WW2-Global

[eaglefox]

Well, I tried setting the ratio of citizen:military for suppressing revolts to 10:1. I still saw one city razed (This is another scenario by the way, but it should still have the same result in this one). I am not sure if my idea doesn't work or the ratio was still too small. I think the razed city was fairly large. So still more testing is needed.

 

[Adler17]

Hmm. In my game Rio was destroyed. It had a population of about 30. Sao Paulo as last Brazilain city was not razed and had a pop of 28.
So IMO it is perhaps still too few. If you make it perhaps 30 or 40 it might be possible. The disadvantage of having less rebellious people in the town in short times is IMO better than razed cities.

Adler

 

[Adler17]

Week 45 part 3:
PC turn:
The US and Britain cross the new border near Raleigh (South) and Washington. About 250 units are near to cross my border!
Also the Me 262 and FW 190 of my fleet attacking St. Johns can claim 2 resp. 1 further kill.

Adler

 

[Sasebo]

Adler: I am betting the trade wonder cites are also unit producing wonders; I don't think they can perform both functions. I also don't think it is a good idea to get trade wonders other then where they start the scenario; these are invasion beach heads after all.

I'm thinking the higher suppression rate is a good idea too; trying to subdue a british city for example can take forever simply because of their massive cultural lead. There is too much inequality simply based on civ size in that regard. Though it does add more challenge to the axis side...

 

[Adler17]

I know, but I still think it is a good idea.

Adler

 

[eaglefox]

Hmm. In my game Rio was destroyed. It had a population of about 30. Sao Paulo as last Brazilain city was not razed and had a pop of 28.
So IMO it is perhaps still too few. If you make it perhaps 30 or 40 it might be possible. The disadvantage of having less rebellious people in the town in short times is IMO better than razed cities.

Adler

Yes, I too would prefer reduced rebellion compared to razed cities. Most rebellions in WWII were quelled by a few garrisoned divisions anyway, so it doesn't matter.

 

[eaglefox]

Adler, Sasebo:
If you guys are testing my idea about cit:mil ratio, please also try to find out if it affects the AI unit production by any chance. Although it shouldn't, you never know.

 

[eaglefox]

I am seriously hoping this works, cause then Rocoteh won't have to create wonders for each city. That'll cut his work and reduce the loading time a bit.

 

[Adler17]

Week 46:
Albany, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Raleigh and Columbia were taken. Also heavy fightings in North America. All in all I lost 50 units- and destroyed 418 enemies. Not counting the bombardment of St. John. Also after long shelling and bombing Hallifax is mine.
Also I have a few points:
1. You need a strong army of several hundred units of the Panther and Tiger I + II tanks to invade North America. Otherwise you can forget it.
2. The British and US infantry has a movement of two. Why? Also the US marines are multiple times built. They are very strong and I think they are a bit too strong. I think at least the movement of 2 should be reduced.
New BB: (thought I wasn´t one producing any more) Dietrich von Bern
I do have a reserve now of 43 Panther, which are not used. I decided not to attack Cincinatti but to wait for the counter strike of the Allies.

PC turn:
My FlaK shot down over North America 3 planes but several other were unfortunately successful. I need more planes, so I have to say that it is nearly a must to take at first St. Johns.
Also the British retreated their forces near Toronto to cross the border between Halifax and Augusta. A nice try for the AI, but here I do have planes. Some of my carrier are here. And I can say it is really a need to have about hundred fleet carrier. You need them.
Also you need an airbase on Greenland to transfer small range planes like Ju 87.

Adler

 

[Adler17]

eaglefox, when I ended my game I will make a break in playing WW2 Global. However that does not mean I will stay away here. I will discuss, but I won´t test it in this scenario, but perhaps in another one. However if so I let you know the results.

Adler

 

[Sasebo]

Adler: UK and US infantry in particular were heavily motorized(jeeps, trucks, halftracks) by the middle of the war, and thus they get the movement rate of 2. Rocoteh used to have them start the scenario that way, but given the need for an industrial build up this way makes more sense.

US marines are indeed powerful, but not so bad in my opinion. Compared to high end tanks they are not so impressive,and they were quite well-equipped overall.

 

[Morphling]

Is it normal to lose 40 stukas to the sam in Leningrad with only 4 coming trough?

 

[Adler17]

Yep. That´s why I used artillery to kill the fortresses in towns. That´s why I think artillery should have still lethal land bombardment. Perhaps more planes, too.

Adler

 

[WVCivnut]

My thought on bombardment:

When artillery had lethal bombardment, you could take a city too easily. A good tactic now is to bombard the fortresses down to one HP each then destroy them with Stukas. I have taken Strassborg, Odessa, Sevastipol, & Rostov doing this. I lost maybe 6 planes in all. The key might be to place radar towers near the front as you progress -- those Russian POWs are good for something.

 

[Adler17]

In that cases it works indeed. However not at St. Petersburg and Moscow. The air defense there is too strong.

Adler

 

[Morphling]

Maybe there is a bug at Moscw at my game,i was suprised from the beginning,how easy it was to take it.The thing with St.Petersburg is whole differnent the first 30 stukas where all shot down,so you hae to atellery bombard it to 1 hp and then send the brave panzers in does this work?

 

[Baldurslayer]

Aloha,

I use both tactics yet since I don't build any new arty (arty makes taking cities too easy regardless of the ability to kill or not) stukas and capital sips are my preferred way to go. Another result of these tough fortresses is that I avoid them and focus on the weak spots in order to outflank them (just like in real Blitzkrieg or the Soviet equivalent Deep Battle). This means I can not head straight for Moscow but head for the Ural first in order to take Moscow from the east - again blitzkrieg doctrine! In deity the t-34s punish any mistake you make and wave after wave of Soviet units keep on coming.

With the upgradeable German medium tanks (PzIII and PzIV) to a Pz IV-H one tends to become too powerful.

Drushba

 

[Adler17]

Erm, the Pz IV F2 is not upgradeable to IV H. That´s another bug.

Adler

 

[Adler17]

Week 46:
It is nice to have sea superiority. So I could bomb the British forces attacking be at August with bombs and shells. 23 enemy units destroyed. In the South near Richmond I did the same with artillery and then attacked the weakened US forces. I lost only one unit and destroyed also about 30 units.
After hard fights and some losses, among the Königstiger (ouch), I took Ottawa and Montreal. Now the enclosed British units. 36:5 for me.

PC turn:
Massive US bomber attacks. Where are my planes? I have to take St. Johns AFAP. There a British KGV class BB appreared (which I just sank with the loss of only one Uboat!). Also mostly British offensive near Ottawa and retreat near Quebec.



Adler

 

[Baldurslayer]

Erm, the Pz IV F2 is not upgradeable to IV H. That´s another bug.

Adler

Aloha,

Well it sue is upgradeable in my game and I did not mess with the units. Perhaps you can not upgrade them in North America since you lack the resources? Were you saying it is a bug because of the upgradability?

III E -> III G
III G -> IV H
III H -> IV F2
IV F2 -> IV H

Once one researches the IV H you have hundreds of them at your disposal, no need to build the Panther anymore.

Drushba