1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

BTS 1939 scenario feedback

Discussion in 'Civ4 - World War II 1939 Mod' started by Ahriman, Sep 2, 2009.

  1. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Gunpowder units can't actually be loaded into trucks.

    Another bug: the anti-air artillery can instantly remove all city defenses; its bombard ability is set way too high (should anti-air artillery even be able to bomb city defenses?)

    Starting (soviet) air force feel too large; it feels too easy to bomb everything like crazy from the air; the soviet airforce was never really that significant in determining the outcome of battles.
    The mighty soviet bombers allowed me to blitz Poland by October week 2; I got everything except Poznan and Cracow (which Germany snagged) suffering only minor losses.

    It really would feel more accurate if the major DoWs were hard-coded by event (especially Germany vs USSR), but leave the minor powers to be influenced by in-engine diplomacy as normal.

    Why don't early artillery have a withdraw chance?

    Why is a T-26 (light tank 2) weaker than a BT-7 (light tank 1)?
     
  2. asioasioasio

    asioasioasio Fallout Scrubber

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Poland, EU
    The unit can withdraw if it has 2 or more moves - it's how it works in civ :(

    I agree with the rest. Decreasing tanks and bombers would make economy in better shape for Soviet Union and harder to destroy Poland.
     
  3. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I don't know what you are talking about. In civ4, siege units like catapults and typically have a built-in withdraw chance. They are low strength, but you can use them to attack a stack and have a chance of them surviving by withdrawing, so you can use them to soften up a stack before attacking with other troops.

    Withdraw chances are completely unrelated to the number of movement points that a unit has.

    * * *

    The starting german army and german industrial capacity need to be strong enough so that they actually pose a real threat; it should be *hard* as the soviets to hold back germany.

    I think you need to cut way back on the starting Soviet army and/or boost the German starting army. As the soviets I have easily wiped Poland and finland and just started a war with Germany, and will beat them easily.

    I would also put Italy into permanent alliance with Germany from the start.

    I would also remove "require complete kills" from the default scenario options. Its just confusing when civs hang around because they have an unkillable spy somewhere.
     
  4. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Its March 1940 and as Soviets I'm at the gates of Berlin (see screenshots).

    Some ideas for weakening the Soviets:

    a) Radically cut back their airforce.
    b) Make workers much more expensive (like +300%) to make it a very expensive proposition to improve all the vast tracts of soviet land.
    c) Reduce the size of their starting army and push it even further east to make blitzing poland harder.
    d) Make artillery tougher, so the enemy AI has anti-stack units that it can use to punish your mega-stacks.
    e) Poland starts with large stacks on its western front to fight the germans, but small ones on its eastern front making soviet conquest easy.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    You should change the order of the civs. Germany should be going first on the first turn. As it stands, Poland is going first, and France is going before Germany. The German fleet off casablanca gets destroyed on the first turn, and Poland kills several german units and workers, and many other naval units get killed by the poles and french.

    Just start the navies in port to prevent first turn annihilation.

    * * *

    Transport ships should be unable to attack.

    * * *

    Fighter aircraft should not be doing collateral damage with their bombardment.

    * * *

    The British strating airforce should not be significantly tougher than the germans; trying to blitz france shoudl not result in the german airforce being destroyed by the brits.
     
  6. Narn

    Narn Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2006
    Messages:
    217
    each nation has so many units. perhaps reduce each civs units by at least 20%?

    perhaps make france a bit stronger against the germans as they got wiped out quite quickly in my game

    oh perhaps make the carriers carry at least 5 planes each, with 3 they're quite weak
     
  7. LoneTraveller

    LoneTraveller Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Montreal, Quebec
    Yes but no at the sametime. The Soviet Airforce was very very large in numbers but the problem was that their quality of aircraft and pilot skills sucked so much that the LuftWaffe always neutralized them in most battles .


    The thing is that when a country is invaded on 2 fronts...especially 1 after the other...it is rare that it would manage both sides well enough to win...let alone survive.


    DoWs ? I do not know that abbreviation...please explain.



    Hmmm...cause they lack the motorized skill to do so ? I don't know...I'm saying my opinion.

    I agree. the T-26 had better armor and firepower.
     
  8. LoneTraveller

    LoneTraveller Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Montreal, Quebec
    I don't see how this effects the game overall...

    France was a WW2 absent. Why ruin a good thing ?


    I'm a fan of the SNES game "Pacific Theatre of Operations II" and in that game they had a max of 4 fighter/bomber unit. Why not leave it at that number ? 4.
     
  9. LoneTraveller

    LoneTraveller Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Montreal, Quebec
    I see what you mean. I have a distinct feeling that it is cause by the unconscious bias of the ModMaker :)


    I agree for all nations except Germany. After all they decided when the war was gonna start. No ?

    I'm always facinated by the way ppl think that a 20 mm gun on a strafing airplane will do much damage to anything...


    I must agree...especially when they are all based in England. (No Allied airplane had the range to get there before the P51 Mustang)
     
  10. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Then you either need to make their aircraft *really* inferior or reduce their number
    But reducing their number will work better, because their airforce makes it too easy for them to steamroll the Poles and Finns.
    Soviets should be having to use infantry waves and artillery, not just airbombing. Soviets should lose the air superiority war pretty badly vs the Germans.

    I have no problem with Poland getting crunched quickly, but Germany should get most of it. As it is, Germany has to fight for it whereas Soviets can blitz pretty easily.
    Sorry, Declarations of War.

    In vanilla civ *catapults* have a high withdraw chance, so do cannons, so to trebuchets.
    Withdraw chance on siege units isn't representing mobility when its on siege units, its just a helpful mechanic to represent ranged fire as an anti-stack weapon, but without losing the unit every time. But unlike a ranged bombardment ability, the artillery units still gets heavily damaged, so it makes an artillery-backed advance powerful but slow, you can't blitz because you have to wait for the arty to heal.
    It works well in vanilla, and the AI understands it.

    And a slow advance (other than for poland) is what you *want* here, when the turn length is a week. It should be *hard* to capture cities.

    Fighters should be air superiority fighters, their only real function is to take out enemy fighters so that tactical and strategic bombers can actually kill stuff. The fighter bombard should be pretty weak.
     
  11. asioasioasio

    asioasioasio Fallout Scrubber

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Poland, EU
    T-26

    9.6 tonnes (10.6 short tons)
    Armour 6 mm (0.24 in) bottom, 6–10 mm (0.24–0.39 in) roof, 15 mm (0.59 in) hull (front, rear, sides) and turret
    Primary
    armament 45 mm 20K mod. 1932/34 tank gun (122 rds.)
    Secondary
    armament 7.62 mm DT tank machine gun (2,961 rds.)

    BT-7
    Weight 11.5 tonnes
    Armour 6–13 mm
    Primary
    armament 45-mm Model 32 tank gun
    Secondary
    armament 7.62-mm DT machine gun

    So theire similliar in power - slight bonus to strenght it's because it's speed - it's easier to attack from surprise, encircle enemy, got away.



    Yup I'll leave mussolini as second the rest is doable

    I agree with both - need fixing. I'll also increase the strenght of fighters a bit to shoot more bombers.
     
  12. asioasioasio

    asioasioasio Fallout Scrubber

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Poland, EU
    Yeah I'll reduce 15 -30% depending on wich nation it is.

    I'll probably change weeks to months - the timeline should fit better than.


    I think it's strong enough - much machinegunners wich means they will defend own contry rather than make second front in Europe in September 1939.

    Improved carriers carry more planes.
     
  13. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    I don't really care *which* is stronger, but the one with higher tech requirement should be better. If you have a light tank 1 and a light tank 2, the light tank 2 should be better.

    As it is though, you have a mod that is stuffed full of units, but with no significant differences between them. There is no real strategic incentive to build anything but your highest strength fighter and tank, so the rest are just clutter.

    If you want people to build multiple units, then you need to distinguish them more. You can have a (very) short range fighter with high strength and a longer
    You can have a high strength tank with 2 moves and a lower strength tank with 3 moves and a withdraw chance.

    Why would you ever build the armored cars in this mod?

    I'd also increase the rock/paper/scissors aspect more. Each unit needs to have a role, something it is good at. So artillery can be anti-machine gun for eg.
     
  14. asioasioasio

    asioasioasio Fallout Scrubber

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,058
    Location:
    Poland, EU
    They require the same tech
    The name is a little bit confusing but it's how i managed to do unique units.
    T26 is cheaper and weaker so i think it's ok - you can still choose wich one you want to produce.
     
  15. primordial stew

    primordial stew Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,219
    Location:
    a puddle
    Tremendous work asioasioasio :goodjob: Some substantial tweaking is in order though!

    The army compositions have far too much armor in them. I'm not sure what the right % is, but maybe 25% tops is reasonable to shoot for? Armor hammer cost and GPT upkeep need to be higher.

    The early AT infantry graphic should be an AT gun. Till late 42 there were only AT rifles, but these wouldn't be independent units, so only AT guns make sense. The strength is fine. In 43 the PIAT, Panzerfaust, and Bazooka started to appear so the graphic would be ok then.

    The Finnish Jaeger is too weak. Consider that the Finns were able to send the Soviets packing during the winter war. Right now the Soviets start with way too much quality armor, and the Finns are too weak. Perhaps rename the Jaeger to Sissi (commando ski troops) and give them substantial forest defense?

    In the 1939 scenario all 6 of the Waffen SS units are already built. Historically there was only 1 regiment and this time.

    The US Army was tiny in 1939. It took time to ramp up production. It might help to give them some sort of pacifist civic that gives -80% military production to keep them out for a while.


    I can help with doing some python if you want. For example I would like to create a new promotion for the Soviets that gives -15% strength (or so). This represents the purges Stalin made to the army and it could be removed with a series of either Soviet specific techs, or just triggered when the Soviets discover some of the existing techs, or even based on the game turn. Whatever works best.

    Another idea is to give the Soviets a promotion that gives -15% strength and -2 mobility on the first turn of Germany declaring war on them (and not the other way around). The represents the miserable response to the initial invasion.

    Similarly some sort of "winter war" promo could be given to the Germans in Russia (ie based on a unit's x,y) during the winter 41 months. Winter 42 would be a similar, but less debilitating promo.
     
  16. wotan321

    wotan321 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    1,218
    Location:
    NC, USA
    I'd like to see ships cost a LOT more than other units, they need to be very expensive and therefore very valuable. It would make control of the air and control of the oceans more interesting. It would be more realistic, and more fun.

    As for the pace of getting techs and units.... since there are so many techs, the speed may be necessary given the pace of the game. If it changes that time is moving in weeks instead of months, that would change this problem.
     
  17. Ahriman

    Ahriman Tyrant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    13,266
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Why would you ever want to produce a lower strength tank when you could get a higher strength one at the same tech level?
    A slightly lower hammer cost is not enough of an incentive.

    As I tried to explain above, you have a lot of units here, but without significant variation in purpose or stats.
    There must be something that a particular unit is *better* at than another unit that fills the same role in the same tech level.

    * * *
    The game also seems too armor-centric. I'd suggest giving tanks a large city-penalty, to encourage you to use artillery and infantry for taking cities. Taking cities should be bloody.

    * * *
    I like this, but you'd also need to find some way to stop them from switching out of it until ~Dec 41.

    * * *
    More with the first turn issue: as Britain, I had ~10 naval units (20% of my navy) destroyed by the Germans before taking my first turn. Don't start with naval units within range of each other.

    * * *
    Why does Britain start as non-militaristic military attitude civic? Britain was rearming by 39, surely they should be Defensive?
    You should consider fixing all the civics so that leaders can't change them voluntarily, and then changing them by event on particular turn numbers.
    This would also help with keeping the US low production for a while.

    * * *
    Canada seems to start at war with Italy, but UK doesn't? Historical war start dates aside, fixing Italy/Germany to be a team would make much more sense. Would be a shame to miss out on the north africa wars.
     
  18. makke

    makke Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    165
    Location:
    Finland
    I think the Jaegers are strong enough. Maybe add more jaegers at the start for Finland? I think it was good idea from Asioasioasio to give them snow and ice defence. I think soviets just have to many starting units in the scenario.
     
  19. LoneTraveller

    LoneTraveller Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    283
    Location:
    Montreal, Quebec
    Great work on your mod Asio :D

    I've also have a few comments but I'm unsure where to put them I will post some here :



    I have noticed a maximum limit on the amount of damage inflictable to enemy ships. I don't believe that there should be one.

    During war time, I'm not convinced that an enemy air force would spend time and resources bombing a cow pasture...

    While playing Germany I noticed that Italy produces military equipment for them. I have always had the impression that Italy lacked the industrial and technical know-how to develop adequate military equipment to survive in both world wars but could just be me.

    When I opened up the "corporation screen" I saw that there is the Confusionism icon present. I think that the Assets/res/fonts/Gamefont_75.tga file has not been edited.

    The odds for combat success are strange. If the odds are below 75% I have never won even once.

    The strength of ships are unbalanced :

    - The sub and transport are the same but this doesn't work. The maximum armament on a transport was .50 caliber MG and some had 3 inch guns. When the u-boats saw that a transport was armed...it just submerged and fired torpedoes.
    - The Destroyers and Battleships' strength are also too closely similar. It is not rare so far that a british destroyer managed to sink a german battleship armed with radar guided 15 inch guns (like they had in real life).
    - Subs should generally have an attack bonus against transports, battleships and carriers. Neither of the latter had Sonar or depth charges.

    I doubt the flexibility of Machine Gun Units to intercept fighter units strafing them.

    France's Army is overly strong and aggressive. I think that their outdated tactics and strategy should be reflected in their attacks and inertia.

    I miss the action button for fighters from RTW when you could specificly attack only other aircraft units. It was perfect for achieving air superiority.

    I have noticed that for some cities a few national wonders state that there are too many built in the city while other national wonders are available in the same city...strange. (IE : check Berlin).

    Tacticly speaking...Germans were masters at crossing rivers even before the amphibious promotion. Perharps reduce their penalty for it ?

    DDT tech/wonder should have an expiration date on it because it is a cancer causing agent.

    -----------

    Here are a few 'suggestions' for adding stuff (most I have already done for RTW) :

    - The Inquisition Mod. I dislike the idea of the Nazi or Commies having conquered so much Democratic cities and letting their political party exist.
    - Sea mines. I'm not sure how to make the AI work them though.
    - Super spies (make them like "OSS" agents who sabotage cities, etc)
    - Nation specific quests. (Germany = Breathing space; Great Britain = Crush German Economic Threat + conquer 0.5 the world; Japan = Take all british, dutch and american colonies : "Asia for Asiatics !", etc)
    - Events triggered by historical facts (Ex : Japan at war with US + US conquers saipan + US has 'advanced bombers'. Damaged US bombers land in Russia, Russian leaders faced with a decision : 1- return the plane and pilots (gives extra diplomatics points) 2-return pilots but keep the planes (+75% of advanced bomber tech cost) )
     
  20. Tigranes

    Tigranes Armenian

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    9,318
    If anyone would merge his Python knowllege with this mod please make France to split into France and Vichi France. I am not sure if it is even possible, though.

    One thing that bothers me is a small Europe. Everything is so congested, I understand that map was done up to scale, but I would not mind to see bigger Europe for a better gameplay.
     

Share This Page