of time until it falls. Australia being threatened. We have decided this is really the Americans job and will sacrifice Australia to keep our mainland positions and offensive going.

What a difference some focused playing makes!

Observations - Russia has not been at war yet!
Autoproduced units for Germany while interesting flavor may be a little too much. These units are forcing me to spend some attack on them.
Germany has apparently given up attack on France. Total for France so far is they lost Damascus and gained LaCarona - why is Germany going South? (remember this is my second playtest and other than me doing better the AI is doing the same thing. Unfortunately what that means is that in a few weeks the Russians will declare war on the allies. I am giving them good deals on trades so maybe they will go for the Germans.

Chinese have stopped the Japanese or rather the Japanese offensive is South towards Australia and via Russian ROP to India. China has not lost a city in 1940. We have held Hong Kong but more because the Japanese did not follow up the attack.

Other than a few naval units, no sign of the Americans yet

A lot of fun but I fear that in human hands the Japanese have moved from helpless to unstoppable. Their marines are so much more powerful than Americans! But perhaps that will equalize as the game continues and we will see the result is a more realistic gradual shift in power.

Subs - what subs? - Still kill one each turn. Essentially I kept the home fleet dedicated to this. New units are on convoy escort.

By the way, I have a simple marines fix. Since you have given other units marine attack capability why not simply eliminate the unit. Each country can have different level infantry and special unit infantry i.e. SS Infantry. You can name the US special unit as marines for flavor. That way all countries have marine attack but we don't force builds of special units. Just an idea.
I also would like to see lower defense for tanks to force mixed units.

.
 
Originally Posted by ric ricardo
To all:
let me know if i am doing something wrong as i can not start the sceanario. I am running a p4 2.4 gz dfsb, w 512 mb ram and a fx5200 256mb video card...
since v 1.5 doesn't come with the ww2-global folder, i created it myself and put the 134 mb of stuff in it and move the folder to "C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios" , along with the "WW2-Global 1.5.biq" file.
Am i doing something wrong? because i can never finish configurating the scenario and get bumped with one of those really long errors...
pls advise
keep on gaming
r.r


ric ricardo,

You must also download the biq-file located at Post 1.

Rocoteh

Dear Rocoteh:
perhaps i am still confused...i dl the big 134 mb file and put it in C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios\WW2-Global
now with the small biq file, do i put it under C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios\WW2-Global or C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios ?

or is the folder suppose to be ww2_global instead of ww2-global?

To be exact, the error i am getting is--missing entry in "text\pedialcons.txt":ANIMNAME_PRTO_Gato"

or perhaps is there another file i need to dl first? i am currently running v1.22

thank you for your time
r.r
 
Bob1475 said:
Japan - ver1.5 - Emperor
A lot of fun but I fear that in human hands the Japanese have moved from helpless to unstoppable. Their marines are so much more powerful than Americans! But perhaps that will equalize as the game continues and we will see the result is a more realistic gradual shift in power.
.

1st -- I am assuming you are playing as the British, not the Japanese :)

2nd -- You have me curious as to the Japanese now. I am playing the Americans to see the impact of the weaker Marine, but I might need to start a Japanese game relatively soon too. America is good to play when you are in the mood to build. Japan would be fun when you want immediate action.
 
Great Britain Emperor 1.4 week 19 1940

- Never lost any city

- I have conquered Spain, Lisbon, Thailand, half Mexico, Sicily, Tripoli, El Agheila and some japanese cities taken to Dutch.

- I have the technological lead with land 41 and sea 41 in 6 turns.

- i have 150+ workers which I think is a minimum for Great Britain

- Germans have taken Paris, Lyon and Brest

-Germany and SU are best friends of the world and have an ROP from the start ! ( as in all my Allies games )

- Now I'm concentrating on building some amphibious assault forces to prepare a revenge in Pacific where I have moved most of my navy

- only 1 city razed : Djibouti

Military

Russia : No significant forces but 66 HMG.

Japan : No signifiacant forces but 79 inf and 49 type 99 hmg + fortress

Germany : 3 armies, 28 88, 17 IIIe, 16 SS inf, 49 germ inf

US : 15 1919 hmg, 13 marines, 77! US infantry

---> Now, AI seems to build infantry with high priority ?


- Think each civ should have some free workers from the start as AI doesn't build them ( less than in normal conquest games ? ) .
week 19 1940 : Germany and Italy 0 workers, Us : 17, Japan : 9, SU : 32.
As GB, I'm everywhere and I can say you that they don't build improvements, not even a mine for NY or Los Angeles !
The German roads I bomb on turn 1 are still not repaired same as for polution in Germany.

- What's the use of combat engineer as they build at the same rate than workers ?


Regards
 
Antoine - you did a lot better than I although I note the Germans have focused on the French. Were you attacked in India?
 
Rocoteh,

Some thoughts based on playing US at SID level, versions 1.3/1.4/1.5. Have also played Germany and Japan, but will focus these comments from the US perspective.

As before, please take these thoughts as constructive, not negative. And I certainly do not have all the answers.

Ver 1.5 Dutch Harbor I like the addition of Dutch Harbor. I had felt the need for it when playing 1.3.

Ver 1.5 Marianas and Wake Island - Replacing the US cities Marianas (next to the Carolines) and Wake Island with airfields was good. Makes it tougher for the US, and makes it much more likely the US will lose all Philippine cities –which is realistic.

Ver 1.5 Heavy Cruiser in the US Philippine Squadron - I sure liked having that heavy cruiser with the Philippine naval squadron. Again, makes holding the Philippines more unlikely but it helped in slowing Japanese expansion southwards which in turn contributed to overall Japanese weakness and British strength. I was usually able to wipe out at least 2 Japanese convoys before withdrawing the remnants of the squadron. So on balance good to have dropped it.

Ver 1.5 Destroyers at Pearl Harbor - I like the addition of destroyers at Pearl Harbor.

Ver 1.5 South American Countries - The change to the countries look good for accuracy. Have seen no dramatic affect on game play so far and doubt that it will have any.

Ver 1.5 South America – Venezuela. I would move the city :South Venezuela Area” one square diagonally East, rename it Puerto Carrena, and extend the Orinoco river down to it. More accurate geographically.

Ver 1.5 Mexico - I would move the city of Rosario one square southeast.

Ver 1.5 Retaining City Culture on Capture – With this change the US is able to capture Cuidad, Mexico City and Acapulco on turn 1. Without it Acapulco had to wait to turn 2. In one sense, culture retention is not a big issue as we can easily turn it on or off. On our own. On balance I think it is good to have city culture retention on because it helps the AI players. But might be worth putting a couple more Garrisons in Mexican cities to slow down the US. More on AI/ human balance later.

Ver 1.5 US Continent – Would like to see Detroit, St Louis, and Memphis connected by rail. Not a huge deal as workers can do it in the game, but they were connected in 1939. On the Florida cities I can go either way. It is just really annoying to send the workers to connect them when in fact the rail lines existed historically. The counter- argument is that having to build those rail lines slows US development a bit, but right now I would vote for connecting them.

Ver 1.5 Destroyers - I like the addition of 1939 and 1941 destroyers with the different stats. On the graphics, however, strongly urge you to use the Fletcher DD graphics available on the CGD Forum. The Fletcher graphics just look a lot better than the Akuzuki graphics you used. The Fletcher class was not introduced until 1942, but the late 1930’s US Destroyer classes (Mahan 1936, Somers 1938, Gridley 1937, Bagley 1937, Sims 1939, Benham 1939, Benson DD 1940, Bristol DD 1941) all had two forward gun turrets and two stacks like the Fletchers.. At the graphics resolution in the game they would be virtually indistinguishable from the Fletchers. Same goes for the Sumner 1944 and Gearing 1945 destroyer classes.

The Fletcher graphics make a good looking destroyer for all navies for the entire war, plus it ended up being THE US destroyer of WWII.. If you get the urge, I would add 1944 and 1945 destroyer upgrades, changing only the AA capabilities/stats. The main upgrade in the Fletcher and subsequent WWII US destroyer classes was increased AA.

I installed the Fletcher graphics for the 1939 and 1941 DD’s and it seems to work fine.

Ver 1.5 S-Boats (German) I tend to see the addition of S-boats as a distraction that does not really help the game. I think that at least their bombardment stat is way too high.

“With only two torpedo tubes without any torpedo reloads and only a 2 cm gun as main defense , the Schnellboot 1933 was only of limited offensive use when World War II broke out. Because of this, those boats were moved form active S-Boat duty to other roles in 1940, some of them were converted in to fast submarine hunters, others were used as Patrol boats

The S-Boot class 1939/1940 was the largest class of fast attack boats built in Germany during the war. Built between 1940 and 1945, those boats were modified based on the experience of war action, especially the light flak armament was tripled in the later boats.

From S100 on, the boats were equipped with an armored control platform to protect the crew from attacks of British MGB and MTB.
Most of the more than 100 boats built were lost during the war, either through mine hits, battles with British ships or air attacks.”

In this scenario S-boats could have some validity as an AA platform and could be used against subs and destroyers. But I’m just not sure I see it as a really valid unit on the scale of a global WWII scenario any more than I would PT boats in the Pacific. And certainly not with a bombardment of 20 - even for a flotilla- given it’s actual historical armament.. Perhaps a standoff naval torpedo bombardment only if the game engine allows. On balance I think the scenario would be better off with Germany building destroyers.

Ver 1.5 U-Boats In version 1.3 I did not see the U-boats as overpowered. I think they should keep the blitz and should not be reduced in power or effectiveness.. Are U-boats a big problem for a US/British AI player?. Yes. But at SID level I have consistently been able to clear the Atlantic of AI U-boats and contain them in the North Sea/English Channel. It takes a lot of Dauntless bombers, a lot of destroyers, and a lot of aircraft carriers. Producing all that anti-sub capability detracts from building ground units for invasion of Eurasia/Africa. But once contained the U-boats are no longer a menace and I have routinely sent transports unescorted across the Atlantic with DD’s as static sentries along the route.

Granted, those U-boats in the hands of a human player can be a different story, but I’ll touch on that when I talk about Civ/AI/Human game balance.

Ver 1.5 Arctic Ocean - I looked carefully at what you did with landmark terrain and ice barriers to simulate arctic sea ice. The problem is that the game engine does not seem to allow coast terrain to be designated as landmark terrain. If that were possible the landmark terrain as ice would work ok. Perhaps in Civ 4 we will be able to add different types of terrain.
After giving it a lot of thought I still think the best, simplest and least disruptive option is to extend arctic tundra terrain up to the northern map edge in two places: (1) Halfway across Siberia at the existing northern extension of the land and (2) halfway between Aklavik and Wager Bay. This is simple and decisive, It stops Artic circumnavigation. It will hardly be noticed at all in game play, and it leaves room for naval operations around the Bering Straight and around Murmansk/Archangel.

If you want to further restrict arctic ocean sea space then convert all arctic ocean/sea squares to landmark sea terrain except along the immediate coast – but I don’t think that is necessary. Just extend the tundra in the two places I mentioned. It is only my opinion, but I find the ice barriers more aesthetically objectionable than extending some tundra terrain that I never look at anyway. Besides, what is really the visual difference between snow covered tundra and snow covered ice?

Suggestions for New Units – Graphics for these units are available on the CGD Forum

US – PBY5 for recon
Germany - Condor recon and light naval bombing
US – Montana class BB
US – Liberty ship or LST instead of the existing transport blob thingy. (The liberty ship looks pretty good)

Ver 1.5 Turkish Navy - In terms of a global WWII scenario, the Turkish navy was just not a player. Same for the Thai navy. Might consider just removing those navies and thereby eliminate some of the distracting, sub-induced declarations of war. Turkey was, if anything a land power. Might consider beefing up the garrisons in Turkish cities to make Turkey more difficult to capture.

Ver 1.5 Iran/Persia. Not so sure about eliminating Iran/Persia and giving it to the Brits. Persia acted as something of a buffer between Russia and Britain in the Middle East in 1.3. I think also the elimination of the Persian buffer reinforces the tendency of the Russian AI not to fight Germany but instead to fight Britain.

Ver 1.5 Invasion routes into India. Might consider making some parts of the Himalaya/Hindu Kush impassable to anything so as to make it more difficult to invade India from the North.. Keep the Khyber Pass open as the major north south route into India. Perhaps add some jungle in the Burma area.

Ver 1.5 Thailand - Might consider limiting Thailand to just garrison units. Eliminate the navy. There has to be a balance between realism and playability. Thailand was just not a significant or capable WWII military power and a WWIII global scenario should reflect this. Garrison units, even strong garrison units – ok. But combat maneuver units and a navy which did not register on the WWII cobat scale - no. Again, this may help eliminate weird declarations of war while still providing somewhat realistic resistance to invasion.

Russia/Germany – From reading the comments on this board and based on my own game experiences it is my sense that the German and Russian AI’s tend not to attack each other very much. Russia seems to go after Britain and to a lesser extent the US. Overall Russia seems to be the most powerful AI Civ when playing the US or Britain. When playing Germany, Russia seems to be much easier to deal with than the US.

Overall Game Balance: Human/AI/Civ

Civ III obviously has some severe built-in limitations which cannot be overcome in a scenario design given the current game engine/AI..

Given those limitations, I think the best way to develop a scenario is to shape it as much as possible so that the AI, when controlling any given Civ, has all it needs to function as best as it can given the AI/game engine limitations.

The problem is that in designing the scenario to get the AI to work as effectively as possible, any given civilization, when controlled by a human player, may well end up being overpowered.

One solution is perhaps to have a series of sub-scenarios, one for each civ, which would be balanced specifically for a human player for that civ. A German WWII Global scenario where the human played Germany but could not play any other civ. A Japan WWII Global scenario balanced for the human player to play Japan only. But that is a lot of work and not likely to happen.

A more flexible alternative is to develop the scenario to give the AI’ civs the best opportunity to be effective and then to identify some acceptable self-imposed handicaps for the human players for each civ.

For example when playing the US in 1.3, I would not allow myself to airlift USMC units. Sometimes I would limit the number of cities I conquered in south America,

So, if the US is considered overpowered for a human player, a sort of house rule might be that the US has to win without invading Mexico or South America.
Self-imposed limits on the number of certain types of units is another possibility. Only so many Marine untis or so many Yamato’s or so many aircraft carriers, for example.

A list of such house rules for the scenario would allow human players to select those they liked and those which they feel give them a good game challenge.

Bottom line, design for the best AI action possible and have the human adjust when palying. Much better than having a really useless AI oponjent.

Final Comment A lot of the comments on the board for this scenario seem to be based on experience at different game difficulty levels. Perceptions as to where a civ is too weak or overpowered can be greatly influenced by the difficulty level being played.

Clearly, some comments/observations are valid regardless of the difficulty level – game graphics, bugs etc.

Comments on game play and outcome, however, may vary according to difficulty level.

It might help, for scenario design, to specify a common standard difficulty level on which to base certain scenario evaluations and recommendations. I suggest either Deity orSID. My comments and observations in this post are made based on playing SID level games.

Rocoteh,
Apologies if this is too long, tedious, or obnoxious.
This is a great scenario and I greatly enjoy playing it.
Thanks again for all your hard work.

Grizx
 
oljb007: I've read plenty of accounts of the submarine campaigns in both Atlantic & Pacific. From what I remember they spent more of their time on the surface then underwater, and did much more attacking at night on the surface. I also seem to remember them stating speeds upwards of 20 knots on the surface too, though that could be wrong.

The point you are missing is it is impossible to duplicate the subs real targets, the merchant shipping. Which were both big, and slow. Really slow! Slow enough for the subs to outrun them when they spotted them and get ahead of them to lie in wait submerged. Now Rocoteh has done the best he can with the Uboats, and has done a pretty fine job too. I think the Uboats have been discussed in this thread since version 1.1 In other words, this is a work in progress!

Now me, I don't see how you consider the Uboats "marginalized". Compared to everybody else's subs they are holy terrors. My sub captains WISH we had that attack & speed; back when they had blitz they were monsters.

Sasebo,

totally agree with everything you said. I just bought conquests tonight installed it and am waiting for the download now! When I spoke of marginalized, i ment in regards to how I felt people were discussing them in this thread and not in the game, as I haven't even played it yet.

Roth,

Thanks for you reply to my posting. what I suggested regarding unique saves was more of a suggestion for the masses, kind of a hint if you will! As you will spend "forever" balancing this game and you will never make everyone happy.

and just to reiterate, I bought conquests tonight just to play your scenario and I hope I in no way offended you. Just serving up my thoughts, constructive criticism.

anyways, its done downloading....time to try it.

thanks again


ps 35 mins later; guess my comp isn't top of the line anymore :(
 
dang...

I keep getting this error. cant find \art\units\1939DD.ini

followed directions and updated to 1.22, also did the previous patch as indicated.

anybody, any thoughts?

default scenarios work fine.

thanks for any help.
 
Try using windows explorer to find the file and then copy it to the C3C \Scenario \WWII Global Scenario \Art \Units \1939 DD folder.
 
Adler17, or Rocoteh: Since the Type XXI being available from the start is a bug, what tech should I get before I allow myself to build these? Also, am I supposed to be able to build Type IXs as well, or what tech do I need for those? I am completely lost on those two issues. :crazyeye:

Also, I sort of am just holding France at bay while I deal with the Yugoslav/Greek/Turkish armies. The Belgians are also being stubborn in Rotterdam. :p I will squish them out of there eventually, but I have a sizeable French army threatening Stuttgart. I also love the new graphic for the Somua, Rocoteh, scared the hell out of me when they started attacking me on Turn 1! :eek: :lol:
 
Sasebo, I think you should not build the type XXI boats before researching tech 43 or 44. The first prototypes of the new technology in these boats were used in so called Walther Uboats in 1943. In 1944 the boats were started to be produced in large scale. Type IX boats however were useable from the beiginning.
Grizx, you are right concerning the Uboats. I was ever against this changing. I am at the start of the game and I think I will have big difficulties in fighting the Allies in the Atlantic by using non blitz subs.
The S- boats did in this two turns a good job sinking 3 DD and a CV. Although you are right concerning the first type of S boats, the latter had 6 torpedoes with them and 2 tubes. They sank over 150 ships, among them 12 DD. 2 cruiser, 12 further warships and 15 merchant vessels had been heavilied damamged. So an attack of 20 is okay.

Adler
 
vlad1917_a said:
Rocoteh,
Could you please do following enchantment to the version:
1) Increase price on combat engneers.
2) Reduce there defense to 3.
3) Eliminate bombard strength.
4) Remove capiture flag.
5) ADD All terrain as roads.!!!

Playing German SID. Change all the plans. Do not care about Paris any more. My target is weak Russia...
Have sunk all Russian Fleet in Black sea on turn 2.

Where all these buildings in Chelyabinsk?

vlad1917_a,

OK, I will look it over.

On Chelyabinsk: I will add buildings in 1.6.

Rocoteh
 
Adler,

Well i opened my mouth about the S-boats before actually playing Germany in 1.5, so will wait until I play it to make any further comment. I had misunderstood that the S-boats had been given a ranged bombardment factor of 20 like a curiser. That was my main objection. A plain old attack factor of 20 is different and not a problem. An S-boat that is essentially a flavor DD type seems no problem. Anyway, I should have known not to comment until I had played Germany in 1.5. I'll see what sort of problems the S-Boats give the US in the game i'm playing now and how many the AI seems to buiild.
 
Bob1475,

"Chinese have stopped the Japanese or rather the Japanese offensive is South towards Australia and via Russian ROP to India. China has not lost a city in 1940. We have held Hong Kong but more because the Japanese did not follow up the attack." Bob1475

That is positive. Maybe the Japanese have not become to powerful.

"Germany has apparently given up attack on France." Bob1475

Germany-AI is still very ineffective.

"Week 22 - Port Moresby falls to the Japanese. I had foolishly reinforced with 6 ANZAC units but Japanese air power eliminated them" Bob1475

Interesting that AI could achieve that!

"Other than a few naval units, no sign of the Americans yet" Bob1475

That is very strange. I will add more Ice-barriers in the East near
Baffin Island. That should stop US-AI from trying the Arctic move.

Its very interesting thay you are able to control the subs.

On the Marines: I will consider it.

Overall your strategic situation looks good.

Thank you and welcome back.

Rocoteh
 
ric ricardo,

"now with the small biq file, do i put it under C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios\WW2-Global or C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios" ric ricardo

The biq-file should be in "C:\Program Files\Infogrames Interactive\Civilization III\Conquests\Scenarios".

Rocoteh
 
allin1joe said:
Well, for starters, it's more boring :) In 1.3, I was able to take my 2 Marines and go after the Japanese islands. I don't dare do that in 1.5. Instead, I wrote off the Phillipines, and put my fleet into a defensive position until the mainland is capable of better production.

Other then that, my strategy will remain the same. Concentrate 100% on improving my mainland focusing on universities/banks first. Once those are done, I'm moving over to factories/plants. Only after a city has all of it's improvements am I building units from it. I probably won't even be ready for Mexico until later 1940.

allin1joe,

However its maybe more realistic now.

I think its a good idea to build up the forces like you do and wait
with the offensive moves.

Rocoteh
 
Fast attack craft are built for coastal fights. Attack fast and retreat even faster. Hit and run. So they can´t have great values in attack and defense but in bombardment So a bombard value of 20 is okay. Also they are very good suited for their role. However I doubt AI could handle them...
The US had used PT boats quite effectively as well as the Brits their MTB and even the Italians their S boats. So I suggest to give them all these boats. Also indeed I wonder if AI uses them well.

Adler
 
antoine said:
Great Britain Emperor 1.4 week 19 1940

- Never lost any city

- I have conquered Spain, Lisbon, Thailand, half Mexico, Sicily, Tripoli, El Agheila and some japanese cities taken to Dutch.

- I have the technological lead with land 41 and sea 41 in 6 turns.

- i have 150+ workers which I think is a minimum for Great Britain

- Germans have taken Paris, Lyon and Brest

-Germany and SU are best friends of the world and have an ROP from the start ! ( as in all my Allies games )

- Now I'm concentrating on building some amphibious assault forces to prepare a revenge in Pacific where I have moved most of my navy

- only 1 city razed : Djibouti

Military

Russia : No significant forces but 66 HMG.

Japan : No signifiacant forces but 79 inf and 49 type 99 hmg + fortress

Germany : 3 armies, 28 88, 17 IIIe, 16 SS inf, 49 germ inf

US : 15 1919 hmg, 13 marines, 77! US infantry

---> Now, AI seems to build infantry with high priority ?


- Think each civ should have some free workers from the start as AI doesn't build them ( less than in normal conquest games ? ) .
week 19 1940 : Germany and Italy 0 workers, Us : 17, Japan : 9, SU : 32.
As GB, I'm everywhere and I can say you that they don't build improvements, not even a mine for NY or Los Angeles !
The German roads I bomb on turn 1 are still not repaired same as for polution in Germany.

- What's the use of combat engineer as they build at the same rate than workers ?


Regards

antoine,

Thank you for the report.

It seems that you have a very good start for your playtest.

Despite the high cost AI build HMG. Its possible I remove these units
in version 1.6. I think US-AI build a huge number of infantry due to
the fact that this is motorized units with move 2 and blitz.

On free workers: I will consider it.

On Combat Engineer: Its a flavour unit.

Thank you and welcome back.

Best Regards

Rocoteh
 
Top Bottom