Need WW2 Help for scenario!

Soviet Generals :

I just give the 6 whose armies actually invaded Germany at the end (in order from North to South though that won't be needed I guess).
Wassilevski
Rokossovski
Joukov (Jukov)
Koniev
Petrov
Malinovski
Tolboukine

Well, I gave Vichy and Free French before so

Italy

Graziani (Lybia campaign)
Marshall di Bono (first in Abyssinia/Ethiopia)
espc Marshall Badoglio who made a new government against Mussolini in July 43. He is the one who conquered successfully Ethiopia.

Japan
Admiral Tojo (first minister)
Admiral Yamamoto (Midway)


Nationalist China
capital Tchoung King from 1937 until the end of the war against Japan.


Communist China
Tchou Teh, Zhu En-Lai, forget Wang Tsing Wei (my mistake, he worked with the Japanese during the war, based in Nankin (Nanjing).
 
French Indochina should be Japanese (Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia)! They were taken over by the Japanese in July-September 1941.

Inonu sounds right to me. Spelling might be off, not sure.
 
Zukhov I believe you mentioned before, he was commander of the 1st Ukranian Front in 1945.

Soviet Army Groups were called Fronts. :) There's at least one more guy you're missing too from that list, can't remember his name (begins with C).

English spelling would be Chungking for Tchoung King, just as FYI.

American Generals:

Eisenhower
Bradley
Patton
Patch
Hodges
Clark

British Generals/Field Marshals:

Montgomery
Alexander
Wavell

American Admirals:

Nimitz
Spruance (spelling)
Fletcher ?
 
Originally posted by Procifica
Procifica-

Turkey was neutral, but since it is a relatively large country I want to have it seperate so if Russia, for example, declares war on Turkey then they aren't also at war with all the other neutrals. But the neutrals like Switzerland who will have only one or two cities can be lumped.

Thailand might be interesting but just for the sake of promoting Japanese attack on Burma and the rest of South Asia they will be part of Japan.

The same situation for Canada and Australia - if they were seperate civs, they wouldn't be able to use British transports or shelter behind British navy, plus they could declare peace seperately from Britain (which could have happened but was very unlikely).

Iran is currently British but they could become neutral if that would be more accurate.

China - I looked that up afterwards and Mao controlled only the area around Yenan (North-central China), having been pushed out of the more important areas by Chiang, until after the Japanese withdrew, when his forces captured most of the North of China. I will put a bunch of rebels around to simulate his influence.

Tunisia (and Algeria) are controlled by Vichy, along with French Morocco. I've got Tripoli, Benghazi and Tobruk under German control. Tripoli could be Italian, but since Germany was the major player in North Africa, it could be more accurate if it was German. Otherwise, it could be Italian and the two captured cities German.

South America - I don't expect much fighting to go on down there so I have kind of lumped them together with the allies. Brazil is American, the Free French have Cayenne (French Guyana) as well as Port-au-Prince and Martinique in the Caribbean, Britain has Georgetown (in Guyana) and the rest are neutral.

Rocoteh-
I'm using my world map in which Europe is enlarged a bit.
And thanks for the generals!

Loulong-
Thanks for the info!
Free France's capital is currently Brazzaville because that's where de Gaulle set up his first base (besides London, that is unfortunately already taken).

Syria and Lebanon - check.

All Balkan states are German occupied except Italian Albania.

Procifica again-
I want to keep the loading time down because I already shudder to think how long it will take. That's why I'm reluctant to put in too many neutral countries like Argentina as seperate nations. As it stands Argentina is with the neutrals but if the loading time is still okay I might add them after. Afghanistan is also neutral.

LouLong again-

All of French Indo-China was taken by Japan before the start date of this scenario.

Gabes it is. And Malta is already in, it will definately be an important city.
And thanks for the Turkish leader and the generals.

For China I'm keeping the British spellings so it'll be Chungking.

Procifica -
Thanks again for more generals, don't forget MacArthur for America!


Okay, now about units. How abundant should Anti-tank and flamethrower troops be (right now I'm not putting in very many) and should China have any Cavalry or should it be just plain troops. Also what was Italy's tank situation?
And should Djibouti be Vichy or Free French? Also Madagasgar, it was Vichy right?

Also here's a scenario making question: can I give techs to a civ outside of the four starting techs? Or do I have to screw around with the tech tree?
Click to expand...
 
If you want to promote Japanese attack on Burma and Southeast Asia, put a few Japanese units in Malaysia, which bordered part of Burma on the south end. They did invade Malaysia the same day as Pearl Harbor was bombed.

Canada and Australia does make sense from your point of view.

Iran is a large country too...if you want to parcel Iran out, give the northern half to the Soviet Union, as by 1941 the Soviet Union and the British had divided Iran into spheres of influence (though not formally occupied).

Mao, don't forget was technically allied with the Chinese Nationalist forces during WWII...they probably should just have separate units.

Tripoli should be Italian, as should Benghazi and Tobruk. These were all a part of Libya, which was Italian. I can't remember though if the German/Italian Armies had re-taken Tobruk by December, 1941 or not, it might be British at that time. (will check)

Italy actually had an entire army in Africa (about 8 to 10 divisions), while Germany only had an armored corps (about 2 1/2 divisions). So I would say while the Germans had the leadership influence (and better units), the Italians were there in much greater numbers (Italian divisions at that time were larger, at least in Africa).

Brazil shouldn't be "American" per se, for awhile the Brazilian leader had Pro-Axis leanings.

Afghanistan neutral, that's a good idea.

Yes, forgot about MacArthur. Bad mistake there.

Flame throwers were not widely used in WWII. Anti-tank weapons were quite abundant, particularly among the Germans and Russians. Some were self-propelled as well.

Italian tanks just plain suck on the whole. :) Ditto for most of their air force. Italian tanks/air force should be by far the weakest of the major powers.

Djibouti (French Somaliland) I believe was under Italian control. Will check on this.

Madagascar I think was Free French.

Can only start with up to 4 techs per civ.
 
"Also what was Italy`s tank situation?" Yurt

During the whole war Italy never had more than 3
armoured divisions: Ariete, Littorio and Centauro.
 
I believe two of those were employed in North Africa, with the third being stationed in Italy.
 
Originally posted by Procifica
I believe two of those were employed in North Africa, with the third being stationed in Italy.
Click to expand...

Yes, Ariete and Littorio were in North Africa.
Centauro were in North Africa (Tunisia) only a short time.
 
I would argue that Kruschev (sp) should be in as a Soviet leader as he led the defense of Stalingrad and later held enough political clout to become the leader of the country.

Pap
 
I will do that, and I'll also put them in the Philippines (both invaded Dec8)

I'll probably parcel out Iran like you suggested.

Forget the Mao rebels. Speaking of rebels, where should I put them throughout the world? So far all I can think of is some basque rebels in that area of Spain.

I will change all of Libya to Italy. According to the book in front of me the German/Italian forces reached Italy on April 11 1941.

I'll make Brazil a seperate country.

I will keep the number of flame throwers down. The only reason I'm even using them is because the unit was included in the pack. Ditto for the fighters: Germans have Sturmovick, Focke-Wulf 190 and Messerschmidt 262 to choose from.

Only Germany and Russia will start with a significant amount of tanks. Infantry will be changed to have equal attack/defence. Machine gunners are defensive, Flamethrowers offensive and Anti-tanks very offensive but very weak defensively. The German, American and Japanese infantry will have one extra attack. The British one extra defence. Russia's will be weaker on defence but cheaper to build.

I'm pretty sure about Madagascar being Vichy because the British fought a naval battle against them in that area. That may have been before this time period though.
Also I remember seeing that Italy didn't have Djibouti, I'm pretty sure it was controlled by one of the French factions.

Techs- I will have to rework it, don't expect anything fancy.
 
The K guy was not the overall leader of the Stalingrad operation (I'm not even going to attempt the spelling).

The Fw-190 and Me-262 are later generation fighters, just as FYI. The ones that should be initially in would include the Me-109 and the Me-110.

The United Kingdom had a decent amount of tanks in Egypt. The Japanese did use a considerable amount of light tanks in Malaysia.

Anti-tanks should be entirely the opposite...anti-tank guns were almost exclusively used in defense.

German infantry should have at least 2 higher attack. No bonus to Americans. Japanese having 1 extra sounds ok.

British having 1 extra defense...sounds ok.

Russia should have higher HP, and no lowered defense values, as even though they lost alot of units, they were cut-off quite often and were outnumbered initially when Germany attacked. I would give Russian infantry across the board at least 1 extra HP, maybe 2, as they could survive much better than any infantry in the world.

Tanks wise, Germans and Russians are GREATLY superior to anyone else. British tanks up to 1942 are about equal to German/Russian models on defense. American tanks are generally vastly overrated in history. Generally it took 3 to 4 American tanks to defeat 1 German one.
 
Unfortunately I don't have the ME-109 or ME-110 units. So should I just use Sturmovick to start? And speaking of fighters, what should their stats be? Here's what there is as of now:

All fighters have bombard 2 and r.o.f. 1
Fighter (generic) Cost 8, Att 4, Def 3, Range 4 [all except Germany, Japan, America and Britain]
F4F Wildcat Cost 10, Att 5, Def 4, Range 6 [America and Britain]
Fw190 Cost 10, Att 5, Def 4, Range 4 [Germany]
Me262 Cost 10, Att 4, Def 3, Range 7 [Germany]
P38 Lightning Cost 8, Att 4, Def 3, Range 5 [America and Britain]
P51 Mustang Cost 10, Att 5, Def 3, Range 7 [America and Britian]
Sturmovick Cost 8, Att 4, Def 3, Range 5 [Germany]
Zero Cost 8, Att 4, Def 4, Range 4 [Japan]

And the tanks:
I was looking for info on them and I found that the Churchill's max speed was only 15-20 km/h, which is why I only gave it one movement.

Also, I'm currently not using the German UU Panzer. Should I, and if so as what?

All tanks require oil but not rubber (this is not a resource management based scenario)

Tank (generic) Cost 10, Move 2, Att 9, Def 5 [all civs except Germany, Soviets, and America]
Churchill Cost 12, Move 1, Att 14, Def 6 [Britain]
M26 Pershing Cost 12, Move 2, Att 12, Def 6 [America]
Panther Cost 10, Move 2, Att 10, Def 5 [Germany]
T-34 Cost 10, Move 2, Att 10, Def 5 [Russia]
Tiger II Cost 11, Move 2, Att 12, Def 6 [Germany]

I will put tanks in Egypt and the Malaysia area.

The thing with the anti-tank is I don't want it to be a defensive unit because the machine gunner already serves that purpose. Unfortunately I can't make the anti-tank specialize against fast units. I could make it a bombard unit, after all it's just a guy carrying a huge bazooka.

I'll change Germany to +2. Maybe American infantry should be capable of amphibious assault?
The Russian troops are weaker because they were poorly supplied, and I want Germany to have a clear edge against Russia.
 
Tanks: Speed, Max Penetration,Turret Armor Front/Side
and Hull Armor Front/Side

Churchill III 14, 93, 89/68, 81/69.

M26 Pershing 24, 185, 113/76, 89/63.

Panther 28, 188, 115/45, 85/55.(stats refers to G version)

T34/85 33, 139, 90/75, 47/45.

Tiger II 16, 232, 215/80, 155/87.
 
Use the Panzer UU as a Panzer IV, the most numerous of all the German panzers. It sorta resembles it, so it's the best you can do.

Pap
 
Panzer IV though had several forms, just like the T34.

Panzer IVD, IVE, IVF1, IVF2, IVG, IVH were all common at one point or another in WWI after 1939.

Panzer I, II, and III were older models used mainly in Poland and France.

And notice the HUGE difference between the Tiger II (not widely used, though), and the M26 Pershing.

Another common tank for the Germans was the Panther model, these came mainly in Panther D and Panther G.

Tiger I also was widely used. Both the Panther's and the Tiger I came out in 1943, the Tiger II in late 1944.

And please, give the Tiger II better offense AND defense than the Churchhill, as I've stated before, the German tanks were IMMENSELY superior to any allied tank (with exception of Russians). A better soviet tank would be the KV1, KV-85, or the KV2. These are comparable to the German Panther and Tiger tanks. No American or British tank equaled any of these.

Russian troops were hardly poorly supplied...the Germans were the ones without winter clothing! The Russian Infantry was well-equipped, though to start with they did have a bit inferior weapons. I'd also like to point out, that on December 6, 1941, the Russians started a HUGE counter-offensive first around Moscow, then on the other fronts as well, pushing the Germans back as much as 200 miles in places. German casulties between December and March, 1942 were over 700,000, considerably more than the Russians suffered during the same time period. (though Russian losses from June to December, 1941 were over 2 million, a good number of those prisoners, to the Germans 500,000 or so) The Russians had brought in 100 well-trained, well-armed, Siberian divisions trained to fight in blizzards and winter conditions. I still would give the Russians 1 or 2 extra HP.

Give the Americans a Marine, with amphibious assault.

Anti-Tank was not a bazooka type unit, it was a specialized artillery unit, with armor-piercing shells. The early anti-tank guns came in 37 mm, followed by 50 mm. These were generally ineffective against the 1939/1940ish tanks, but worked well against older models. (examples would be Panzer I, II, and III, while Panzer IV was more resistant) The Germans eventually used their 88 mm anti-aircraft guns as anti-tank weapons, with great effectiveness. Later in the war both the Germans and Russians had anti-tank guns with calibers up above 100 mm. Americans mainly used a 76 mm anti-tank gun. Anti-tank should have bombard, range 1, decent rate of fire. Oh, and keep in mind, there is no way a machine gun of that era can penetrate a tank. :) (at least not effectively)

I'd also like to add that until 1944, German planes were superior to any American built plane, and until the Spitfire came out in the UK, superior to any of those as well.

Think that is enough for now. :)
 
The German bombers weren't superior to anyone.

And only the Fw.190 was superior to the allied planes, until the Spitfire IX came out, and then they were pretty much equal planes. Then when the Fw-190D came out they had the edge again and finally they finished the war with the edge with the Me-262, but they couldn't build them so well because of the bombing.

Pap
 
I meant to say German Fighter planes. I know their bombers sucked. :)

The Me-109/110 was superior to French/British planes till the Spitfire came out in late 1940.

Everyone tends to overrate the Americans in history books, they only won because of much superior numbers. :)

They also couldn't build them very well because of Goering's complete ineptness.
 
Hitler didn't have much direct control over the airforce though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
“Looking for Blender/3D help for Civ VI ancient civ mod”)
Replies
1
Views
170
Shirotora Kenshin
Shirotora Kenshin
C
“Looking for Blender/3D help for Civ VI ancient civ mod”)
Replies
0
Views
72
chrabaszcz6
C
Lord Lakely
Filling in the gaps - Charting the optimal Civ Switches
4 5 6
Replies
113
Views
3K
socratic
S
Blake00
Blake's Scenario Workshop
Replies
8
Views
3K
Blake00
Blake00
The_J
Old World update #133
Replies
9
Views
1K
Dale
Dale
Back
Top Bottom