Thrawn modification - wow impressive

[ev]

I have played this mod through summer 1940. I really like it, though it makes me wish I had a better computer.

At first I was concerned about high unit cost, but I have come to see the wisdom of it.

I also like the fact that so many units start at reduced strength. I wonder if it would be possible to have all units built at reduced strength ...and have the player chose between taking time to beef them up, or throwing into combat at reduced strength.

On the negative side, I think the Allied AI is too quick to DOW Italy. It works to Axis advantage.

I am also concerned about how long it takes for an engineer unit to fortify a tile. If tiles are smaller, it should take less time to fortify. I am trying to make a fortified line from Konigsberg to Warsaw and down to the frontier with Hungary. It seems it will take forever. (I want to fortify Poland to cover my back while I SeaLion England.)

Regarding the Italian Navy, I do not agree with the decission to reduce its attack strength. The Italian high command was afraid of losing their fleet... for good reasons: they had a huge coast to guard, and they did not have the industrial capacity to replace any loss. Those issues are adequately represented in the game already. During 1939-40 all my italian production is sucked up by my Tobruk units (1HQ, 2 air, 1 armor, 1 army, 3 corps). I still need another HQ and my second armored unit if I ever want to go in the offense. I have not been able to spend any money on research. I know I could not possibly recover from any losses in my fleet, so clearly I have to play it carefully....

Finally, I read elsewhere in this site that English ports will never reach level 5 if captured by Axis units. Is that so?

[ev]

Originally posted by ev:

I read elsewhere in this site that English ports will never reach level 5 if captured by Axis units. Is that so?

...mhm, let me answer my own question. I took over England, ports are at level 4 and I cannot ship any unit out of England. Is there anything I can do to bring my ports to level 5? Why are these ports stuck at level 4?

[Preusse]

Im also anxious to hear about this, since im currently playing my friend as the Axis. Also does England move their capital to Canada when London and Manchester falls? Otherwise id like to use this opportunity to congratulate thrawn on his excellent mod. Much appreciated.

[Preusse]

I decided not to invade the UK and focus on a traditional campaign in Russia, which oddly began in August/September when Russia declared war. Anyways i really enjoy the mod, there are several improvements in it over the campaigns in the box. But it seems the allies dont stand much of a chance, at least in our game. The German navy owns the Royal navy, by early 1941 the Germans earn 700+ MPP, almost twice what Russia does. I really cant see how the Axis can lose.

[Thrawn78]

Thanks for feedback.

- Russia should earn ~ 500 MPP

- Balance is the major thing for what I need feedback (I thought with Oil =5*MPP it would be enough for Allies - but seems i am wrong)

[Leedsunited40]

What would one suggest the oil be to make it more balanced?

[ev]

About game balance for the Thrawn Mod:

I have only played through early '41. I am playing as begginer, against the AI (it is the first time I play this scenario). I did not invade Denmark and Norway. Took over the low countries, Frnace, and invaded England as soon as possible.

Taking over England was too easy, because the Allied AI is shipping all its units to North Africa. One of my subs actually sunk an army transport comming out of London for Africa on the turn before I attacked London. Meanwhile there was no army to defend Liverpool.

One way to balance things out would be to stop Allied AI from attacking (DOW) Italy in '39. The resources England uses in North Africa would be better used in Engand and France. Furthermore, this allows the Italian Air Force to bomb French HQ's other units.

Can we induce the Allied AI to defend key strategic locations: each city and port in England, Gibraltar, Malta, Alexandria... The Allied AI should not go around attacking other places (e.g. Tobruk) until these critical locations are defended.

On the other hand, I believe the "El Alamein" fortifications are excessive. They should not be full fledge fortresses like Tobruk and Maginot. As a matter of fact, I would consider instead of starting the game with pre-built fortresses at El Alamain, giving the allied player a Construction Unit to fortify El Alamain sometime after Italy joins the Axis.

I would also eliminate the automatic appearance of the Africa Corps. If the German player wants to have an Africa Corps, they should buy it and ship it all the way to Africa.

Another way to balance things out would be to reduce the starting strength of the units along the Rhine.

Yet another way to balance things out would be to require the Axis player to invest in diplomacy to bring Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria on board.

Finally, Russia DOWed on me after I attacked London. Russia was not ready to fight me at all. DOWing me did nothing to help England. The Russian lost several units. I gained experience and took three Russian cities before end of '40... And, as an added bonus, Spain joined the Axis, which allowed me to take an undefended Gibraltar.

Can you script minimum buildups before a declartion of war?

[Preusse]

Well it seems Russia joins the fight in late 1940 no matter what. I havent looked at the scripts because im to lazy, but it has happend all the 3 times ive played the scenario. First 2 times vs AI and lastly multiplayer. In regard to giving the Russians more MPPs i tried to mod that myself but i cant increase the level of oil above 5. But i think they need a boost in MPPS. Not additional units its better to give them MPPs, as it will create more variety.

[ev]

Russia reached huge military production some time during 1942. However, its military output was more modest prior to the German invasion.

I would suggest that Rusia gets an automatic (free) research chit in prodution and/or an automatic (free) reseach chit in industrial tech, after Germany captures any three Russian Cities.

Also I would allow Russia to invest an additional research chit on Production and Industrait Tech after DOW... But I would reduce by one chit the amount Russia can invest on Production and Industrial Tech prior to DOW. The idea is that military production should be boosted after DOW, not before DOW.

[Thrawn78]

Hello,

Russia joins to early (dunno why - I have to check the scripts),

to russian MPP, maybe they should start with 2-3 more tech points or with e.g. 1000 MPP,

but atm i am thinking they need just more units - would be historical

[Preusse]

Yes perhaps give them more units, otherwise give them a couple of more oil fields, or perhaps increase Ural industry?

[ev]

I find air force is too effective against infantry.

From my readings, I gather WWII air raids were very effective against armor, artillery (Rockets), and, supply (HQ's), but much less effective against infantry.

...My guess the main problem regards the way research increases affect infantry attack. Apparently as your planes get better, all attack strengths increase. This is not realistic. A better fighter was not necessarily a better tactical bomber.

I guess the same is true of Hard (armor) attack. The deadliest tank killers were older planes like the Stuka fitted with automatic cannons. ...development in Anti Tank weaponry had more to do with Hard Attack for airplanes than anything else.

Ground attack values for Tactical Air Units should respond to different tech areas than "Advanced Aircraft"...

[ev]

Originally posted by Thrawn78:

...but atm i am thinking they need just more units - would be historical

Russia had a lot of poorly trainned, poorly equiped infantry. Many infantry men were not given rifles, but were expected to pick up the rifles of their fallen comrades. That's quite grim.

And basic trainning was truly minimal.

Finally, they lacked radios, artillery spotters, and, many other support troops and equipment taken for granted in western armies.

I guess you could reduce the cost of the infantry corps, but also reduce its combat values. If you choose this approach, I would consider reducing attack and hard defense values, but, perhaps live as is the soft defense value.

I would also reduce the trainning time for these infantry corps to only 4 weeks.

Another way to achieve this is to push the infantry and anti tank tech for all countries 2 additional points so the starting, standard tech level is 2. You would also need to increase the maximum research level by 2. So French, Italians, Finish, Hungarians and every body and their neighbor have Infantry level 2. But the Allied/Russian Player (and every body else) can build Russian level 0 units if they want to have cheaper/weaker infantry units.

Yet another way to go about this... would the editor allow you to reduce the trainning time and cost of the Russian Infantry Corps but have it appear at half strength?

[JJColorado]

Someone wrote:

---------

"I find air force is too effective against infantry. From my readings, I gather WWII air raids were very effective against armor, artillery (Rockets), and, supply (HQ's), but much less effective against infantry."

---------

ANSWER: The game is a high level strategic game. When you bomb a unit you are bombing an entire corp or army. You are not necessarily eliminating the line infantry squads of the unit but rather are reducing the overall combat effectiveness of that corp or army - i.e. you can consider if you like that the "tail" is being bombed - supply, command/control, etc. When a unit is "eliminated" it can usually be rebuilt at reduced cost - this is because it has had its combat effectiveness reduced to the point that it must be rested and refitted (i.e. rebuilt) - it's not representing that you've bombed to death every infantryman in the unit.

-----------------

"...My guess the main problem regards the way research increases affect infantry attack. Apparently as your planes get better, all attack strengths increase. This is not realistic. A better fighter was not necessarily a better tactical bomber."

-----------------------

ANSWER: As planes get better all attack strengths do not increase. You can verify this by looking at the properties (right-click) of an air unit that has 1 or more air tech added to it. You will see that only air attack and defense values are changed by the tech increase - naval/soft/hard attack values are not modified.

--------------------------------

"I guess the same is true of Hard (armor) attack. The deadliest tank killers were older planes like the Stuka fitted with automatic cannons. ...development in Anti Tank weaponry had more to do with Hard Attack for airplanes than anything else."

----------------------------

ANSWER: refer to previous answer - hard attack values are not changed by air tech

---------------------------

"Ground attack values for Tactical Air Units should respond to different tech areas than "Advanced Aircraft"..."

--------------------------

ANSWER: refer to previous answer - ground attack values are not changed by air tech - there is no way to increase them. There is also no way to increase ground units' defense vs air - so the relationship between air and ground/naval units is unchanged by tech throughout the war - only by experience levels of the units involved, and by terrain.

[ev]

Thanks for all the info JJ.

In a recent game, a few airfleet blasted out of the map an infantry corps in London, and a Paratroop unit walked into London unoppossed. I have had other similar events.

After the information you gave us here, and other readings in this site, maybe experience is playing to big of a factor. Otherwise, I really don't understand why my airfleets are so effective... but they are, to an extent that seems disproportionate.