Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: WAW update and notes

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> RE: WAW update and notes Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/21/2008 4:04:54 PM   
thomas916

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 1/17/2008
Status: offline
i have a question just upgraded to the latest patch and trie to play WAW v27 but there is no option to save the game.Everytime it asked me to create a password after this I played one turn and wanted to quit but I could not save the game.(the button for saving is missing under the system option)

(in reply to tweber)
Post #: 61
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/21/2008 4:55:52 PM   
Twotribes


Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline
The scenario is et up to play by mail, when you start the scenario turn off the PBM options ( password and one other) I made the same mistake and had to do just as your doing now, ask what was going on.... )

(in reply to thomas916)
Post #: 62
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/21/2008 4:58:41 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
just in case that is not too clear, you can only save non pbem games

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 63
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/21/2008 5:00:20 PM   
thomas916

 

Posts: 21
Joined: 1/17/2008
Status: offline
Thanks a lot
That solved the problem

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 64
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 5:27:36 AM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
So what's conventional wisdom right now in this scenario re: what to do w/ France?

It sounds like abandon Maginot - defend around Paris, and evacuate some troops? Any thoughts?

Thanks

(in reply to thomas916)
Post #: 65
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 5:41:30 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
IIRC there's a penalty for evacuating hte Maginot line isn't there?

France is toast - best thing to do is probably to not invest too much in it - try to defend Lille for a turn if you can, Paris for another turn.....and be happy if you succeed! :)

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 66
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 1:04:48 PM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline
Afaik there is no penalty for evacuating the maginot line, only for the german if he crosses it before april 1940.

I usually simply evacuate the maginottroops in turn 1-3 to Lille and Paris. They are intended to die in France, but the 5 fighters get evacuated to GB and France usually builds only PP and no troops.
Then in april 1940 depending how good/bad the german start of Fall Gelb was if i think it was not too good i start the battle of britain then over french skies and France pumps out lots of defensive troops, rifles or mgs.
In some of my games this delayed the german player considerably.
Basically if the allied player decides to abandon the maginot line he more or less does what Manstein suggested for the French as counter for the german operational plan.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 67
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 3:16:10 PM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
We're starting a game w/ these house rules. Anyone who has played the scenario (incl Tom) have comments on whether these will be too imbalanced or cause any problems we might not foresee? We've developed these based on the posts made in this forum about the scenario and the AAR.

1) no building factories
2) USSR must be DOW'd by Feb 42
3) US must be attacked by May 42
4) 1939 no research
1940 max tech level II
1941 still max tech level II
1942 max tech level III
1943 still max tech level III
1944 and 1945 max tech level IV

We haven't house-ruled the no blocking of ports w/ neutral ships but I think neither of us would do that so I guess we could add it as a house rule just to be clear.

Comments/suggestions?

_____________________________


(in reply to thomas916)
Post #: 68
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 3:50:44 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
have you considered using my ca reduced air power mod, still in testing fyi?
It is specific to 27a and 27a test

< Message edited by freeboy -- 1/22/2008 3:51:59 PM >

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 69
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 4:01:03 PM   
jjdenver

 

Posts: 2247
Joined: 11/2/2007
Status: offline
Actually I feel like CA's have too much power against air too but we are already started and I'm hoping that eventually it becomes standard to reduce the flak power of CA's just a little bit.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 70
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 4:26:17 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
opk, let me know if you want to see my ca aa power reduced mod, they are easier to kill as well.. and u could self test it, or take your chances with me lol

(in reply to jjdenver)
Post #: 71
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 4:58:47 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline
Freeboy,

Would you mind posting what your mod is. Just a description of what you changed, ie numbers/factors, so that others of us can try it in our mods?

Thanks.

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 72
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 5:57:16 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
sure.. hitpoints: inititive: attacks: %kill:
CA1 1000 3/3 3 10
CA2 1300 3/3 4 10
CA3 1600 4/4 5 15
CA4 2000 5/5 5 20


So far the testers seem to favor this as fleets are now vulnerable to air.. and it seems in the wide ocean expanses cv will rule as they should.

I think the ranges on land based level one plane is way to much imo.. we will see what we need for the future


< Message edited by freeboy -- 1/22/2008 6:30:46 PM >

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 73
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 7:02:15 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline
Great thanks!

Yeah, I was thinking the all air ranges needed to be changed a bit.....

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 74
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/22/2008 11:19:35 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
I like the idea of a powerrfull, against bombers esp interceptor with a short range and a longer range escort poewerfull againt other fighters.
I like the idea of an event engine jets stf for the germans in 42 .. costly for pp but allowing jets in 43 44 45..
I like limiting research, perhaps simply making it more expensive?

Ilike WAW
I like my ca reducing mod as do the three testers I enlisted.. so far
I would not mind three week turns .
I think the reds should have a different production cost for ingfantry and perhaps more industry
I would like to see shorter ranges on dive bombers.
I like the idea of Two types of carrier air.. one anti ship/port and other intercepter type.. call them carrier fighterrs and carrier bombers ??/
I like the idea of no troops from enemy ocupied cities but perhaps reduced planes/tanks artillery// simulating captured industry
I like An event for no nazi tactics in Ukran and Baltic states giving Germans troops but limiting ss there.
other ideas anyone?
Think.. what option could be explored by the major powers.. IE german early armaments, total war footing  and more lesser quality tanks etc,
Or FDR takes us into war early event triggered by?
This engiune rocks for what if ????

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 75
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 1:30:04 AM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
xB wrote:
quote:

Afaik there is no penalty for evacuating the maginot line, only for the german if he crosses it before april 1940.


that must be what I was thinking of.

Can I suggest then that this is an opportunity for improvement?? :)

The French forces in the Maginot line should be frozen or immobile - with a PP option to release them, since it would have been a major political change for het French to do so.

Can the AT system do that?

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 76
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 2:41:27 AM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
sure, you have an event for loss of the maginot line as a stick and a build to the sea as a cost.. with the allied neutrals feeling abandoned going to germany
Not sure about units being frozen.. but seems Tom did this with the US ..

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 77
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 4:18:16 AM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

I like the idea of a powerrfull, against bombers esp interceptor with a short range and a longer range escort poewerfull againt other fighters.
I like the idea of an event engine jets stf for the germans in 42 .. costly for pp but allowing jets in 43 44 45..
I like limiting research, perhaps simply making it more expensive?

Ilike WAW
I like my ca reducing mod as do the three testers I enlisted.. so far
I would not mind three week turns .
I think the reds should have a different production cost for ingfantry and perhaps more industry
I would like to see shorter ranges on dive bombers.
I like the idea of Two types of carrier air.. one anti ship/port and other intercepter type.. call them carrier fighterrs and carrier bombers ??/
I like the idea of no troops from enemy ocupied cities but perhaps reduced planes/tanks artillery// simulating captured industry
I like An event for no nazi tactics in Ukran and Baltic states giving Germans troops but limiting ss there.
other ideas anyone?
Think.. what option could be explored by the major powers.. IE german early armaments, total war footing  and more lesser quality tanks etc,
Or FDR takes us into war early event triggered by?
This engiune rocks for what if ????



Great ideas! I was considering the following additions to your list:

Different types of factories - aircraft/vehicles/guns/shipyard but no supply/PP/infantry
Factories completely destructable
Strategic Bombers different from level bombers




_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 78
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 8:02:43 AM   
tweber

 

Posts: 1411
Joined: 6/27/2007
Status: offline
I am actually working on 2 others scenarios and want to get them done. But, it someone would like to make variations of this scenario, I would be happy to provide guidance. Here are some thoughts on the suggestions so far:

quote:

1) no building factories
2) USSR must be DOW'd by Feb 42
3) US must be attacked by May 42
4) 1939 no research
1940 max tech level II
1941 still max tech level II
1942 max tech level III
1943 still max tech level III
1944 and 1945 max tech level IV


First 1 is easy, just change the location type so it is not buildable. However, I still do not think this is a dominating strategy for the Axis.
2&3 are also easy through events. Although as a design philosophy, I have never like the automatic war just because the date changed.
4 is tough right now. Currently R&D does not have pre-requisites based on variables. Actually, item types does. This is how I do manpower. So, you could make it so that level x units could not be produced until time y. However, you could still do the research before hand. But, this is not particularly elegant. One thought would be to change the cost of pp over time. PP is, after all, an itemtype. You could double or multiply by ten the cost of the next R&D level. You could then divide by 2 or 10 the cost of pp at the time you want to allow this next research.

quote:

I like the idea of a powerrfull, against bombers esp interceptor with a short range and a longer range escort poewerfull againt other fighters.
I like the idea of an event engine jets stf for the germans in 42 .. costly for pp but allowing jets in 43 44 45..
I like limiting research, perhaps simply making it more expensive?

Ilike WAW
I like my ca reducing mod as do the three testers I enlisted.. so far
I would not mind three week turns .
I think the reds should have a different production cost for ingfantry and perhaps more industry
I would like to see shorter ranges on dive bombers.
I like the idea of Two types of carrier air.. one anti ship/port and other intercepter type.. call them carrier fighterrs and carrier bombers ??/
I like the idea of no troops from enemy ocupied cities but perhaps reduced planes/tanks artillery// simulating captured industry
I like An event for no nazi tactics in Ukran and Baltic states giving Germans troops but limiting ss there.
other ideas anyone?


For the first type above, you just have to add the appropriate sftypes, itemtypes, and update the research trees.
Research cost is set in the research sheet of the editor

3 week turns (or any turn duration of x days) is set in settings in the editor. You would have to check events to make sure nothing is triggered on a round higher than 1.
Changing production at a regime level would require major rework. You would have to define new people groups, change the people of production centers and of units.
For 'no troops' in enemy cities, you would have to mark cities with a slot to show original ownership, then run a map looper at the start of the turn. If the ownership had changed, you would have to change the production to a different produciton type. You would have to define a set of 'limited' production types. You would also need an event that undid this in the event that the city was recaptured. (If you can write this event, you probably do not need my help anymore)

quote:

The French forces in the Maginot line should be frozen or immobile - with a PP option to release them, since it would have been a major political change for het French to do so.

Can the AT system do that?


I can think of 2 ways to do this. First, you could count the garrison and put an incentive to keep it at a certain level. This would be similar to the garrison event in the east. Second, you could define a new regime called 'Maginot'. It would have to have an event to get the right supply. You could take the approate Vic used in the N.A. scenario. The regime might take independent or join the West at a certain time (like when the Western blitz card was played).

The one idea I would like to see someone pick up is a scenario that starts in May 1940, June 1941, or December 1941. This scenario would be much more multiplayer friendly.


(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 79
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 4:01:27 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweber
...
Changing production at a regime level would require major rework. You would have to define new people groups, change the people of production centers and of units.
For 'no troops' in enemy cities, you would have to mark cities with a slot to show original ownership, then run a map looper at the start of the turn. If the ownership had changed, you would have to change the production to a different produciton type. You would have to define a set of 'limited' production types. You would also need an event that undid this in the event that the city was recaptured. (If you can write this event, you probably do not need my help anymore)
...



I have this pretty much complete now in my mod just need to finish the events to change the production center types. the following peoples are in the scenario now:
Germans
SS
Italians
Russians
Siberians
British
French
Canadians
South Africans
Indians
Australians
Dutch
Belgians
Danish
Norwegians
Polish
Chinese
Japanese
Greeks
Yugoslavians
Hungarians
Rumanians
Bulgarians
Finish
Free French
Vichy French
RSI Italians

All with separate flags and ID markers.

I would like some input on whether I should make national differences on fighting ability and how best to do this. I think maybe national morale might work best and can change over time.
Example: Use Germans as bench mark set to 1 for 1939 to 1944 then .8 for 1945 (or maybe manpower level) due to drop in quality of troops.
Then Brits might be .85 for 1939 to 1942 then .9 until 1944 then 1
USA might be .9 until 1943 or 44
Russia would be .7 until 1943 then 1
Rumania would be .8 for entire war.

That kind of thing.
Hope to get some more work done on this this weekend.... real life is keeping me busy during the week.... and all the PBEM games I'm in.


_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to tweber)
Post #: 80
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 4:23:24 PM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline
I've done a small WAW-mod too, testing it now in a pbem with freeboy :).
If everything works as intended in this testgame i will upload the scenario. Probably there are somewhere errors in though and some more finetuning is needed.

Here is the readme about my current changes:
-Yamato battleships for Japan if they research lvl 4 ships. Slightly stronger than Battleships IV and artillery range 2
-Research costs increased, all lvl 1 groups need 120 or 160, lvl 2 240 or 320 and lvl 3 360 or 480.
Staff needs 240, 480 and 720 pp.
-Cruiser -25% damage vs. aircraft
-kayuschas have now no carry capacity and weaker attack, but cost only 1000
-T-34 for soviets added. A slightly weaker medium tank which only costs 1500 though
-King Tiger for germans added. About 25% better than a heavy tank IV, but needs more supply and slower. Needs armor 4 research

- Reworked increasing production and factories:
There are now 4 factory types with production of 2, 4, 8 and 16k. Cost for all of them is 20xtheir production, so 80, 160, 320 and 640 pp. 15x their production from vanilla seemed a bit too low to me.
Production increases are now seperately for each nation. The universal +25% in 1942 and +50% in 1943 are gone. Instead every nation gets free powerpoints via events, enough to roughly simulate the historic production increases. But for the allies those increases are a bit lower than historical to hopefully keep the game somewhat balanced.
As source for the data i used the charts on pages 54e,108e and 109e of the war diary of the OKW by Percy Schramm.
Those boni are granted:
1940:
West 600 pp, 100 each month from july to december. Can be converted via engineers building factories into 15k additional production. But you can also spend them on research instead if you think that is more useful. I recommend spending those pp on production though.
1942:
Soviets 960 pp, 80 each month = (up to) 24k additional production.
Japan 240 pp, 20 each month = 6k additional production
From june 1942 on production efficiency for München doubles, so the germans can spend 8000 production points on SS units from then on. This is because historically the germans started to greatly increase the number of Waffen-SS-divisions from 1942 on.
1943:
Germans 960 pp, 80 each month = 24k additional production
Usa (west) 6000 pp, 1000 each month from july to december = 150k additional production

-China got a second cheap troop type, militia. They are even weaker than conscripts and horrible, but they are cheap. They can be built in the safe hinterlands in 2 special factories that only produce supply for China and those militias. So China can use their Manpower. This hopefully leads to a somewhat historic outcome so that in this theater a stalemate is likely.
-Tweaked forts a bit. The small forts have only 400 structure points now and 40 structure points autorepair, but only cost 1 pp and 40 ep. The large forts have 2000 structure points and 200 structure points autorepair, but kept their cost of 5 pp and 300 ep.
So the small forts are basically field fortifications now whereas the big forts are "lines" like the Westwall or the Maginot Line.
-Germany starts with staff level 2 researched. You have to upgrade your existing staff though. This is to reflect the better german leadership in the early years of the war. In the polish campaign the germans have still been rather conservative though and it needed a lot of futile internal struggles in the german leadership. But eventually the brilliant german leaders like Manstein and Guderian managed to convince Hitler to accept their views and Mansteins plan for Fall Gelb.
It was not a complete success however because Hitler, maybe because he was a very conservative supreme commander, maybe because of political reasons, stopped the panzers in front of Dunkirch.

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 81
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 6:02:00 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
Not sure why the t34 is weaker? seems it should be a armor med tank level 3 that the reds start 1940 with.. now that would hurt the nasties! no worries awaiting your turn 

(in reply to xBoroNx)
Post #: 82
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 6:06:50 PM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Not sure why the t34 is weaker? seems it should be a armor med tank level 3 that the reds start 1940 with.. now that would hurt the nasties! no worries awaiting your turn

Hm the T-34 scales a bit bad with the current tanks in AT imho.

I'd say that if you assume that a panzer III and early panzer IV would be a light tank, lvl 3-4, then you could say the panzer IV F2-H is rougly a medium tank lvl 1-2 and panther then lvl 3-4.
The standard T-34 is in between a late panzer III and the panzer IV F2-H.

Eventually i will make an oob with nationspecific units, but that takes a long while. So as a quick+dirty solution i made the T-34 mainly extremely cheap.

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 83
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 7:10:53 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
right.. sounds about what you would think, with the t34  1942 models and the 34-85 being med t level 3 4 .. they should be cheaper historically..
If we are shooting, pun intended for historical accuracy.. then german tank units are stronger per sft, and reds get more sft

(in reply to xBoroNx)
Post #: 84
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/23/2008 11:46:44 PM   
SMK-at-work

 

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline
all that effort and you still let the French evacuate the Maginot line?

IMO you missed the things that REALLY matter.

AFAIK staff levels don't affect command ability do they?  they seem to jsut affect eth defence value of het staff in combat?

(in reply to freeboy)
Post #: 85
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/24/2008 12:02:11 AM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

all that effort and you still let the French evacuate the Maginot line?

IMO you missed the things that REALLY matter.


Hm you are correct, the maginot line issue should be solved too.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 86
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/24/2008 12:11:14 AM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: xBoroNx


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

all that effort and you still let the French evacuate the Maginot line?

IMO you missed the things that REALLY matter.


Hm you are correct, the maginot line issue should be solved too.


I'm not so sure about this. If you want to hamstring the player the way the French did their military then yes freeze them. But to allow the player to try something other than a "losing ploicy" thenI'd say no. Maybe make it an option - Historical French Political Realities

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to xBoroNx)
Post #: 87
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/24/2008 12:20:18 AM   
Twotribes


Posts: 6929
Joined: 2/15/2002
From: Jacksonville NC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barthheart


quote:

ORIGINAL: xBoroNx


quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

all that effort and you still let the French evacuate the Maginot line?

IMO you missed the things that REALLY matter.


Hm you are correct, the maginot line issue should be solved too.


I'm not so sure about this. If you want to hamstring the player the way the French did their military then yes freeze them. But to allow the player to try something other than a "losing ploicy" thenI'd say no. Maybe make it an option - Historical French Political Realities


How about the fact the german player is "hamstrung" by the fact he can not change to total war production? In fact the scenario never allows it to happen at all.

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 88
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/24/2008 12:22:33 AM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barthheart
I'm not so sure about this. If you want to hamstring the player the way the French did their military then yes freeze them. But to allow the player to try something other than a "losing ploicy" thenI'd say no. Maybe make it an option - Historical French Political Realities

Retreating from maginot should of course still be allowed. But the german should be allowed to attack France immediately then without losing his blitz card maybe. Maybe it would be better to remove the blitz card entirely and solve it differently. But it would need a major reworking of Tom's coding then. I share Tom's opinion he once stated somewhere here on the board, changing the events of someone else in AT seems almost tougher than making your own events. So so far i mainly expanded the scenario but did not change any important event code. I am still rather unused to the AT event code. I eventually get my events to work, but my eventwriting is much less elegant than Tom's. For 1 line Tom uses i need 3-4 if i do it myself

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 89
RE: WAW update and notes - 1/24/2008 12:44:57 AM   
xBoroNx

 

Posts: 404
Joined: 12/8/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

How about the fact the german player is "hamstrung" by the fact he can not change to total war production? In fact the scenario never allows it to happen at all.

The german player imho can already do this in any of the WAW's from Tom by deciding to spend production on building factories instead of troops. If the german player builds a couple of factories in 1941 he starts to earn the benefits in 42, so it imho nicely reflects total war production.

(in reply to Twotribes)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> RE: WAW update and notes Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.250