New World War II Scenario

[BKA]

Hi Eivind and Archer,

Since there has not been so great interest in signing up as playtesters, I have deceided just to upload the files here at the forum. Anyone who feels for it can freely download it but I still would be glad to get some feedback. So here goes:

Regards

BKA

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/AWAW.zip

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/Patch.zip

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/Sound1.zip

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/Sound2.zip

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/Sound3.zip

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/Sound4.zip

 

[Eivind IV]

Where is the *.scn-file?

 

[BKA]

Whooooooooooops, here it is.

 

[insurgent]

I'm afraid I don't have time - too busy with my own project. Good to see you back, however! Looking forward to playing your scenario!

Nåja, jeg har forresten ledt efter betydningen af det citat du har i din 'sig' - men jeg kan simpelthen ikke. Kleckern betyder såvidt jeg ved noget med at spilde, ikke? Klotzen? Jeg har spurgt tyskkundige omkring mig om det, men jeg kan simpelthen ikke finde de... Jeg har også læst en masse Guderian-citater, men kan ikke finde det... Det holder mig vågen om natten , hvad betyder det?

 

[Eivind IV]

Noen har lite å gjøre i sin fritid

 

[insurgent]

Excusez-moi!? Jeg er WWII-nørd - jeg må vide det!

 

[Eivind IV]

BKA, noe jeg la merke til sånn med én gang; Early Bomber er egentlig en modell av den tyske langdistansejageren ME-110. Litt rart å bruke en jager som bombefly.

Som nordmann - og WWII-nørd ( ) , kunne jeg ønske å se at det var flere transport ships i de norske havnene. Den norske marinen bidro i svært stor grad til den britiske dominansen til sjøs under krigen, spesielt til konvoiferdselen mellom Storbritania og USA.

Den røde armé har også tyske hjelmer på hodet, hvordor det? Bortsett fra slike småting ser det meget bra ut!

 

[Eivind IV]

Insurgent, det tok meg to sekunder å finne ut hva "Klotzen, nicht Kleckern" betydde. Det beviser at mine nørdesanser er mye sterkere enn dine Det betyder "Boot'em, don't spatter'em".


Kilde

 

[de Montcalm]

Hi.
Here's yours truly: De Montcalm
back on track

I would like to say that perhaps China should have more inf so they held on some time before they crumble. They had a large army but they are underdeveloped and only infantry. Some countries tried to hold on just with numbers alone. Well it didn't work

 

[Yop73]

Could you guys please speak English.

 

[BKA]

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your feedback already. I am writing everything down, small or huge. I am sorry, I am aware that there are a LOT of unsolved problems yet to be corrected, but I really couldn't wait any longer to get some response. I plan to upload updated files along the way.

Yeah Eivind, the early bomber was a bit of a "quick" solution. It will hopefully be replaced very soon. Concerning the convoys, I will think about it. Should they then be British or Norse (Minor Allied) ?

Hi Insurgent. Yeah, it's nice to be back. Looking forward to play your scenario!
As Eivind already has explained, the signature means "Boot'em, don't spatter'em". Just love the simplicity in that one.

Oh, nice to see you here also Montcalm. Got the same feedback from Morten Blaabjerg concerning the week Chinese resistance. Note taken.
BTW: I have mailed you the map.

Regards

BKA

 

[insurgent]

Originally posted by Eivind IV
Insurgent, det tok meg to sekunder å finne ut hva "Klotzen, nicht Kleckern" betydde. Det beviser at mine nørdesanser er mye sterkere enn dine Det betyder "Boot'em, don't spatter'em".


Kilde

Doh! I asked around, I asked two teachers of German, I looked it up in a dictionary, I tried Altavista's Babelfish. The one thing I didn't consider was making a "Klotzen nicht Kleckern" (with asterisks) search on Google! Your powers are much stronger than mine! I bow in the dust at your wisdom!

BKA: Looked a little at the graphics, they are relatively good (even though I belong to "the other side" )...

 

[Eivind IV]

I especially loved the Tiger I

 

[Eivind IV]

Concerning the convoys, I will think about it. Should they then be British or Norse (Minor Allied) ?

You could make it through events. If the Axis capture Oslo, the Minor Allies would then automaticly be on the British side. To make it historical accurate you could give the British player some transport ships, since they sailed together with the Roayal Navy.

 

[Eivind IV]

I would like to say that perhaps China should have more inf so they held on some time before they crumble. They had a large army but they are underdeveloped and only infantry.

I would say that the same should go for France in this scenario. They are protected with only one inf. in each city, they are doomed to fall. Polend is also very porely defended.

 

[de Montcalm]

Poland was poorly defended in reality why do you think the Germans ran over them without any troubles
But you're right regarding France they need much more soldiers. Because in reality they had a large army almost matching the army of Germany they only lost because they had older leaders which tried to guide their army the same way they did in WWI: sitting there in their trench-defences and waiting. Unfortunately for them the Germans had young leaders which mastered the new trend of this time-period: mobile warfare.

 

[Eivind IV]

The Germans ran over Polend because they had a modern military force. They had modern armor and a modern air force. They had superior tactics and superior equipment. But the Polish military was not weak. They had a huge army, but they were attacked by Germany in the west and the Soviet Union in the East. They had no chance of surviveing.

BKA, I understand why you have balanced it the way you have - you probably want it to happen the historical line, with Germany rolling their panzer over Europe. In reality France and Polend had a huge army, and maybe they could have survived if they had chosen a different way (well, maybe not Polen, they where doomed anyway )

 

[BKA]

Hi guys,

Yeah, it's a tricky balancing question. But I think we all know that winning in Civ2 is not a major problem on any level in singleplayer regardless of playing Germany, Britain, Minor Allies etc. and with their respective strengths and weaknesses. I have thought much about this, and I know that I maybe will bolster the French, Japanese and Polish forces etc. But my hope is of cause that this scen also will be played in multiplayer mode, which was my original intension. This way every aspect will be much more balanced and I think the initial Minor Allied weaknesses could be turned (or at least be utilized more effectfully) with carefull mangement and better strategies than the CPU.
Therefore I plan to make a singleplayer and multiplayer version. Singleplayer should then face much harder resistance than the multiplayer version playing let's say Germany. But it's still an idea.

About the units, thx guys! I also think the Tiger came out perfectly! My secret ambitious plan is to try and rescale all the less succesfull Koba units (like the PzIII, MatildaII, M3A1) so that the units will stand out crisp and uniformed).

Regards

BKA

 

[EmuGod]

I tried Italy, Japan and the USSR. I found the game wasn't bad but Spain shoudl be neutral and not part of the Minor Axis. Franco was not going to join the Axis after the war in Spain. Also, Bangkok appears is placed and Indo-China should be part of the Minor-allies.

 

[Archer 007]

Just go it. I've haven't been home.