WW2-Global

[Morphling]

Hi,
I wonder how you all get it so easy with germany.A small frustrating thing is that when i attack an enemy unit it seems to me as if I would have no chance with 1on1 fight,so I allways need at least(often more) 2 infanty units to kill one of the french e.g. And how do you handle intercepptors atackking your bombers?Again great szenario with a lot of work in it,n1!

 

[Akrasia]

Britain 2.1, ‘Sid’, 1942 Week 45 (approx)

It is nearing the end of 42 and the end of Fascism on planet Earth. The Finns are out. Japan will lose its last city-Sapporo in a week either by my invasion fleet or by a US fleet that dumped a full convoy load of units (strange choice of units though—one Sherman, three Wolverines, and four Stuarts. . .). I am inclined to let the US take it so that they might use it as a strategic bombing base against the Soviets (they have been using Corsica as a B-29 base against the Germans). Germany has five cities left and is being horribly squeezed by me and Russia.

Remarkable as it seems, the Allies have been at peace with the Soviets for three whole weeks. I was steadily moving against Germany from the west and South when an enormous stack of T-34/76s and KV1s moved past German controlled Stuttgart toward my recently conquered city of Freiburg. As I was spread dangerously thin, I negotiated a peace treaty expecting to only last a turn, but hoping it would be enough of a pause to dig in. Instead, things have turned into a complete land-grab competition between me and the Red Army over the rest of Germany. I took Stuttgart, Dresden, Hamburg, Prague, Nurnberg, and Rostock. The Red Army took the three Polish cities and has surrounded Konigsburg. We both have forces next to Stettin and Berlin. I wish I could find some way to steal Koingsburg, but it would be tough. The upside is that I prevented several cities from falling into Russian hands—the downside is that I may not be able to hold on to any of them should hostilities resume (that huge stack of armour is still lurking east of Stuttgart).

If things go the way I would like them to, I’ll take Berlin, Copenhagen, Stettin, and Konigsburg (somehow), and wait until Spring of 43 to attack the Soviets. Naturally, I do not expect things to go the way I would like them to. Then I will likely have to take the defensive—hold on to what I have as best as I can, until I gather enough forces to mount a counter-offensive. We’ll see. . .

Some Random Notes:

1) Since there was dabbling with “what-if” units on the German side, how about a Vanguard class BB? The KGV BB is nice, but it seemingly never survives a battle against another capital ship except the BB-C2.
2) Why can’t UK build Southampton class CLs at beginning of game? To my understanding they were built all the way to the end of the war.
3) I suggest that the Firefly aircraft be altered or eliminated. It comes up late in the tech-tree, but, compared to the Skua, it is useless as a carrier-borne aircraft.
4) I see that those who are playing Axis feel that the Spitfire is the best around, but my experience is that as the game moves on, it is marginal against German fighters. I’d say that on average, I lose three Spitfires for every FW-190 I take out (that is a generous estimate). The Typhoon is not much better against the FW-190. I cringe at the though of dealing with advanced German Fighters—luckily I won’t have to. Perhaps it would be helpful to have a British end of war fighter or Spitfire upgrade placed into the 43 or 44 tech tree.
5) Regarding AI naval unit construction: I have found in most of the occasions I have played this scenario that the AI will build only BBs, occasional CVs, and DDs. In earlier scenarios they almost exclusively built DD Flotillas, so I think it was a good idea to remove them. In my current game, the Dutch seem to have built a number of Heavy Cruisers, perhaps that is the largest class they can build. Personally, I have built a wide range of classes of ships, including escort carriers to serve as convoy escorts or to ferry aircraft from Canada to Europe.
6) Coping with the RR issue: Perhaps boosting up the maintenance cost of each worker would help. . . At least in the beginning of the game, every penny counts. So, pricey workers might make all-out efforts at RR construction impractical.
7) Lastly, since no one seems to be currently playing the Brits but myself, is there anything about my game in particular you would like to know, Rocoteh?

 

[Rocoteh]

Akrasia,

Thank you for the report.

"It is nearing the end of 42 and the end of Fascism on planet Earth. The Finns are out. Japan will lose its last city-Sapporo in a week either by my invasion fleet or by a US fleet that dumped a full convoy load of units (strange choice of units though—one Sherman, three Wolverines, and four Stuarts. . .). I am inclined to let the US take it so that they might use it as a strategic bombing base against the Soviets (they have been using Corsica as a B-29 base against the Germans). Germany has five cities left and is being horribly squeezed by me and Russia."
Akrasia

If one play US or Britain its no doubt an interesting option to continue
the war (attacking Soviet) after that the Axis powers have been defeated.

"Remarkable as it seems, the Allies have been at peace with the Soviets for three whole weeks. I was steadily moving against Germany from the west and South when an enormous stack of T-34/76s and KV1s moved past German controlled Stuttgart toward my recently conquered city of Freiburg. As I was spread dangerously thin, I negotiated a peace treaty expecting to only last a turn, but hoping it would be enough of a pause to dig in. Instead, things have turned into a complete land-grab competition between me and the Red Army over the rest of Germany. I took Stuttgart, Dresden, Hamburg, Prague, Nurnberg, and Rostock. The Red Army took the three Polish cities and has surrounded Konigsburg. We both have forces next to Stettin and Berlin. I wish I could find some way to steal Koingsburg, but it would be tough. The upside is that I prevented several cities from falling into Russian hands—the downside is that I may not be able to hold on to any of them should hostilities resume (that huge stack of armour is still lurking east of Stuttgart)."

I think this will be very interesting to follow! If you have a strong airforce
you will probably be able to drive back the Russian forces.

"If things go the way I would like them to, I’ll take Berlin, Copenhagen, Stettin, and Konigsburg (somehow), and wait until Spring of 43 to attack the Soviets. Naturally, I do not expect things to go the way I would like them to. Then I will likely have to take the defensive—hold on to what I have as best as I can, until I gather enough forces to mount a counter-offensive. We’ll see. . ."
Akrasia

I would wait until there is a very strong RAF Bomber Command.
You have won an incredible early victory against the Axis.

"1) Since there was dabbling with “what-if” units on the German side, how about a Vanguard class BB? The KGV BB is nice, but it seemingly never survives a battle against another capital ship except the BB-C2."
Akrasia


Its a good idea that its possible I will implement in version 2.2.

"2) Why can’t UK build Southampton class CLs at beginning of game? To my understanding they were built all the way to the end of the war."
Akrasia

Again a good idea, worth to consider.

"3) I suggest that the Firefly aircraft be altered or eliminated. It comes up late in the tech-tree, but, compared to the Skua, it is useless as a carrier-borne aircraft"
Akrasia

OK I will look it over.

"4) I see that those who are playing Axis feel that the Spitfire is the best around, but my experience is that as the game moves on, it is marginal against German fighters. I’d say that on average, I lose three Spitfires for every FW-190 I take out (that is a generous estimate). The Typhoon is not much better against the FW-190. I cringe at the though of dealing with advanced German Fighters—luckily I won’t have to. Perhaps it would be helpful to have a British end of war fighter or Spitfire upgrade placed into the 43 or 44 tech tree."
Akrasia

I will consider the inclusion of a late Spitfire version in 2.2.

"5) Regarding AI naval unit construction: I have found in most of the occasions I have played this scenario that the AI will build only BBs, occasional CVs, and DDs. In earlier scenarios they almost exclusively built DD Flotillas, so I think it was a good idea to remove them. In my current game, the Dutch seem to have built a number of Heavy Cruisers, perhaps that is the largest class they can build. Personally, I have built a wide range of classes of ships, including escort carriers to serve as convoy escorts or to ferry aircraft from Canada to Europe."
Akrasia

General analyses concerning which building-strategys AI choose,
show that AI (very often) produce the strongest units even when they are
a bad economic choice.

"6) Coping with the RR issue: Perhaps boosting up the maintenance cost of each worker would help. . . At least in the beginning of the game, every penny counts. So, pricey workers might make all-out efforts at RR construction impractical."
Akrasia

The editor does not allow you to set different maintenance cost
for units only maintenance cost or no cost.
However its possible that it should cost more to produce workers.

"7) Lastly, since no one seems to be currently playing the Brits but myself, is there anything about my game in particular you would like to know, Rocoteh?"
Akrasia

Yes it is.

You won a very early victory as Britain on Sid level.
Do you think it was to easy?

Do you think its more difficult to win early as Germany than Britain?

Which are the worst problem one will have to deal with playing Britain?

Thank you and welcome back.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

Hi,
I wonder how you all get it so easy with germany.A small frustrating thing is that when i attack an enemy unit it seems to me as if I would have no chance with 1on1 fight,so I allways need at least(often more) 2 infanty units to kill one of the french e.g. And how do you handle intercepptors atackking your bombers?Again great szenario with a lot of work in it,n1!

Morphling,

On ground attack:

Using artillery and air-units first, before you attack with infantry
or armour is the key.

On interceptors:

If you intend to use bombers in an enemy area its a good idea
to first attack the area with your fighters until the defender runs
out of interceptors.

Rocoteh

 

[Sasebo]

Morphling: In addition to what Rocoteh said, look at the Attack/defense stats of the fighter you will use for clearing the way for your bombers. As an example, for Germany in the beginning, it is better to use the Me110s, because their attack of 6 makes them only OK interceptors, but their defense of 8 makes them good when they are attacked--plus they have actually have a decent bomb attack for a fighter, which is sometimes useful. The Me109 is much better used for a defensive fighter. Just remember if it has higher defense then attack, it's better to attack with that fighter.

On your ground attack problems, what Hyperborean said, also, pay attention to terrain, the rivers can be hard to see, and the bonuses for hills, forest, etc., are NOT standard Civ 3, so you may be getting snakebit by miscalculating your chances.

Hyperborean: Spies. Save up and use espionage to buy spies in the enemy countries, and then you can use the espionage options to spy on cities. When you do that, you see a lot of useful information, and if you look at how their economy is being used at the bottom of the espionage report screen you will see the distribution of science/shields/cash. Thats where I found out what they were spending on research.

Rocoteh: I agree with a possible late UK BB, maybe something similar to Iowa Class? Also, that late Sea Spitfire seems useless almost in the tech tree, maybe you can just bump it's stats for the upgraded late UK fighter if you want to go that route?

I also like the house rule for players not building RR, with the rate for roads at six, you still have plenty of movement capability, you just have to plan a little more. it doesn't really concern me that the AI will build them since they really don't know what to do with that advantage. I don't like the AI wasting time building them with them being so expensive now, they build RR over mines and irrigation.

Also, yes, the AI handles the bigger map much more intelligently,and their naval aggressiveness has been much improved. Now, on building the crusiers, I'm not sure how others think, but after you have SOME BBs, I'd rather have more bombard units overall. I build 1 BB to 2 CA types,and that works great for me. I should note here ships and aircraft are very vulnerable to naval bombard on cities, you can kill BBs easily this way, even the cruisers do great damage when attacking ports. Bombard on land units outside of cities is much harder.

Now, in my Italy game I am seeing the US and UK building some CA class 2s recently, but BBs are still the main thing. Japan has been totally out of character with their balanced builds, I've even seen them build subs! Now if they would only build Otsus, I would be thrilled with them.

As far as UK's biggest problem, I would say it absolutely has to be the Mideast to India--that whole long Northern border. When USSR goes to war with the Allies, that is going to be a big, BIG problem for the UK to handle. I always see the USSR coming and hitting the UK all over that area, with multiple thrusts. In my Italy game when the UK went to war with them briefly I saw both of them start pouring units toward each other in Persia. I was cowering in Meshad with a dozen units while about 40+ USSR tanks disdained attacking me to head towards the UK. Scary stuff. I had about 30 units in there at one point shortly after that, when I realized they still could have wiped me out. Soviets were very merciful and went home without blowing me away there.

On UK order of battle: I don't think it needs to be changed. As it is, UK is the biggest Pain-in-the-butt for the Axis, but not overwhelming. UK AI plays a very good game now. Other then the border guards for Italy, and I also added some forts in North Africa(I'm sure I mentioned that before), the OOBs seem fine, at least for emperor.

 

[Adler17]

I have written my exams and will return to the game. I missed much so I will try to go into the discussion here: Rocoteh, the British built the Vanguard and the Lion class at the end. However due to several reasons, especially being equipped with ww1 15" guns, I would rate the Vanguard above the KGV but under the Bismarck class. At a duel I would not bet on the Vanguard.
The Lion class had also 9 16" guns and are to be higher rated than both KGV and Vanguard. However these projected ships were also smaller than the Bismarck, so I would also rate them lower than her, although only slightly.
From the constructional phase the British lost much due to the Washington treaty. The standard of 1914 with the QE II was kept but with Rodney, Nelson and the KGV class no new ships were built to cope with the more modern German and US ships, and of course Yamato. And even the new projects were still behind the newest generations of existing ships, not to say planned (Montana, Super Yamato, H- class).

Adler

 

[Rocoteh]

Sasebo,

"Rocoteh: I agree with a possible late UK BB, maybe something similar to Iowa Class?"
Sasebo

Yes, the stats should be closed to the Iowa.

"Also, that late Sea Spitfire seems useless almost in the tech tree, maybe you can just bump it's stats for the upgraded late UK fighter if you want to go that route?"
Sasebo

I will consider it.

"I also like the house rule for players not building RR, with the rate for roads at six, you still have plenty of movement capability, you just have to plan a little more. it doesn't really concern me that the AI will build them since they really don't know what to do with that advantage. I don't like the AI wasting time building them with them being so expensive now, they build RR over mines and irrigation."
Sasebo

Its a good house rule. However I do not want to introduce to many
"official" house rules since I think many people will find that disturbing.

"Also, yes, the AI handles the bigger map much more intelligently,and their naval aggressiveness has been much improved. Now, on building the crusiers, I'm not sure how others think, but after you have SOME BBs, I'd rather have more bombard units overall. I build 1 BB to 2 CA types,and that works great for me. I should note here ships and aircraft are very vulnerable to naval bombard on cities, you can kill BBs easily this way, even the cruisers do great damage when attacking ports. Bombard on land units outside of cities is much harder."
Sasebo

Its possible I will add intrinsic defense for some coastal cities in version 2.2.

"Now, in my Italy game I am seeing the US and UK building some CA class 2s recently, but BBs are still the main thing. Japan has been totally out of character with their balanced builds, I've even seen them build subs! Now if they would only build Otsus, I would be thrilled with them."
Sasebo

What you mention about Japan-AI is fore sure a surprise.

"As far as UK's biggest problem, I would say it absolutely has to be the Mideast to India--that whole long Northern border. When USSR goes to war with the Allies, that is going to be a big, BIG problem for the UK to handle. I always see the USSR coming and hitting the UK all over that area, with multiple thrusts."
Sasebo

I will see what I can do to solve this problem.
Its possible that a large number of high-defense guerilla units in
Persia can make a Soviet campaign in this area less interesting.

"On UK order of battle: I don't think it needs to be changed. As it is, UK is the biggest Pain-in-the-butt for the Axis, but not overwhelming. UK AI plays a very good game now. Other then the border guards for Italy, and I also added some forts in North Africa(I'm sure I mentioned that before), the OOBs seem fine, at least for emperor."
Sasebo

That is interesting. Notes have been taken.

Thank you for your comments and welcome back.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

I have written my exams and will return to the game. I missed much so I will try to go into the discussion here: Rocoteh, the British built the Vanguard and the Lion class at the end. However due to several reasons, especially being equipped with ww1 15" guns, I would rate the Vanguard above the KGV but under the Bismarck class. At a duel I would not bet on the Vanguard.
The Lion class had also 9 16" guns and are to be higher rated than both KGV and Vanguard. However these projected ships were also smaller than the Bismarck, so I would also rate them lower than her, although only slightly.
From the constructional phase the British lost much due to the Washington treaty. The standard of 1914 with the QE II was kept but with Rodney, Nelson and the KGV class no new ships were built to cope with the more modern German and US ships, and of course Yamato. And even the new projects were still behind the newest generations of existing ships, not to say planned (Montana, Super Yamato, H- class).

Adler

Adler,

Welcome back!

Yes maybe its better to introduce the cancelled Lion-class instead of
the Vanguard.
I will consider it.

Thank you for your comments on this issue.

Rocoteh

 

[Adler17]

I think you should add both but IMO there are in no way so big differences. Indeed the Lion class was smaller than the Vanguard! That means usually it was not so well protected. To me the whole British ship designing was in decline after the QE2 class. And even before in one to one combats the German ships of similar classes would have been greater chances to win, also against a bit newer types. IMO even SMS Nassau was better than HMS Dreadnought. And SMS Bayern better than HMS QE 2. But since then the distance between the new produced ships rapidly grew against the British: Nelson and Rodney were not fast enough and had problems concerning the turrets all on the front. The KGV was better and faster but had severe problems due to the guns. They were only 14" guns although the other nations were at least by 15"- 16". And due to the quadruple turrets they could not fire whole salvos as this was impossible to do so. Only 8+ 2 was able to be fired.
Vanguard was better built, but she didn´t reach Bismarck also due to her old and inferior guns. The Lion class was a better choice, but even she would not have reached the Bismarck. And in contrast to the H class much more inferior.

Adler

 

[Hyperborean]

Hyperborean: Spies. Save up and use espionage to buy spies in the enemy countries, and then you can use the espionage options to spy on cities. When you do that, you see a lot of useful information, and if you look at how their economy is being used at the bottom of the espionage report screen you will see the distribution of science/shields/cash. Thats where I found out what they were spending on research.

I have to check it out. I only use spies to find out how many units the AI has. I don't want to risk losing my spy by conducting any operations. I hate it when I can't see the forces of my opponents (and allies). But maybe I should try it on some minor nation in South America to see for myself.
But after you have played for a while you'll learn who is ahead of you on research, and who's behind anyway. I know that the British AI is ahead of me, and that the Soviets are far, far behind.

Germany - Sid - Week 25, 1941

Cities conquered: Tver, Moscow, Tula, Voronezh, Kursk, Groznyj, Timbuktu and Corsica (again).
Things are finally starting to go my way. I think the key to the success was to heavily reinforce the Luftwaffe. I can obliterate dozens of divisions every week now, and that has really helped the Wehrmacht. There are still some pockets of resistance behind the front lines, but they can easily be wiped out.
Because of the Allied domination in the Mediterranean I have not been able to reinforce DAK as I had planned. But I still have enough panzers to move forward. I have airdropped all my paratroopers over North Africa, and they are holding the conquered cities until I can develop the paratrooper plane and reinforce the garrisons by air. I have almost finished researching Air 2 1940, so this shouldn't take too long.
I have 2 u-boats in the Red Sea (where they have engaged and sunk several destroyers), 2 u-boats near India, 2 u-boats around Australia, 2 u-boats west of South America, 1 u-boat north of Japan (this one took the Northwest Passage to the Pacific Ocean, and it has sunk several Soviet subs). I also had a u-boat in Indonesia, but the British sunk it. And a few more subs are currently in the Northwest passage on their way to the Pacific.
Japan has conquered Lucknow. Guam is Japanese. Truk is British. New Soviet capital: Sverdlovsk.
Now that I have connected all Spanish cities with railroads (except La Coruna, where the Allies prevent me from building anything) I have noticed what an effort it takes to build railroads, and this is good. For instance, I have 102 workers building a railroad on a mountain tile, and they are still not done!
The RAF bombings have almost stopped now that Luftwaffe has been reinforced. With over 100 fighters they don't dare to attack me as often as they once did. My only trouble comes when I take a new city within RAFs reach. They will bomb it with everything they have.
My fleet of Bismarcks has been entangled in battles in the English Channel. They are pretty good. I destroy two KGVs for every Bismarck they sink. But I'm not entirely happy with the kill ratio. I want to cause more damage.
I'm going to reward my Finnish allies by starting to hand over the cities I have taken in northwestern Russia to them. This is for two reasons. First of all, I want a strong ally, and secondly, I want them to have access to the Atlantic. That's why I'm going to give them the city-ports of Narvik, Murmansk, Sosnovka, Arkhangelsk and Petjora (I'm going to keep southern Scandinavia though. The border will be drawn south of Narvik-Kiruna-Luleå.).
I may consider giving the Italians some African cities, but that is a later issue. Right now I have to focus on winning the Eastern front.
Now that I have pushed the Russians back I'm going to reform the Army Groups. Army Group North's objectives are Gorki, Kazan and Perm. Army Group Centre's objectives are Saratov and Kujbysjev. Army Group South's objectives are Stalingrad and Astrachan. My artillery will move to Stalingrad to attack the fortress there while my panzers will carry out the other operations.
Once these objectives have been completed I'm going to reform the Army Groups again. I will replace Army Group Centre's panzers with infantry, supported by artillery, after Stalingrad has been taken. The reason is because the panzers cannot use their speed when they move through forests. Instead Army Group South will be reinforced by the panzers and attack Central Asia, and link up with the Japanese. Army Group North will consist entirely of panzers, and they will attack the northernmost Siberian cities where I have most use of their speed on the tundra. This involves some pretty complex moves back and forth along the battle-lines, but I think it will work.
I know I said earlier that I would attack Suez with Army Group South, but those plans have been postponed for a while, mainly because I still don't have control over the Mediterranean, and it will take some time before I will. So there's no rush. I think it's more important to make contact with the Japanese and threaten the British and the Russians from Central Asia. That's my number one priority right now.

List of units week 25, 1941

(Changes from week 1, 1941 in parenthesis)

Workers: 123 (78)
Transports: 4 (-6)
Special transport: 1
Destroyers: 3 (-8)
Heavy cruisers: 0 (-2)
Bismarcks: 9 (9)
Coastal submarines: 11
Type VIII: 8 (-2)
Type IX: 24 (-8)
German Army HQ: 5
Heavy artillery: 26
Flak: 13
German 88: 37 (14)
Panzer II: 1 (-1)
Panzer IIIe: 95 (19)
Marines: 1 (-2)
Paratroopers: 4 (1)
German Security Divisions: 3 (-2)
German infantry: 97 (33)
Slovakia infantry: 7 (2)
Hungary infantry: 13 (1)
Romania infantry: 30 (5)
Bulgaria infantry: 14 (3)
Do-17: 3 (-1)
Ju87B: 14 (6)
Ju 88: 28 (17)
Heinkel-111: 4 (1)
ME-109: 99 (55)
ME-110: 14 (11)

. . . . . . . . . Germany Soviet . . . . U.K. . . . U.S. . . . . Japan . . France . Italy . . Finland

Workers: . . . 123 (78) 70 (-29) . . 122 (6) . 70 (1) . . . 51 . . . . 13 (-5) . 9 (3) . . 10
Infantry: . . . 164 (42) 306 (-190) 490 (-6) . 579 (218) 333 (50) 48 (-28) . 68 (6) . 60 (11)
Tanks: . . . . 96 (18) . 75 (-10) . . 184 (72) . 97 (80) . 51 (-31) . -- . . . . -- . . . . 15 (7)
Artillery: . . . 31 . . . . 57 (-7) . . . 19 (4) . . 26 . . . . . 30 (19) . . 7 (4) . . -- . . . . 5
Planes: . . . . 162 (89) 115 (32) . . 122 . . . . 97 (22) . 93 (17) . . 4 (-3) . 6 (-6) . 1
Transports: . 5 (-6) . . 1 (-1) . . . . 23 (-2) . 3 (1) . . . 16 (2) . . . -- . . . -- . . . . 1
Submarines: . 43 (-10) 3 (-6) . . . . 4 (-3) . . 12 (-10) . 1 (1) . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Destroyers: . 3 (-8) . . 0 (-2) . . . . 40 (3) . . 1 (-5) . . 27 (1) . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Cruisers: . . . 0 (-2) . . 0 . . . . . . . 12 . . . . . 1 . . . . . 2 . . . . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Capital ships: 9 (4) . . . 0 . . . . . . . 41 (1) . . 22 (6) . . 48 (4) . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Carriers: . . . . -- . . . . -- . . . . . . . -- . . . . 1 (-1) . . 6 . . . . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Flak: . . . . . . 13 . . . . 2 (2) . . . . . 7 (-1) . 13 (10) . . -- . . . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Paratroopers: 4 (1) . . 0 . . . . . . . . 3 (1) . . 5 (3) . . . 1 . . . . . . -- . . . 1 (1) . . . --
Marines: . . . . 1 (-2) . 0 . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . 130 (68) . 1 . . . . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --
Cavalry: . . . . -- . . . . 3 (-1) . . . . 8 (3) . . 14 (7) . . . -- . . . . . 27 (3) -- . . . . --
Motorized inf: -- . . . . 68 (-43) . . . -- . . . . -- . . . . . -- . . . . . -- . . . -- . . . . --

 

[Sasebo]

Hyperborean: You don't lose our spy by conducting operations, you only lose it if the AI pays for a counter intelligence sweep, or if you try to sweep their spy out of your country and fail. The AI never seems to do the counter sweep so just go nuts! Other then the cost of gold, there is no risk to yourself.

I recently had Japan cancel their rubber trade to me becasue when it came time to renew they try to extort a hideous amount from me--some allies! I now have to either take Stalingrad, or somehow take and get one of those western african rubbers on line. Either way I have a rather large problem now.

 

[oljb007]

Rocoteh (all)

Sorry for disappearing. I moved, didn't get internet at home and then work blocked the site. I am glad to see this thread still going strong, a testiment to your hard work.

I am starting my photography business these days (www.jb-studios.com) and have been quite busy with little free time. So I doubt I will be able play your scenario enough to make any viable contributions to this thread. But I will check in from time to time now that I have internet at home.

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler,

Thank you for your comment.

Yes, The Royal Navy really had problems with quality if one look at
the capital ships.
In fact this was an old problem. During WW1 the German battleships
were superior to the British in most aspects.
Britain did rely on superior quantity and that is probably the reason
to the problems with quality.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

Hyperborean,

Thank you for the report.

Germany - Sid - Week 25, 1941

"Cities conquered: Tver, Moscow, Tula, Voronezh, Kursk, Groznyj, Timbuktu and Corsica (again).
Things are finally starting to go my way. I think the key to the success was to heavily reinforce the Luftwaffe. I can obliterate dozens of divisions every week now, and that has really helped the Wehrmacht. There are still some pockets of resistance behind the front lines, but they can easily be wiped out."
Hyperborean

I think Soviet soon will collapse!

"Because of the Allied domination in the Mediterranean I have not been able to reinforce DAK as I had planned. But I still have enough panzers to move forward. I have airdropped all my paratroopers over North Africa, and they are holding the conquered cities until I can develop the paratrooper plane and reinforce the garrisons by air. I have almost finished researching Air 2 1940, so this shouldn't take too long"
Hyperborean

An interesting move.

"I have 2 u-boats in the Red Sea (where they have engaged and sunk several destroyers), 2 u-boats near India, 2 u-boats around Australia, 2 u-boats west of South America, 1 u-boat north of Japan (this one took the Northwest Passage to the Pacific Ocean, and it has sunk several Soviet subs). I also had a u-boat in Indonesia, but the British sunk it. And a few more subs are currently in the Northwest passage on their way to the Pacific."
Hyperborean

I think its a very good idea to spread out the u-boat forces in the
way you describe. Allied transports will be disturbed no matter position!

"Now that I have connected all Spanish cities with railroads (except La Coruna, where the Allies prevent me from building anything) I have noticed what an effort it takes to build railroads, and this is good. For instance, I have 102 workers building a railroad on a mountain tile, and they are still not done! "
Hyperborean

That represents heavy investment.

"My fleet of Bismarcks has been entangled in battles in the English Channel. They are pretty good. I destroy two KGVs for every Bismarck they sink. But I'm not entirely happy with the kill ratio. I want to cause more damage."
Hyperborean

As you say its a good kill-ratio though.

"I'm going to reward my Finnish allies by starting to hand over the cities I have taken in northwestern Russia to them. This is for two reasons. First of all, I want a strong ally, and secondly, I want them to have access to the Atlantic. That's why I'm going to give them the city-ports of Narvik, Murmansk, Sosnovka, Arkhangelsk and Petjora (I'm going to keep southern Scandinavia though. The border will be drawn south of Narvik-Kiruna-Luleå.).
I may consider giving the Italians some African cities, but that is a later issue."
Hyperborean

I think this is good ideas.

"Now that I have pushed the Russians back I'm going to reform the Army Groups. Army Group North's objectives are Gorki, Kazan and Perm. Army Group Centre's objectives are Saratov and Kujbysjev. Army Group South's objectives are Stalingrad and Astrachan. My artillery will move to Stalingrad to attack the fortress there while my panzers will carry out the other operations.
Once these objectives have been completed I'm going to reform the Army Groups again. I will replace Army Group Centre's panzers with infantry, supported by artillery, after Stalingrad has been taken. The reason is because the panzers cannot use their speed when they move through forests."
Hyperborean

Yes, that is an important factor to consider when planning.

"Instead Army Group South will be reinforced by the panzers and attack Central Asia, and link up with the Japanese. Army Group North will consist entirely of panzers, and they will attack the northernmost Siberian cities where I have most use of their speed on the tundra. This involves some pretty complex moves back and forth along the battle-lines, but I think it will work."
Hyperborean

If Germany reach the Arkhangelsk-Astrachan line its almost impossible
for Soviet to recover.

"I know I said earlier that I would attack Suez with Army Group South, but those plans have been postponed for a while, mainly because I still don't have control over the Mediterranean, and it will take some time before I will. So there's no rush. I think it's more important to make contact with the Japanese and threaten the British and the Russians from Central Asia. That's my number one priority right now."
Hyperborean

A good priority.

Comment on stats:

US-AI has already built an impressing force, although its navy
is rather weak.

Japanese navy: Very strong!

Soviet airforce: Stronger then one could expect.

Thank you and welcome back.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

Rocoteh (all)

Sorry for disappearing. I moved, didn't get internet at home and then work blocked the site. I am glad to see this thread still going strong, a testiment to your hard work.

I am starting my photography business these days (www.jb-studios.com) and have been quite busy with little free time. So I doubt I will be able play your scenario enough to make any viable contributions to this thread. But I will check in from time to time now that I have internet at home.

oljb007,

Welcome back!

Good luck with your photography business.

I hope you will find time in the future to report on WW2-Global again.

Rocoteh

 

[Rocoteh]

I recently had Japan cancel their rubber trade to me becasue when it came time to renew they try to extort a hideous amount from me--some allies! I now have to either take Stalingrad, or somehow take and get one of those western african rubbers on line. Either way I have a rather large problem now.

Sasebo,

Yes, that really sounds like a problem!

I guess the best way is to occupy one of the rubber-tiles in
West-Africa.

Rocoteh

 

[Adler17]

I played a few turns in my game. There are a few remarks:

1. The bombing of the German occupied Dutch and Belgian harbours became less, however is still existing.
2. The Me 109 should be enhenced. I tried to fight with her against a Spitfire. I tested the results by reloading and replaying. The Me 109 was in most cases shot down. But since both planes were nearly equal (at the beginning at least) they should have the same stats. Also I think under variants of the existing planes would be good.

However I should give a small result of my game now:

It is week 40 1939. I have conquered Poland, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. I am preparing for the invasion of France. France has successfully invaded Italy conquering Turin and Milan. I had light losses until now.
The war in the air is doing well, as much of the enemy air forces were killed and I have had only light losses.
The war at sea has for me three fronts:
1. The Atlantic: There I use my Uboats to do as much damage as they can before being sunk. My Panzerschiffe are on the way home, since I have no harbour there.
2. North sea, Skagerrak. The British tried and still try to bomb my minefields. My battleships Schranhorst, Gneisenau and the Deutschland were able to sink 3 capital ships until now (IIRC Hood, Nelson and Repulse). In this turn 3 British CA appeared, only to be sunk by my forces. At first my S boats damaged them. Then the old Schlesien and Schleswig Holstein were engaging them and sunk 2 of them without problems. The last one was finished by a Uboat.
3. North sea, German Bay/ Channel: The British traffic here is great. I have here mostly Uboats and destroyers to deal with them. So my forces were until now able to sink several ships, among them also 3 CV and several CA. Nevertheless flotillas of about totally 30 DDs were able to cross the channel entry without being punished by my forces. Therefore the French navy lost the CA Colbert and the BC Dunquerque due to my planes. I lost a Do 17 due to British Spitfighters.
As last remark I suggest to delete Lille and add Cherbourg.

Adler

 

[Morphling]

Me,being a noob in civ,is playing only on warlord so the report will no be interresting at all,but i'm very pleased about my industy i produce 8 panzers per turn and my coastal citys build 3 bismarks in 8 turns or so i like it...but Rocoteh I must say u hae greatet such a great szenario very good work ...
One thing annoying me:the USA(being the only enemy with a Navy left,hast tonnes of small ships and i only have 4 of each Bismarks and Gneisnau class but the fact that they can attack only once each turn makes it imposibble 4 me to handle their fleet what about letting them attack 2 times a turn?

 

[IarnGreiper]

Hello all. I have been very busy at work in the last months and I had plenty to do in my "free time". However I decided to try to play a new game of WWII global right now. Can t live without

 

[Rocoteh]

Adler,

Thank you for the report.

"1. The bombing of the German occupied Dutch and Belgian harbours became less, however is still existing.
2. The Me 109 should be enhenced. I tried to fight with her against a Spitfire. I tested the results by reloading and replaying. The Me 109 was in most cases shot down. But since both planes were nearly equal (at the beginning at least) they should have the same stats. Also I think under variants of the existing planes would be good."
Adler

I will look this over with regard to version 2.2.
There will probably be late versions of both Me-109 and Spitfire.

"It is week 40 1939. I have conquered Poland, Denmark, Belgium and the Netherlands. I am preparing for the invasion of France. France has successfully invaded Italy conquering Turin and Milan. I had light losses until now.
The war in the air is doing well, as much of the enemy air forces were killed and I have had only light losses."
Adler

A good start.
I will introduce Italian fortress-units in version 2.2.
Hopefully the result will be that France-AI cease to invade Italy.

"The war at sea has for me three fronts:
1. The Atlantic: There I use my Uboats to do as much damage as they can before being sunk. My Panzerschiffe are on the way home, since I have no harbour there."
Adler

A good move.

"2. North sea, Skagerrak. The British tried and still try to bomb my minefields. My battleships Schranhorst, Gneisenau and the Deutschland were able to sink 3 capital ships until now (IIRC Hood, Nelson and Repulse). In this turn 3 British CA appeared, only to be sunk by my forces. At first my S boats damaged them. Then the old Schlesien and Schleswig Holstein were engaging them and sunk 2 of them without problems. The last one was finished by a Uboat."
Adler

Its disturbing that AI bombs minefields but I see no good way to stop it.

"3. North sea, German Bay/ Channel: The British traffic here is great. I have here mostly Uboats and destroyers to deal with them. So my forces were until now able to sink several ships, among them also 3 CV and several CA. Nevertheless flotillas of about totally 30 DDs were able to cross the channel entry without being punished by my forces. Therefore the French navy lost the CA Colbert and the BC Dunquerque due to my planes. I lost a Do 17 due to British Spitfighters.
As last remark I suggest to delete Lille and add Cherbourg."
Adler

OK, notes have been taken.

Thank you and welcome back.

Rocoteh