Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
err... I meant that the changes requested have been made. 1.1 will not be released for a few days or so. When all requests are in ill release that and TGW 2.1chucknra said:
Barbarossa: The War in the East 1941-1945
- Thread starter Sarevok
- Start date
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
but how to simulate it...
hanzguderian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2
This is a fantastic scenario with an appropriate DL time, historical depth and accuracy, no major bugs, and very nice attention to detail. 
I'm looking forward to future versions with even more complexity with diverse units. BTW: I have an extensive library on german military equipment. Feel free to drop an email if you have specific questions. Good work!
I'm curious about the sound effects used. The Messerschmitt's had a unique resonant sound and Junker's(Stuka JU87) had a unique whistle, etc. Could this be incorporated into the game?
(Too bad the program doesn't allow for winter weather changes - which was a huge factor in the downfall of Barbarossa and Napolean's invasion.)
-Hanz
I'm looking forward to future versions with even more complexity with diverse units. BTW: I have an extensive library on german military equipment. Feel free to drop an email if you have specific questions. Good work!
I'm curious about the sound effects used. The Messerschmitt's had a unique resonant sound and Junker's(Stuka JU87) had a unique whistle, etc. Could this be incorporated into the game?
(Too bad the program doesn't allow for winter weather changes - which was a huge factor in the downfall of Barbarossa and Napolean's invasion.)
-Hanz
hanzguderian
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2
Read?, I wrote it 
-Hanz
-Hanz
AKauhanen
Civ3 graphics for Civ4
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 103
augurey said:
FANTASTIC IDEA ! Truly briliant. The lend lease wonder should be in Murmansk at the start of the war. It should become obsolite sometech before D-Day, but still it would give Murmansk the strategic meaning it had in reality.
Stalin infact said that the three cities he will not allow to fall at any cost are Moscow, Leningrad and Murmansk.
(And again to brag about Finnish wartime achievements. We cut [pillage] the Murmansk railroad several times delaying equipment coming to the Russian/German frontline. Why Mannerheim diden't just -all together- conquer the landmass effectively isolating Murmansk I really don't know..??? Someone has said Mannerheim was a traitor and had made a pact with the Russians (the country he served formely) not to cut the Murmansk railroad or advance too far. By the way Mannerheim was the only axis military leader not to be called to warcourts after the war. Makes you wonder. But again anything like this can't be implemented by the civ editor..
Grandfather said that the political "we don't want to advance too far" has been excaterated the men on the front according to him were full of revenge feeling because the soviet occupation and the last soviet invasion. They wanted to go to Leningrad, the Russian resistance had totally fallen, they were finding abondoned machineguns, mortars and even some artillery left behind as the Russians fled. According to him it was a shock not to take apart of Leningrad and move the troops indoors. They were in fact at visial distance of Leningrad but ordered to fall back (even without Russian resistance??) and to fortify positions in the forest were the Finnish army waited for the rest of the war years. It would be tremendeus if this could be implemented in the scenario. The risk is making Finland too powerful and they will take attack Leningrad, too weak and they will be conquered fast by a smart human player using the Russian railroad network to bring a lot of units fast. The Finnish ski Jaeger divisions were in fact not as good in defencive battles because they had less mortars and heavy weapon support comparing to the Finnish infantry divisions. (I think their defencive rating should be lowered to make it more realistic
) But good tactics, veteran skill, fast moving, great morale, and ok equipment made them good in attacking. (In my own version I have attacking twelve and thinked it was much but when I looked at the attack rating German infantry have Im unsure. Maybe its at a realistic level.. Have to wait what other people say.. 
) Hitler infact said if there was as much Finnish as there are Germans we could conquer the World. And Mannerheim replied that if there was as much Finnish as there is Germans, We Finnish would conquer the World
(and I think he is right !
) hanzguderian said:
Western Europeans always undermine the significance of cold !
They think they know what cold is. They have no idea. I really do mean thundra should have a defencive bonus of 40%. I really do mean it.And all armor, wheeled transports and artillery in the scenario should be WHEELED. You can't take armor in real live to mountain without road or well you can but it's very difficult. Only infantry can fight in difficult terrain without roads. Why isen't artillery *wheeled* in the scenario ?
I corrected the mistakes in the map in Finland, but how can I upload the file to you two ? You could have a look at the changes I made and decide do they make the map more realistic looking or not.
Finally made some time to tinker around with some actual playing.
Started as the German. Brest-Litovisk, Bialystok, Vilna, Lvov, and Slonim fell before the German assault with heavy casualties to the Russians and moderate casualties to the German. I think it would be tremendously difficult to get to Riga on the first turn, but then it did not fall in the first week either.
29 Russian aircraft were destroyed by German overruns.
Some game notes:
1. Bridges are not working. They should.
2. Road movement of 4 is good.
3. Don't bother bombing cities with your aircraft. You are likely to kill everything but military units. This makes it very hard to destroy the Russian airforce in cities you can't get to.
4. Be very careful on how you lay out your attacks. You want to take the cities first, then destroy the rest of the Russian forces. With the cities in your territory, they won't be moving anyplace fast. Use artillery to soften up city defenders and aircraft on troops in the open. The Stuka's are very deadly. Use them against the elite Russian units to score maximum damage.
5. Kill or wound as many mobile Russian units as you can. They represent the greatest threat to your troops, both when the Russian moves for the first time and later in the game if he gets a chance to withdraw.
6. German TD units that are listed as battalions are actually much more expensive than the Panzer III divisions. Need to fix that I think. I do like the concept of lower hps for them and you may also consider removing the "blitz" ability from them.
I also started as the Russians and basically passed to see what the German AI would do. They captured Biastok and Slonim and destroyed Grodono and Lvov. Several of the German units pulled back. They inflicted moderate casualties and took heavy casualties. The Finns attacked in a couple spots, but appeared to pull back for the most part. The Rumanians did not get very far either and appeared to pull back. The Germans also exclusively bombed Russian cities, reducing Grodono to pop 1 before it was captured. Basically, their attack was rather ineffective.
Some overall suggestions:
1. Set up some static units in the cities, so the Germans and their allies don't pull their forces off the line. By static, I mean good defenders and immobile.
2. Enable bridges to work for both sides.
3. Change costs on German TD battalions and also remove the blitz ability from TD units.
4. Perhaps have some airfields in open terrain with the Russian airforce there. The Germans then have the ability to bomb some of the Russian airforce and destroy it on the ground (as historically happen) instead of having to totally wreck a city before getting to the aircraft.
5. Consider making some of the Russian artillery units to be able to be captured by the Germans to start. (Basically, seperate unit that the Russians can't build anymore). This will have a limited amount of artillery falling into German hands to simulate what happen. The Germans captured vast amounts of Russian artillery and made great use of it, even to the point that they retooled and were producing ammunition for some of it. This might be a "nice to have" detail that is not needed for the scenario, but does add to the realism I think and gives a better "feel" to the scenario.
Overall, I think this is a great first run at a scenario covering this subject matter and many of the proposed changes for 1.1 will make it even better.
Started as the German. Brest-Litovisk, Bialystok, Vilna, Lvov, and Slonim fell before the German assault with heavy casualties to the Russians and moderate casualties to the German. I think it would be tremendously difficult to get to Riga on the first turn, but then it did not fall in the first week either.
29 Russian aircraft were destroyed by German overruns.
Some game notes:
1. Bridges are not working. They should.
2. Road movement of 4 is good.
3. Don't bother bombing cities with your aircraft. You are likely to kill everything but military units. This makes it very hard to destroy the Russian airforce in cities you can't get to.
4. Be very careful on how you lay out your attacks. You want to take the cities first, then destroy the rest of the Russian forces. With the cities in your territory, they won't be moving anyplace fast. Use artillery to soften up city defenders and aircraft on troops in the open. The Stuka's are very deadly. Use them against the elite Russian units to score maximum damage.
5. Kill or wound as many mobile Russian units as you can. They represent the greatest threat to your troops, both when the Russian moves for the first time and later in the game if he gets a chance to withdraw.
6. German TD units that are listed as battalions are actually much more expensive than the Panzer III divisions. Need to fix that I think. I do like the concept of lower hps for them and you may also consider removing the "blitz" ability from them.
I also started as the Russians and basically passed to see what the German AI would do. They captured Biastok and Slonim and destroyed Grodono and Lvov. Several of the German units pulled back. They inflicted moderate casualties and took heavy casualties. The Finns attacked in a couple spots, but appeared to pull back for the most part. The Rumanians did not get very far either and appeared to pull back. The Germans also exclusively bombed Russian cities, reducing Grodono to pop 1 before it was captured. Basically, their attack was rather ineffective.
Some overall suggestions:
1. Set up some static units in the cities, so the Germans and their allies don't pull their forces off the line. By static, I mean good defenders and immobile.
2. Enable bridges to work for both sides.
3. Change costs on German TD battalions and also remove the blitz ability from TD units.
4. Perhaps have some airfields in open terrain with the Russian airforce there. The Germans then have the ability to bomb some of the Russian airforce and destroy it on the ground (as historically happen) instead of having to totally wreck a city before getting to the aircraft.
5. Consider making some of the Russian artillery units to be able to be captured by the Germans to start. (Basically, seperate unit that the Russians can't build anymore). This will have a limited amount of artillery falling into German hands to simulate what happen. The Germans captured vast amounts of Russian artillery and made great use of it, even to the point that they retooled and were producing ammunition for some of it. This might be a "nice to have" detail that is not needed for the scenario, but does add to the realism I think and gives a better "feel" to the scenario.
Overall, I think this is a great first run at a scenario covering this subject matter and many of the proposed changes for 1.1 will make it even better.
hanzguderian said:This is a fantastic scenario with an appropriate DL time, historical depth and accuracy, no major bugs, and very nice attention to detail.
I'm looking forward to future versions with even more complexity with diverse units. BTW: I have an extensive library on german military equipment. Feel free to drop an email if you have specific questions. Good work!
I'm curious about the sound effects used. The Messerschmitt's had a unique resonant sound and Junker's(Stuka JU87) had a unique whistle, etc. Could this be incorporated into the game?
(Too bad the program doesn't allow for winter weather changes - which was a huge factor in the downfall of Barbarossa and Napolean's invasion.)
-Hanz
Thank you.
On sounds effects:
Yes, if unit-creator can manage it.
I agree on the weather aspects.
One can only hope for CIV4.
Rocoteh
Klyden,
Thank you for the comments.
On game notes:
I do agree.
German TD-Battalions are problematic due
to game-engine. Hopefully a better solution
can be found than the currnt one.
Your overall suggestions:
They are relevant.
All should be considered.
Best Regards
Rocoteh
Thank you for the comments.
On game notes:
I do agree.
German TD-Battalions are problematic due
to game-engine. Hopefully a better solution
can be found than the currnt one.
Your overall suggestions:
They are relevant.
All should be considered.
Best Regards
Rocoteh
Sarevok
Civ3 Scenario Creator
Klyden:
1. Alright, how about we add this unit:
City Garrison:
1 ATT 6 DEF 1 MOV, Immobile, cannot disband, -1 HP.
2. Done
3. TD's are meant to be that expensive due to the sheer weight of the tanks in their units, but also to discourage massing them. I will however, remove Blitz.
4. Where would I put these airfields?
5. Ill think about it
Good report
BTW, Should I add a ME-262 and if so what should its stats be?
Ill put the Lend-Lease wonder in Murmansk
1. Alright, how about we add this unit:
City Garrison:
1 ATT 6 DEF 1 MOV, Immobile, cannot disband, -1 HP.
2. Done
3. TD's are meant to be that expensive due to the sheer weight of the tanks in their units, but also to discourage massing them. I will however, remove Blitz.
4. Where would I put these airfields?
5. Ill think about it
Good report
BTW, Should I add a ME-262 and if so what should its stats be?
Ill put the Lend-Lease wonder in Murmansk
LBPB
King
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2003
- Messages
- 643
Just finished the scenario.
It is March 1942 and URSS as fallen... the whole country is under German domination.
Some notes on my game :
1) Great Scenario idea with lot of fun.
2) Stalingrad is the Only city who give me real hard time to conquer. Numerous German divisions dies to crush this city and pass trough the volga river here. (I guess the soviet backup are coming here from the near cocasian cites). btw it's very good balanced here.
3) Moscow is not well enough well defended... Red army doesn't have enough backup forces here. Same for Stalingrad (a piece of cake).
4) I got my research to 80% in the whole game and I've hardly researched half of the first panel (Maybe lesser a bit the cost of the techs).
5) I agree with Klyden, you should park the russian air force on airfield dispatched near the front line, so the Luftwaffe can bomb them on ground.
It is March 1942 and URSS as fallen... the whole country is under German domination.
Some notes on my game :
1) Great Scenario idea with lot of fun.
2) Stalingrad is the Only city who give me real hard time to conquer. Numerous German divisions dies to crush this city and pass trough the volga river here. (I guess the soviet backup are coming here from the near cocasian cites). btw it's very good balanced here.
3) Moscow is not well enough well defended... Red army doesn't have enough backup forces here. Same for Stalingrad (a piece of cake).
4) I got my research to 80% in the whole game and I've hardly researched half of the first panel (Maybe lesser a bit the cost of the techs).
5) I agree with Klyden, you should park the russian air force on airfield dispatched near the front line, so the Luftwaffe can bomb them on ground.
Garrison unit looks good for a start (lot of how well it will work depends on how much the AI pulls back to "defend" its cities).
Airfields could be next to the cities in any current plain square. The idea is to get them out of the city so they can effectively be bombed, should the German elect to do that.
The only thing on the tank destroyers are they are listed as a battalion (which is how the Germans usually deployed them) and they are much more expensive than a panzer division. Does not sound right, but might be one of those things for game mechanics that it works out. The TD units, even with reduced hps, are extremely powerful compared to the early panzer divisions.
Airfields could be next to the cities in any current plain square. The idea is to get them out of the city so they can effectively be bombed, should the German elect to do that.
The only thing on the tank destroyers are they are listed as a battalion (which is how the Germans usually deployed them) and they are much more expensive than a panzer division. Does not sound right, but might be one of those things for game mechanics that it works out. The TD units, even with reduced hps, are extremely powerful compared to the early panzer divisions.
Al Zan
King
Keep up the good guy.Dam good map!
against the comunist empire, like the spanish "Division Azul" (blue division) and a lot of others.
AKauhanen
Civ3 graphics for Civ4
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2003
- Messages
- 103
I hope you two aren't losing your nerves because of my continuing flow of ideas...
1) The Garrison unit could be named "Homeland Defence Force" Or "Homefront Reserve Guard" or "Citizen defence force" ? Or just "reserve infantry division"..
2) Im unsure about this one, but wasen't Tank Destroyers in real live defencive tanks? They had a big gun, low armor, really bad turret manouverability (if at all any turret manouverability angle), they were also slow and plainly just relyied at ambushing the enemy with their big gun and getting to fire first..? Did I remember correctly ??
3) So what if they would be cheaper, lower hit points (like they now have), attack not as good as normal tanks, move 1-2, a ok defence value, range0-1 and ranged damage 2-30 ??
4)Infantry would be more cost effective defending and could be drafted unlike tank destoyers, but some Tank Destroyers could hammer enemy positions with their range 1 big gun but have a ranged damage of 2-4. They would take the role of siege armor. Other tank destroyers would have a range0 and ranged damage of 5-8 and the role of defencive support armor in the game. The later war big behemoth Tank Destroyers could even be so good that they would make a 30-40 ranged damage? So they should be damaged/destroyed from the air.
5) The range0 support armor tank destroyer ( great at ambushing rushing/attacking enemy tanks with their big gun ) would be realistic and fit the role they had in real live (if I remember correctly their role.. ).
6) Did the German "rockethalftracks" have a longer/lower range than normal artillery ? The German "rockethalftrack" is still missing..
7) The scenario still lacks a artillerysystem how you can bombard enemy cities farther than their normal artillery [range2] can counter fire. The idea of a fortress gun would fits that strategic slot but in real history fortressguns/shoregunemplacements were more used on the western front not on the eastern.. and did artillery advance troughout WW2 like rockets did ? If so there could be a range 3 artillery far in the artillery tech tree.
8) Later war German tanks had a superior range. Could a King Tiger fire relatively accurately to 3km ? If so the later war German tanks could have a range1 and small ranged damage to simulate the range advantage against Russian cheaper fast tanks ?
9) When you add the 88mm-antiairguns/Russian anti-air/tankguns will you make them immobile and only movable by trucks ? Or do they have a move of 1? If armor would be *wheeled* then there could be created a new unit type trucks/halftracks.
Trucks/halftracks could only move foot units (only infantry and emplacements guns) Road movement could be changed back to 3 and long distance unit movements would be done by motorized units wich would disembark the units inside before battle (or maybe be ambushed by a invisible special unit..or maybe invisible special units are a bad idea even if they coulden't occupy cities... ) or better yet the convoy could be attacked from air if enemy air reconnecance finds the convoy moving somewhere deep inside your territory..
10) Trucks/halftracks would be wheeled units and must deploy infantry before moving across rough terrain/mountain passes. The infantry could go on foot to the mountain passes and engineer battallions could construct roads so the wheeled units could get across.
11) Trucks/halftracks could carry some immobile invisible "mines" and plant them on key roads or where ever they want. The mines would be invisible, have a range of 0, a ranged damage of 10-20(?), a defence of 1(?) and only one hitpoint.
Only Engineers/Pioneers could see invisible units. If a engineer/pioneer "platoon/regiment/batallion" sees a minefield from the range of 1 squares the minefield could be destroyed by any aircraft/artillery what can kill/destroy units. Or the engineer/pioneer "platoon/regiment/batallion" could make their special 1 range damage 2 ranged attack called disable minefield. Disabling minefields could be really slow but giving a engineer/pioneer "batallion" more ranged damage could make it too good in bombing enemy cities (even if it hasen't mines.. )
12) That could be fixed by combining the heavymortar regiment and the engineer/pioneer "batallion" into one batallion type.. THE SUPPORT BATALLION
They could build roads, bridges, see mines, disable mines and bombard enemy units with heavy mortar fire from the range of 1 with a damage of 8(?).
A Minefield would be disabled in one/two turns of disabling and using a ranged attack against enemy cities/units would be realistic.
13) There could be in the tech tree a path to improve fortifications/mines. This way it would be realistic how the Germans could in real live at the end of the war build really good mines. There could be a path to improve artillery as well.. if you wanted to better your artillerys range/targeting/damage.
14) Germany should have a few universities in some of its cities. Effectively making it little more likely Germany will gain better tech equipment to the end of the war and and Russia have better production capasity. If someone has won Russia by March 1942 there is something really wrong in the balance..
15) It could help if Russia would get more production capasity, really cheap infantry units (like the [6.6.1] conscript infantry costing 30-40) and/or hills under Moscow (so Moscow woulden't fall easily)
16) Even if Germany should start with some universities in its cities. There should be a possibility that the Russian player would builds so much "weapon improvement research facilities" that it could bypass Germany in techonogical development. So many buildings that make researching even faster. Don't lower tech cost. All players keep the research % as high as possible because upgrading with the money is too expensive. So to make a difference in players who want to use resources on research there could be expensive research facility buildings. It would take time to build them from unit production so a new layer of strategy would be created. How much does the player spend valuable constructiontime on research buildings. Please, don't lower tech cost, add buildings
17) Does the Propaganda Office say it makes 3 happiness when you press the right mouse button over it ? If I remember correctly it dosen't.
18) Im having difficulty uploading the map..? It says invalid file type..
Again a lot of new suggestions.. I hope you two like 'em. You two are making a really great scenario.
1) The Garrison unit could be named "Homeland Defence Force" Or "Homefront Reserve Guard" or "Citizen defence force" ? Or just "reserve infantry division"..
2) Im unsure about this one, but wasen't Tank Destroyers in real live defencive tanks? They had a big gun, low armor, really bad turret manouverability (if at all any turret manouverability angle), they were also slow and plainly just relyied at ambushing the enemy with their big gun and getting to fire first..? Did I remember correctly ??
3) So what if they would be cheaper, lower hit points (like they now have), attack not as good as normal tanks, move 1-2, a ok defence value, range0-1 and ranged damage 2-30 ??
4)Infantry would be more cost effective defending and could be drafted unlike tank destoyers, but some Tank Destroyers could hammer enemy positions with their range 1 big gun but have a ranged damage of 2-4. They would take the role of siege armor. Other tank destroyers would have a range0 and ranged damage of 5-8 and the role of defencive support armor in the game. The later war big behemoth Tank Destroyers could even be so good that they would make a 30-40 ranged damage? So they should be damaged/destroyed from the air.
5) The range0 support armor tank destroyer ( great at ambushing rushing/attacking enemy tanks with their big gun ) would be realistic and fit the role they had in real live (if I remember correctly their role..
).6) Did the German "rockethalftracks" have a longer/lower range than normal artillery ? The German "rockethalftrack" is still missing..
7) The scenario still lacks a artillerysystem how you can bombard enemy cities farther than their normal artillery [range2] can counter fire. The idea of a fortress gun would fits that strategic slot but in real history fortressguns/shoregunemplacements were more used on the western front not on the eastern.. and did artillery advance troughout WW2 like rockets did ? If so there could be a range 3 artillery far in the artillery tech tree.
8) Later war German tanks had a superior range. Could a King Tiger fire relatively accurately to 3km ? If so the later war German tanks could have a range1 and small ranged damage to simulate the range advantage against Russian cheaper fast tanks ?
9) When you add the 88mm-antiairguns/Russian anti-air/tankguns will you make them immobile and only movable by trucks ? Or do they have a move of 1? If armor would be *wheeled* then there could be created a new unit type trucks/halftracks.
Trucks/halftracks could only move foot units (only infantry and emplacements guns) Road movement could be changed back to 3 and long distance unit movements would be done by motorized units wich would disembark the units inside before battle (or maybe be ambushed by a invisible special unit..or maybe invisible special units are a bad idea even if they coulden't occupy cities...
) or better yet the convoy could be attacked from air if enemy air reconnecance finds the convoy moving somewhere deep inside your territory.. 10) Trucks/halftracks would be wheeled units and must deploy infantry before moving across rough terrain/mountain passes. The infantry could go on foot to the mountain passes and engineer battallions could construct roads so the wheeled units could get across.
11) Trucks/halftracks could carry some immobile invisible "mines" and plant them on key roads or where ever they want. The mines would be invisible, have a range of 0, a ranged damage of 10-20(?), a defence of 1(?) and only one hitpoint.
Only Engineers/Pioneers could see invisible units. If a engineer/pioneer "platoon/regiment/batallion" sees a minefield from the range of 1 squares the minefield could be destroyed by any aircraft/artillery what can kill/destroy units. Or the engineer/pioneer "platoon/regiment/batallion" could make their special 1 range damage 2 ranged attack called disable minefield. Disabling minefields could be really slow but giving a engineer/pioneer "batallion" more ranged damage could make it too good in bombing enemy cities (even if it hasen't mines..
)12) That could be fixed by combining the heavymortar regiment and the engineer/pioneer "batallion" into one batallion type.. THE SUPPORT BATALLION
They could build roads, bridges, see mines, disable mines and bombard enemy units with heavy mortar fire from the range of 1 with a damage of 8(?).A Minefield would be disabled in one/two turns of disabling and using a ranged attack against enemy cities/units would be realistic.
13) There could be in the tech tree a path to improve fortifications/mines. This way it would be realistic how the Germans could in real live at the end of the war build really good mines. There could be a path to improve artillery as well.. if you wanted to better your artillerys range/targeting/damage.
14) Germany should have a few universities in some of its cities. Effectively making it little more likely Germany will gain better tech equipment to the end of the war and and Russia have better production capasity. If someone has won Russia by March 1942 there is something really wrong in the balance..
15) It could help if Russia would get more production capasity, really cheap infantry units (like the [6.6.1] conscript infantry costing 30-40) and/or hills under Moscow (so Moscow woulden't fall easily)
16) Even if Germany should start with some universities in its cities. There should be a possibility that the Russian player would builds so much "weapon improvement research facilities" that it could bypass Germany in techonogical development. So many buildings that make researching even faster. Don't lower tech cost. All players keep the research % as high as possible because upgrading with the money is too expensive. So to make a difference in players who want to use resources on research there could be expensive research facility buildings. It would take time to build them from unit production so a new layer of strategy would be created. How much does the player spend valuable constructiontime on research buildings. Please, don't lower tech cost, add buildings
17) Does the Propaganda Office say it makes 3 happiness when you press the right mouse button over it ? If I remember correctly it dosen't.
18) Im having difficulty uploading the map..? It says invalid file type..
Again a lot of new suggestions.. I hope you two like 'em. You two are making a really great scenario.
Similar threads
