WW2-Europe XXL

[aeldrik]

All these countries, even though they were defeated very quickly, had huge armies, hundreds of thousands of Poles went into captivity in Germany and the Soviet union,.... Even with its army, -a small one of cavalry- Germany can take on Poland in 3 turns, Benelux in 1, only France takes longer, but it can be done in 6-8 Turns, which is all quite accurate....
The fact that the AI can't do it, well, the Germans also could have failed, let's say the AI is a bad General, the best thing would be to make one scenario file for each Sides the People choose to play, but that's just too much work...

The Problem with the political relations is this crappy solution Firaxis is offering us... They should have made a real diplomacy screen, with trade treaties and all options, and always the option to set it as fix or variable... but well, we'll have to get along with just 4 locked alliances.

For a WW1 scenario, you did the right thing, only Russia should be left out, since it signed a separate peace after the revolution. But for ww2 it is a different story. After France capitulated, the Englich attacked and sank most of the French navy at the shores of Oran. The French soldiers in Casablanca also fought the American landing troups there... In Civ terms, this would mean the French switched sides, witch is what happened (Vichy Regime). A locked alliance would therefore not be realistic. I would need to set a mutual protection pact between France and Poland (also England). Russia didn't declare war on Germany, the other way around...

Removing the forces from France would also have a very unwanted side effect, the Italian forces would be able to take the southern French city, which did not happen, since they were beaten back.... France had quite an army at that time, it just wasn't ready for the German offensive through Belgium....
The Russians need an army to be able to take the baltic countries and there share of Poland, as was decided in the German-Russian Pact of 1939.

I have increased the bombers strenght so that they can put an infantry back to 1 HP in a single bombing raid, I think this makes a lot of the blitz, since the tanks then have an easy task of taking the cities...

but anyway, how are you going to simulate with CIV that Paris was taken without a fight!!!

I hope most of this makes a sense...

PS: Marla, can you play these scenarios with your French CIV version?

 

[Marla_Singer]

The Problem with the political relations is this crappy solution Firaxis is offering us... They should have made a real diplomacy screen, with trade treaties and all options, and always the option to set it as fix or variable... but well, we'll have to get along with just 4 locked alliances.

I DEFINITLY agree on that point.I would like the ottomans to give oil to the germans and that is impossible ! We should be able to edit all agreement and even to lock them if we want.

After France capitulated, the Englich attacked and sank most of the French navy at the shores of Oran. In Civ terms, this would mean the French switched sides, witch is what happened (Vichy Regime).

No that's not totally true... Actually Churchill asked to bomb french navy in Oran because France was knocked out and it was easy for germans to take control of them. However, in reality, french colonies continued to fight with the allies thanx to De Gaulle. French free forces were even in Normandy on June 6th. They were few but still there.

Vichy's France was just an invaded France, it wasn't France in the side of the germans. It's true the germans almost stopped their advance in Paris, but to be honnest, all french powers were (and are still) concentrated in Paris. No, put France in the alliance. Northern Africa has never been invaded by the Axis and it has never recognize Vichy. It's still accurate to have a Northern Africa in the side of the brits.

 

[aeldrik]

still, how do you explain the Fact that French soldiers fought the Americans (French under General Noguès) in Casablanca 1942. From 1940-1942 they were Germans in Casablanca (remember the movie...)

I think if youn look at how the war went, first the Occupation of the North, with a colaboration, then 1942 the occupation also of the south of France, and the start of the Free French "counter attack with the american", if you translate it to civ:
France is attacked, signs a peace treaty, even an alliance with the Third Reich after loosing its northern Territories. 2 years later, the German attack again and take over the south of France, while the colonies continue the fight...
This is for me what fits best the way things happened, this is why I didn't want to put France in a locked alliance, because this would make Germany take over the hole French territory right from the start...

Best thing would have the old Empire splitting of CIV1/2 when the capital is taken, that would really be a realistic option for what happened in France in WW2... but that's no longer possible,...

If someone knows a URL that shows which French colonies where under Control of the "free French" and which were under the Vichy Regime, I'd be really interested...

 

[Dedin]

@ submarines:

Actually I didnt use the bombard ability against cities as it is a bit unrealistic that they are that strong against units in towns
A stronger attack value makes more sense to me, In addition with the stealth attack they should be strong enough imo.

 

[Marla_Singer]

still, how do you explain the Fact that French soldiers fought the Americans (French under General Noguès) in Casablanca 1942. From 1940-1942 they were Germans in Casablanca (remember the movie...)

It's simple. France was invaded...

By the way, how americans had been welcomed in France when they freed it ? With the wonderful flowers another american president was dreaming of. And how the americans had been welcomed in Germany ? With guns.

France was an ally. I consider as an insult what you're insinuating.

 

[Mobilize]

Regarding the names of several Arabic cities.

Al-Qahirah should be Cairo because at the time it was owned by the British thus it should use the British name. This is the same with Gizeh being Giza.

For French occupied Arabic cities, it's the same thing. Use the French words for them rather than Arabic because the government is not Arabic it is French.

This is the same with Italian, Spanish, etc. I was just going by the current modern day names.

Oh yes, and Oran was Oran during WWII, it is that way in every other scenario I have seen and in a few maps I have seen.

This is the best WW2 scenario ever! You should make the leaderheads flags like the Napoleonic Scenario and make enough modifications to make it a mod. This is indeed a Conquest and not just any normal scenario.



I can't stop playing.. it's addicting.

 

[aeldrik]

@Dedin: I'll change the subs for the next version

@Marla: I'm not saying most French were against the Americans or disliked the occupation, but this is the old political question, what is more important, the will of the population, or what the politicians do (look at Spain or the UK in the very recent events of Gulf War 2...).
The best option would be a "conquer the capital, get all cities" option in CIV, but it's missing that too...
German troops never invaded Casablanca, there never even was a real military presence. The soldiers down there were French soldiers, under a pupet Regime maybe, but still under a French goverment.
I have added the resistant unit, which is stealth and has hidden identity to allow the French to continue attacking the Germans even though they are at peace with them, to represent the resistance of the French people to the occupation...

By the way, Germans also didn't start shooting at the americans after the war ended, they might not have greeteg them as in France, but they didn't start a guerilla war either.

@Mobilize: You're right about the arabic cities, I now have kind of a mix, which I will correct, taking the cities name in the language of the European country in charge.

I'll have a look at the leaderheads, if someone knows how it works, it would help to tell me.

One of the main thing I wanted is keep the file people need to download for this scenario small (if possible >1MB) to allow people with modem connection to download it to, which is why I only use Conquest/PTW material. But maybe I'll make a second version as a mod once this one is finished, as an extension...
The main problem would be, once I start this kind of thin, there is no stopping in adding units...

 

[Marla_Singer]

I'm not saying most French were against the Americans or disliked the occupation, but this is the old political question, what is more important, the will of the population, or what the politicians do

Put those damn' French in the alliance. Petain wasn't an ally of Hitler, Petain was the leader of a conqueered country. France was DEFEATED ! Why did you put Belgium in the allies ? Belgium had been defeated even faster !

Political choice were clear : France declared war to Germany at the exact moment when Hitler started to invade Poland. IT IS A DAMN' ALLY !

Or maybe Belgium wasn't ? After all, if we look to the Tintin's book written during the war... americans are always the bad guys and goodies are always germans... austrians.. swedes... italians...

Your scenario started in 1939, at the exact moment when France and England declared war together to Germany. Don't think England would have declared war alone to Germany cause that was impossible. England had been protected of Hitler's invasion by the North Sea and by nothing else. Put France as an ally or I'll consider you as a negationist.

Are you the kind of guy who's writing posts in www.****france.com ?

 

[Dedin]

@aeldrik:

Seems you set the victory points limit to low. I won the game, after like 20 turns with Germany, only with conquering Poland, Benelux, Denmark, parts of Sweden and parts of Yugoslavia.

 

[aeldrik]

What I would do if it was possible would be to put France in a mutual protection pact with Poland and the UK.
Belgium and the Netherlands would be neutral countries outside of any alliance, as it was in History, but since this is not possible, I had to do it otherwise, and the best option in my opinion was to leave France outside of the locked Alliance... If you really want to compare the way the UK behaved during WW2 with the way the French goverment did, well....
I am not discussing the fact that France was on the side of the allies as the war started, nor that it was as the war ended. What I am discussing, is that parts of France, at least of its political elite were leading a French Regime in France, not as in the other occupied countries, were Germans were in control of the goverment. Not accepting that is just not accepting the facts....

As for George Remi (Herge), we are thought in school that he was quite a racist and didn't dislike the Nazi politics, which is one reason one has to be carefull reading his works--- But I really don't see where this kind of arguments should lead us eccept in a discussion that we really should not have.

As to me being a negationist, I am not sure what you mean by that, in Germany this refers to people who think the holocaust never happened, which I think is just outrageous, and I cannot understand how someone can think that.
Everyone should accept what his country did during WW2, and not a single country behaved in a perfect way, even if there is no discussion that the atrocities commited by the Nazis were the worst thing that happened, you might do good to read Anne Frank...
As to say all the bad things commited by the French (or Belgian) during WW2 were the work of the Germans, well, I don't believe in fairy tales...

 

[aeldrik]

@ Dedin, stragen, Victory Point should have been disabled... I'll check it, thx

EDIT: I changed it, version 1.02 will be uploaded to the server tomorow with all the changes of the last couple of days

 

[Marla_Singer]

And By the way Aeldrik !

Don't put Petain as the leader of France ! The leader of France was Daladier ! Petain went in power only once France was invaded. France isn't invaded at the beginning of the game that's totally inaccurate.

If I do an Iraq war scenario, I'll put Saddam at the head of Iraq, I won't put Paul Bremer. So change that.

You have two options :
- You start your scenario at the end of June 1940 and then you can put the northern part of France under German occupation and the Southern part leaded by Petain.
- You start the scenario in the summer 1939 and then France is ruled by Daladier, allied with Britain, and ready to get invaded.

How it is, you're perverting History.

Moreover, France's regime should be democracy. Not republic... France is not the ancient Greece.

 

[Marla_Singer]

am not discussing the fact that France was on the side of the allies as the war started, nor that it was as the war ended. What I am discussing, is that parts of France, at least of its political elite were leading a French Regime in France, not as in the other occupied countries, were Germans were in control of the goverment.

That's FALSE. Northern France and all along the Atlantic Coast was directly occupied by the germans. After France being invaded... that silly Petain has signed an aggreement saying Southern France could be not directly controlled by german forces as long as it was under german guardianship. That's an agreement of a conqueered country. That's not an agreement between two countries that just declared war to each other.

As to me being a negationist, I am not sure what you mean by that, in Germany this refers to people who think the holocaust never happened, which I think is just outrageous, and I cannot understand how someone can think that.

Then you maybe know how outraged I feel to see a scenario beginning in 1939 with a France lead by Petain and allied with Germany. That really disgusts me.

 

[aeldrik]

I think you're missing the point here:
If you can tell me why putting France in the locked alliance would improve the GAMEPLAY and make it more realistic (which is what this is about), I will do it.

I chose for every nation its more representative leader for the ww2 time, maybe I should have chossen Daladiers for France and Chamberlain for the UK... come on this is ridiculous, Petain is the right choice for a scenario. I will however change it if you an explain to me why I should have Chamberlain lead the UK and not Churchill..
(by the way, if my memory is still good, Petain was also the leader of France in the CIV2 WW2 scenario...)

When did I ever place France in an alliance with Germany in 1939 or at any other time??

I think you are overreacting on this, that silly Petain as you call him was the leader of the french armies and represented France during most of the war, before de Gaulle came out at a leader in 1942. Ín 1940, some of the French colonies separated under de Gaulle from the mainland because of its colaboration with the Germans, and went on fighting, but the south of France had capitulated (signed a Peace treaty with a gold tribute) and helped the Germans against the Russians (military alliance against the soviet union)
THE DIPLOMATIC TERMS I AM USING HERE ARE CIV BASED.....

I think you are acting as a negationist regarding your own history.

PS I changed France to a democracy, this is more correct for the period before the war...
a republic in CIV isn't just the old roman style republic, I just see it a form of democracy were a President has most of the power instead of the parliament, and also in which the goverment in more centralized

 

[Marla_Singer]

come on this is ridiculous, Petain is the right choice for a scenario. I will however change it if you an explain to me why I should have Chamberlain lead the UK and not Churchill..

You have no reason to change Churchill since he has been chosen by the british people. Petain has been chosen by the germans after France had been defeated to govern the half of the country which was under german guardianship.

but the south of France had capitulated

Finally you got the point. As France has not already capitulated in 1939, there shouldn't be like if they had already capitulated. In Civ3 terms, Southern France was invaded by the Germans. A good option would be to put a "Daladier" leader unit and when he got captured, the whole country fall in the hands of the germans.

THE DIPLOMATIC TERMS I AM USING HERE ARE CIV BASED.....

No they aren't. The only way to define Vichy in civ-based terms is Southern France under german occupation since we can't put a german guardianship in Civ3.

PS : France's democracy was directly inspired by the "Lumières" philosopher from the 18th Century. In Civ3, republic is discovered in the ancient times, not just before the industrial era... so it's completely inaccurate to think France is a Republic... in Civ3 terms I mean.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Just another thing. Morocco was under french guardianship at that time. How did you represent Morocco ?

 

[aeldrik]

This is a scenario, meaning goverments may have the same name, but represent different things.... France is not called a republic in reality without a reason, it is a form of democracy, but to make you happy, I renamed Democracy to parlamentary democracy, and France will be a republic, I hope this is clear enough that is it not the old Roman form of republic...

The occupation of southern France would not be realistic, since it would take a lot of German units to occupy it, which would be needed on the Eastern Front, this is neither historically correct, nor would it improve gameplay...
I've been saying the south of France capitulated since the beginning, maybe you should read what I wrote again...
As I have also written before (did you really read it?????) the option of making all the cities go over to a CIV upon capture of the capital, or the King, is not available...
and again, the leaders are only the most representative of the Country during WW2, are you really telling me Daladiers is more representative then Petain, I would consider either Petain or de Gaulle, but not Daladier!!!!!!!!!!!!

And if you want to compare Morocco with France (Morocco was a de facto Colony), please, but I am stopping this discussion here in the forum, if you want to continue it, please PM me, since this thread is about GAMEPLAY issues for the scenario, not about a historical discussion

 

[aeldrik]

Does anyone know the history for Tanger about the spanish occupation in 1940, or has someone a good link on the subject?

 

[LouLong]

Err... fellows. Now that I have your attention :
Aeldrik asked to take a look here and give my opinion.
I consider it sligthly difficult because history and Civ3 are DIFFERENT, mostly in regards to civil division and liberation.

Can we agree about the following : France was at war with Nazi Germany in 39. This was not a "Locked Alliance" since after a quick defeat France signed peace with Germany in exchange for gold, food (lux ?) and cities (Alsace-Lorraine again).
There were two areas, one controlled by the Germans directly (North and Atlantic coast to Spain for strategic reasons) and the Free Vichy State which was only a temporary solution and an easy solution for Germany to pressurize France without having to do the job directly.

Now you are going into the dark depths of the French past if you want to know whether Petain was allied with Germany or not.
The French army had crumbled because it was not ready (strategy, hardware) but as well because of the lack of spirit of the soldiers after the first WW (not judging, just analyzing something I have to study this year for AGREG ). There was no way Petain could have kept the war going as it was.
Did it hurt him ? : I think so because he was really a patriot.
Did he relunctantly accept the German order ? : probably not. He was after all an officer in a very traditional army and the policy he organized in Vichy France was not only German-inspired but very close to his personal beliefs. He probably feared more the Communists than the Germans, probably did not have any liking for the Jews and wanted order (civil and moral) more than anything else. Considering the importance of the support France provide (unwillingly) to Germany in its "crusade" especially against the USSR, it could be considered as a limited ally of Germany. It did not provide many troops but some volunteers joined the SS and a large group made the "Legion Charlemagne" that went on the Eastern front.
Money, food and military equipment became German, and some industrials (such as Renault that had made tanks) cooperated easily with the Germans. The English understood that perfectly when they bombed and destroyed part of the French fleet (a powerful, brand-new fleet actually) before the other half blowed themselves up so they should not become German.
De Gaulle's influence was extremely limited at the beginning. And it is only after Germany attacked the USSR (French communists) then invaded Vichy France (patriots) that the resistance started to build up. It is to notice that if De Gaulle had not been very active in London among the Allies leaders and through its growing popularity among some far away (therefore freer in the colonies) generals and among the French population (radio) France might have been considered a defeated ennemy ally of Germany and not a victorious ally against Germany, allowing France to become of the 4 great powers. So if in fact the French population was mostly against Nazi Germany (and showed it more and more with time), Vichy France could be considered its ally (and I am not about to judge whether it was forced or chosen here). Now of course cities in Civ3 when taken should be either captured, or razed or "liberated" (ie given to the state most of its citizens belong to) but that cannot be represented. So two France could be represented. One (Vichy or to be more accurate conservative France since Vichy does not HAVE TO be the capital in a what if scenario) could be allied with England but could afterwards evolve (which it did). The other one (Free France) could be in a locked alliance with England, maintaining the alliance (and the dignity of France ?) and maybe at war with Vichy France so as to force the RL evolution. So Vichy France could have limited troops to build (and mostly defensive) while the French resource could allow Germany to spawn through a wonder (Victory over France) Legion Charlemagne or a very few tanks. On the other hand De Gaulle could be the name of a settler outside London without any movement. Therefore it would stay there unless Germany invaded England and destroyed it on the way. Germany or Vichy France could capture the "Free" colonies without destroying Free France. One of these colonies could have a wonder generating volunteers (except if you prefer to make a small city in England called De Gaulle's headquarters (but then the Polsih could want one as well).

Remember in the Civ2 WWII scenario the status of Norway. Norway had been occupied and its resources (Narvik iron, harbors,...) used. Quisling was pro-nazi but that does not mean all Norwegians were. In a similar way you could think Italy was not a real ally since ASAP Italians got rid of Mussolini (they haven't done that with the more recent one yet though ).

Of course I might not convince anybody here but I am trying to be historically correct within the game limits !

 

[The Last Conformist]

That 'Legion Charlemagne' didn't exactly amount to a "large group" if a couple of websites I checked on it a while ago* are to be trusted; they say it never numbered more than 7500 men, which harldy made much difference on the Eastern Front. They do, however, have the distinction of being one of the last units to continue resistance in Berlin.

Now, I'd rather have Daladier as the French leader; he's surely the best known WWII leader of the third republic, the France that went to war in '39, which I assume is what is primarily being representated. (Why Chamberlain then shouldn't be leader of Great Britain? He wasn't the best-known war-time leader of the Great Britain that went to war in '39, simply.)

* The reason I was checking such sites was that a thread on the unhistorical rations between infantry and mounted/mechanized units common in civ mutated into a discussion of WWII death tolls, in which some guy claimed that 500k Frenchmen fell fighting for the Axis. I'm not believing this, because sources I consider highly reliable give France's total military losses at 300k, and of course very many of those died failing to halt the German invasion in '40.

I'm, for the record, not German.