29-05-2005 20:31									#181
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by rmsharpe I already said that

Not since Curt described the BC as more powerful than a BB. It's not.

	29-05-2005 20:49									#182
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

The Battle-Cruiser 'Surface Raider' unit is slightly more
expensive than a BB to represent Germany's WW2 naval
shortfalls. And while it can outgun a BB, it has not got
such heavy armour, but can travel faster.

	29-05-2005 23:33									#183
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Progress UPDATE!

*Added War Supplies unit for trade.

*Removed cities: Rivadivia and Sudbury.

*Added Cities: Wake, Midway and Pearl Harbor.

*Changed generic infantry to attack, to help prevent Canadian unit gridlock.

*Added more border forts to Northern USA, cutting off all entry to the interior.

*Added Hurricane fighter.

*Nebelwerfer changed to more historically useful 105mm Wespe.

*Artillery changed to generic versions, in 45mm, 75mm and 150mm flavours.

New zip coming soon!

	30-05-2005 00:07									#184
	Suffering from ads?

The suspense is killing me.

	30-05-2005 00:17									#185
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

And me!

	30-05-2005 00:19									#186
	Remove this text

I suspended my initial playtesting after one turn, when it became apparent that the US-Canada problem had to be resolved.

Can't wait to start the scen again.

But how about the Brit-Barb problem in SE Asia?

	30-05-2005 01:54									#187
	Suffering from ads?

I have the new version right here, so I would be delighted
if anyone could give it a playtest for a few game years and
tell me what they think of the new setup?

http://www.evo-games.net/Home/viewt...p?p=12803#12803

PS
The Brits in Asia pose some tricky problems, I am
considering giving a few cities to the commonwealth
or neutrals to stop Brit attacks.

This brings me onto the factor of the commonwealth civ,
should they be kept as is or should they be prevented from
building anything, instead using events to help the Brit?

Options are open – Even to introduce a Chinese civ.
But then we will have to see what can be done with Canada, etc…

Well, if some intrepid types could take a few tests and
give me a list of any bugs/glithches/concerns we can get
this monster into fighting shape!

Keep me posted of anything!

PS
Cheers in advance!

	30-05-2005 02:06									#188
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Oh, and you'd best start a new game, as these changes are radical...

Also please DL the 'Sound1' file again!

You can delete the 'Pos', 'Arty1', and 'Arty2' files from your sound folder too!

Cheers!

	30-05-2005 16:49									#189
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

If anyone is playing the lastest version...

Do you find the AA Battery to be too tough???

	30-05-2005 17:08									#190
	Inflate your Upload Space

The US-Canada problem still exists. I ran a test by killing all civs except the US, Allies and Neutrals (can't kill Barb civ); surrounding Vancouver with a wall of US units; fortifying all US units; and using the ORDERS pulldown to end turns without having to manage any US units.

The results duplicated what rmsharpe reported for the previous version. By mid '43 there were about 15 Allied units milling around from Chicago to Denver to Pierre.

The Allied units, originally located NE of Boston, had moved SW down the eastern seabord early in the scen. In Oct '41, the first Artillery unit appeared near Pierre. After that, there was a steady stream of units that moved west from Toronto and then turned south at the western end of Lake Superior. All of them were under various GOTO orders to approximately (50,60). Without the wall around Vancouver, there probably would have been some Allied units roaming around on the West Coast.

To avoid this, IMHO the scen has to start with a coast to coast barrier of fortresses + US Inf or something equivalent (mines, anyone? ), or instructions to US players to immediately create one.

The additional EW roads are a good idea except that Armored Cars and Tanks cannot use them to cross impassable Mountain terrain. Perhaps the impassable mountain squares under railroads could be replaced by hills. Railroad builders tended to put their tracks through passes rather than high mountains.

Sorry, but the US does not appear to be ready for meaningful playtesting.

quote: If anyone is playing the lastest version... Do you find the AA Battery to be too tough???

Dunno bout that one but why would anyone build the 75mm popgun?

	30-05-2005 20:41									#191
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

While we're speaking of Canada, I think it might be a good idea to insert the city of Winnipeg into Southern Manitoba. It is considered by many to be the gateway to the Canadian West, and it would serve therefore as a crucial strongpoint in the event of a German invasion of North America from the east as well as a Japanese invasion from the West.

Just a thought.

	30-05-2005 20:49									#192
	Get a bigger avatar today!

i watched some show on the history channel about the construction of a highway from washington state to alaska that went through british colombia, it was supposed to be a major supply route in case of a japanese invasion of alaska, perhaps you could impliment this somehow,

	31-05-2005 04:20									#193
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA The results duplicated what rmsharpe reported for the previous version. By mid '43 there were about 15 Allied units milling around from Chicago to Denver to Pierre.

Did they prevent you from moving units or clog up the RRs?

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA The Allied units, originally located NE of Boston, had moved SW down the eastern seabord early in the scen. In Oct '41, the first Artillery unit appeared near Pierre. After that, there was a steady stream of units that moved west from Toronto and then turned south at the western end of Lake Superior. All of them were under various GOTO orders to approximately (50,60). Without the wall around Vancouver, there probably would have been some Allied units roaming around on the West Coast.

Hmm...

Take a look at my save from the same version...
I cannot see any of the odd actions you describe...



I checked on the Commonwealth and could not see the
swamp of units there was before, in fact, they seemed
to be loading units onto transport and sending them
Eastwards...The AI is indeed weird...

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA To avoid this, IMHO the scen has to start with a coast to coast barrier of fortresses + US Inf or something equivalent (mines, anyone? ), or instructions to US players to immediately create one.

That seems like a pretty extreme solution...
I am even considering giving the canadian cities to the US civ...

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA The additional EW roads are a good idea except that Armored Cars and Tanks cannot use them to cross impassable Mountain terrain. Perhaps the impassable mountain squares under railroads could be replaced by hills. Railroad builders tended to put their tracks through passes rather than high mountains.

I'll look into this one...

PS
I used to play Railroad tycoon, y'know!

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA Sorry, but the US does not appear to be ready for meaningful playtesting.

Is this based on the RR and the neighbours?

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA Dunno bout that one but why would anyone build the 75mm popgun?

The same reason as they would build anything?

Are you saying it needs beefed up?

	31-05-2005 04:33									#194
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

PS
Agricola, many thanks for your playtesting - You are an ace!

Any suggestions on unit balances or any details, please let me know...



I think the best solutions are:

1)
To give the Canadian cities to British or US control...

2)
To totally isolate them with ocean squares...But that will mess up the map...
I am rather loathe to delete these Canadian cities from the map...

3)
Adding a minefield unit will use up more space, more
units and look fugly with the ToT health-bars hovering all around...

Other that this, I am pretty much stumped!

Now is the time for me to choose - What do you think?

	31-05-2005 05:15									#195
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Curt, what are you using impassible terrain for?

	31-05-2005 05:17									#196
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Quebec should be Montreal, the largest Canadian city at that time.

	31-05-2005 05:31									#197
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by techumseh Curt, what are you using impassible terrain for?

My original idea for it was to stop tanks and APCs rolling around in the mountains...

quote: Originally posted by techumseh Quebec should be Montreal, the largest Canadian city at that time.

Noted, but do you have any suggestions about the problems mentioned above?

	31-05-2005 06:54									#198
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Please forgive this intrusion

I think the "Pocket Battleships" or "Battlecruisers" were faster than BBs, but had slightly less armour and smaller caliber main guns than most BBs.

For example, BCs or pocket battleships such as the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau had 11" main guns.

However, battleships such as the HMS Prince of Wales and USS Arizona had 14" guns.

Most other BBs had 15" (HMS Renown; Richelieu) and 16" (HMS Nelson; USS Washington) main guns.

German pocket battleships were never intended to fight the heavier, better gunned BBs. Instead, they were used as fast, well-armed, commerce raiders...

http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/scharnhorst.htm

Cheers!

Last edited by Leonidas on 31-05-2005 at 07:03

	31-05-2005 07:03									#199
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

As they will probably fight in Europe alongside the brits anyway, give them to the British civ.

Last edited by Eivind IV on 31-05-2005 at 08:00

	31-05-2005 07:14									#200
	Increase Your PM Length

battlecruisers started as a way to build a dreadnought that used a cruiser hull, the pocket battleships was germany's attempt to build capitol ships that were within the tonnage limit imposed by the treaty of versailles
the pocket battleships kind of look like old pre-dreadnought battleships,
the dreadnoughts and later battleships were a way of saying "look i can waste vasts amount of money on something that isn't really useful when you think about it but hey, it looks cool and i have the money and resources"

	31-05-2005 07:23									#201
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by curtsibling My original idea for it was to stop tanks and APCs rolling around in the mountains... Noted, but do you have any suggestions about the problems mentioned above?

Well, one possibility is to use one terrain as an impassible border.

The other is to use a moveunit command to move wandering units away from the border areas. For example, several maprect areas on the US side could be established to move any invading Canadian units (one of my favorite fantasies, btw ) back across the border. Ditto for the Americans. Combined with a few strategically placed static units, and you should be able to secure the "longest undefended border in the world".

	31-05-2005 08:22									#202
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Here's an April '42 screen shot from my second test (all civs active) of the US-Canada problem.

The three Allied Inf in the New York- Richmond - Pittsburgh area started the scen in New Brunswick. The Armored Car and 2 Arty units north of Lake Superior are on their way the US midwest.

Not shown are 4 Mexican units which have reached San Diego and Austin.

In neither test did I see any loaded transports leave for Europe or elsewhere.

Attachment: dtotpost.jpg
This has been downloaded 67 time(s).

Last edited by AGRICOLA on 31-05-2005 at 08:43

	31-05-2005 08:37									#203
	Remove this text

This is the US midwest in August '43 in my first test with only 3 civs. North of Lake Superior, most of the Inf are heading for Toronto while the Arty and Armored Cars are heading for the US.

Attachment: dtotpost1.jpg
This has been downloaded 65 time(s).

	31-05-2005 09:15									#204
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

"Pocket Battleships" were technically not battleships at all, but upgunned heavy cruisers. Erika is right, they were built to avoid certain provisions of the Versailles Treaty. They had deisel engines and mounted 6 11" guns in two turrets. Like battlecruisers, they were intended to outrun what they could not fight.

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were actual battlecruisers, mounting 6 11" guns in three turrets. They were no match for real battleships, the Scharnhorst being blown up by a single salvo from the Duke of York.

Battlecruisers could mount guns as big as a battleship. The Hood mounted 8 15" guns, the same as the Bismarck, and was actually bigger. When it came to a battle, the sacrifice of armor for speed proved fatal for the Hood.

The Bismarck was not really more powerfully armed compared to other modern battleships of the time (8 15" guns vs. 10 14" for the King George class or 9 16" for American battleships launched in the same period. It was very well armored though, and you might want to increase it's DF or give it an extra hit when doing the rules. I hope this helps.

	31-05-2005 10:31									#205
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I guess it depends on what country does the classification.

According to my source (Bishop):

The British rated the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau as battle cruisers, but Germany had planned to build them as "Pocket Battleships". They were planned as fast, but lightly armed battleships (11" guns) (Bishop, The Complete Encyclopedia of Weapons of WWII, p.481).

So there is often an interchange between calling them BCs and battleships.

Curt is correct to call them battleships.

Still, whatever name they go by, these German ships were no match for Allied BBs (11" guns vs 15 and 16" guns).

http://www.kbismarck.com/scharnhorst.html

	31-05-2005 11:05									#206
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Transocean logistics seems to be above the AI's head.

I'd just make them British.

	31-05-2005 11:14									#207
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ahh, but the caption immediately below says "Scharnhorst and her sister ship were designed to accept 380 mm (15-in) guns, but wartime conditions prevented this."

In any event, they don't fit any generally accepted definition of "battleship". They were battlecruisers - and weak ones at that.

Last edited by techumseh on 31-05-2005 at 11:31

	31-05-2005 12:14									#208
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by techumseh Ahh, but the caption immediately below says "Scharnhorst and her sister ship were designed to accept 380 mm (15-in) guns, but wartime conditions prevented this." In any event, they don't fit any generally accepted definition of "battleship". They were battlecruisers - and weak ones at that.

they pretty much were undergunned battlecruisers with good armor,

	31-05-2005 12:44									#209
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by curtsibling quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA Sorry, but the US does not appear to be ready for meaningful playtesting. Is this based on the RR and the neighbours?

To some extent both, but mainly for the neighbours. However, I must have been at 95% asleep when I wrote that. I'm simply going to use the cheat mode to create as many US Inf as are needed to seal the Candian border from Vancouver to the Atlantic. I may also change a few mountain squares to hills to fix the RR problem, but only if it becomes a major nuisance.

The Mexicans can probably be handled by existing US units and their ZOC's.

Is this alright by you? Any special things to look out for? That is, beside the barrage of 11, 14, 15 and 16 inch shells which have made this thread a decidedly unhealthy place for us landlubbers?

	31-05-2005 15:01									#210
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA To some extent both, but mainly for the neighbours. However, I must have been at 95% asleep when I wrote that. I'm simply going to use the cheat mode to create as many US Inf as are needed to seal the Candian border from Vancouver to the Atlantic. I may also change a few mountain squares to hills to fix the RR problem, but only if it becomes a major nuisance. The Mexicans can probably be handled by existing US units and their ZOC's.

I will address the American RR problems for sure in
the next update, same goes for the Urals and Alps.

Another radical solution is to make infantry immobile,
and give the USA the GIs from the start, leaving the
infantry as border garrisons...This would also stop
the barb infantry surge in China and the Balkans...

quote: Originally posted by AGRICOLA Is this alright by you? Any special things to look out for? That is, beside the barrage of 11, 14, 15 and 16 inch shells which have made this thread a decidedly unhealthy place for us landlubbers?

The naval advice is invaluable!