RtW: Add-On Pack 3 BETA for 3.17

[Joe Harker]

Can we please stop bragging about having the better army,

The point is we couldn't have done it with out each other. None of the Aliies won the war on it's own, the US wouldn't have been able to land and support troops in North France without Britain, Britain couldn't have survived without the help from the Americans, either could the Russians, and British Canadian and American troops landing in North-west France would have faced a huge number of troops without the Russians. We may not have won it without the Poles as they got very far in getting to know the enigma machine.

The main difference between armies is equipment(+tactics) and numbers, always have been, always will be, no individual fighting man from a nation nessarcy was better than another man from another nation

We know British tanks were (certainly in the early years of the war until we got tanks such as the Comet) inferior to American Tanks, who in turn were inferior to German and Russian tanks, however Britain had a very good fighter and a rather poor one at the start of the war were as only Germany had a real equal until the American P-51. However the key for America was how easy it was to build them in huge numbers, America completely dominated in terms of production so they had a lot of decent equipment, giving there average men a better chance in combat than other nations.

 

[ZeeGermans]

I couldn't help but notice the comments about lack of historical accuracy in this mod. That may be so, but its a game. Civ4 itself is historically inaccurate. The Romans shouldn't be a thriving empire in 1884 in one of my saves. The Incas shouldn't be my vassal state and colonized in Australia. It's a game of "what if's" or "maybe's" with a smattering of historical accuracy. We don't play games to mimic reality as we know it. We play games to escape reality.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[AngryHistorian]

There were other finer armies. The only reason the US appears unstoppable in WW2 is due to unlimited production resources, and mass-unskilled manpower pool for the draft.

You know Dale, you just described the RUSSIAN ARMY! Mass-unskilled manpower pool for the draft? Thats called SIBERIA! Where did you think all of the Russian conscripts came from, the oudated Russian Cossack army? Oh and uh know how many people the Russians lost in the war? Over 20 million people, both civilians and soldiers. I think any other nation could have beat the Germans without wasting the lives of 20 million people. I thought you were trying to look at war as futile, not justify the heartlessness of the Communist party.

 

[Joe Harker]

Oh and uh know how many people the Russians lost in the war? Over 20 million people, both civilians and soldiers. I think any other nation could have beat the Germans without wasting the lives of 20 million people.

A) Smoke a joint and lighten up. B) Actually it was closer to 40 million

 

[AngryHistorian]

A) Smoke a joint and lighten up. B) Actually it was closer to 40 million

A) Uh, I'm not even old enough to legally smoke, so you shouldn't be advertising that option to me.

B) Oooo, the more the merrier! 40 million Russians killed in WW2 just makes the communist party even more heartless!

 

[Joe Harker]

Can i ask, why is it important to you to prove the American army was a better army than anyone else?

 

[AngryHistorian]

The only reason MajorWinters and I are proving that the American army was better because of Dale's comments on the "stupidity" and "worthlessness" of the typical american soldier and commander. Read the previous chats Joe and that will explain everything.

 

[Chamboozer]

A) Uh, I'm not even old enough to legally smoke

That's obvious. Now would you please stop acting like you know everything on this topic and start discussing it instead of throwing your words in our faces?

 

[AngryHistorian]

The only reason MajorWinters and I are proving that the American army was better because of Dale's comments on the "stupidity" and "worthlessness" of the typical american soldier and commander. Read the previous chats Joe, that should explain everything. And I really don't appreciate my nation's army being joked about, when they shouldn't.

 

[deanej]

Can i ask, why is it important to you to prove the American army was a better army than anyone else?

Because the current propaganda taught as "history" is the US says that America is better than every nation in everything and always has been (OK, this is a huge exaggeration, but the point stands).

@MajorWinters and AngryHistorian: I think your constant posts are slowing the forums down.

 

[Chamboozer]

Because the current propaganda taught as "history" is the US says that America is better than every nation in everything and always has been (OK, this is a huge exaggeration, but the point stands).

@MajorWinters and AngryHistorian: I think your constant posts are slowing the forums down.

"The good guys in a war arent the ones who make the good decisions, but the ones who win to write its history"

 

[AngryHistorian]

That's obvious. Now would you please stop acting like you know everything on this topic and start discussing it instead of throwing your words in our faces?

Well, I was discussing it, until everyone in this forum labeled me as a" grognard" and repeatedly told me that the changes i am asking for are more focused towards accuracy and realism, which civ cannot recreate. I am also told that these changes are to "balance" the game to make it so that anyone could win the game. I, on the other hand, am convinced that these changes are making the game worse and tehy are making the game unbalanced. I am not asking Dale to create a MOD that will cover every step of WW2! That is not what I am asking. I just want the units in the game to be adjusted according to what their strengths were in real life. However you use those units is up to the user. However you want to adjust history is up to you, BUT the units that you use cannot be changed, or they wouldn't be the unique unit that you know them to be.

 

[AngryHistorian]

Because the current propaganda taught as "history" is the US says that America is better than every nation in everything and always has been (OK, this is a huge exaggeration, but the point stands).

@MajorWinters and AngryHistorian: I think your constant posts are slowing the forums down.

I can tell you this deanej, that I dont need to listen to "propaganda" they "teach" in american schools, because i already know more than my teachers. Everything I have learned about WW2 comes from internationally published sources, thank you very much. I don't need to listen to the idiots of propaganda to deduce my own opinions.

 

[Chamboozer]

Many of the things Dale incorperated into this mod for "balance" I don't understand, such as the extremely weak base units for non-unique nations, and many more simply are frustrating (such as the Chinese having such godly units in comparison to the Japanese). But one thing i've learned is that he's not planning on doing much about it. It's this way now, and it will always be this way. That's why we need to post realistic (but balanced) unit strengths and abilities in the Unit Strengths/Cost: Realistic thread. Only there might we find someone willing to assist us in making it, or, perhaps, learn to make it ourselves.

 

[Joe Harker]

The only reason MajorWinters and I are proving that the American army was better because of Dale's comments on the "stupidity" and "worthlessness" of the typical american soldier and commander. Read the previous chats Joe, that should explain everything. And I really don't appreciate my nation's army being joked about, when they shouldn't.

I have but what we are trying to do is prove which one is best, thats an almost impossible task, say for example your quote about America taking more cities before Caen was liberated, some of the reasons was A) Monty wasn't that good, there were better British Generals, the one who led the first advance into North Africa who i can't remember is name right now. B) America had one of it's best attacking commanders in Patton C) Britain was cautious of landing on foregin shores since we had a bad experience of such an operation in WW1 and D) We faced a Panzer divison with inferior tanks, which never helps.

You just can't compare that, there are so many varibles to compare.

My thoughts are that infantry of all nations should have the same strength, but it should be in their equpiment (tanks planes and ships to name a few) where the differences should be made. If anything to stop this pointless arguement!

 

[Laurier]

I have never seen a more appropriately chosen nickname, AngryHistorian; but your other pseudonym should have been TirelessWindbag, not MajorWinters.

 

[MajorWinters]

Dale this is another post to ensure that you get my message, Dale what do you plan on doing in the full version of addon pack 3? and do you plan on releasing any other addon packs and finally is there anything that you can tell me about modifiying the AI?

 

[AngryHistorian]

I have but what we are trying to do is prove which one is best, thats an almost impossible task, say for example your quote about America taking more cities before Caen was liberated, some of the reasons was A) Monty wasn't that good, there were better British Generals, the one who led the first advance into North Africa who i can't remember is name right now. B) America had one of it's best attacking commanders in Patton C) Britain was cautious of landing on foregin shores since we had a bad experience of such an operation in WW1 and D) We faced a Panzer divison with inferior tanks, which never helps.

You just can't compare that, there are so many varibles to compare.

My thoughts are that infantry of all nations should have the same strength, but it should be in their equpiment (tanks planes and ships to name a few) where the differences should be made. If anything to stop this pointless arguement!

Is the British general you're thinking of Auchinleck?

 

[AngryHistorian]

I have never seen a more appropriately chosen nickname, AngryHistorian; but your other pseudonym should have been TirelessWindbag, not MajorWinters.

Wow... Jump to conclusions that quickly do you? Thats not that funny and no, MajorWinters is not my "pseudonym."

 

[Joe Harker]

No, it was the one who advanced against the Italians outnumbered 3 to 1 (although th Italians did employ some rather bizarre tactics) and used the Italians own fuel dumps to nearly reach Tripoli, before troops were taken away to defend Greece