Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Questions from the Luddite downunder.

I have downloaded the file into a freshly copied WITPAE file.

On opening the game I get new pictures and find a new Scen 26 Norway/Denmark.

When I open this I get the WITP maps, but with WITW icon locations.

All the data seems right, I can interrogate the icons.

What have I done, or not done?????

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dali

AD JeffK

Fall of Denmark,
yes, Danish troops really prevents more than true, let them disappear after two days I felt wrong. (Let's give them a chance ...)
I dont think this is correct, added to the fact that AE engine doesnt move LCU fast enough (as also mentioned by Frank) means Denmark takes12-14 to clear, I'm nit sure they had enough ammo!
Too many LCU & Air Units on map:
There are so many units, how much there actually was!
For example, axis have a total of 3 Fighter Group (1 JG (48) and 2 ZG (2x36))
It is not much ...
Ground units maybe it does. It is because several German divisions are split into smaller units. Because naval assault course.
Later he joined.
No other army in Europe are not, the player does not attack targets in Belgium and the like.
It is written in HR and need to respect that. (unfortunately, are still only in Czech)
The land units of Nederlands, Belgium, France, The BEF and most of Germany are not needed in this SCENARIO, same goes for their respective Air Forces. I had a case where Luftwaffe Bombers sank thier targets then decided to bomb a TF in London at long range, unescorted and in the face of a Spitfire Sqn. Remove the target and keep them on track. maybe its worth making the map a bit shorter, is the English Channel relevant. HR are unessecary if the option isnt there.


RN has a lot of ships, as in reality.
It is this factor which largely compensates for a balance with axis side.
It's just important to how successful players RN ships used.
I dont understand, while the RN had a lot of ships the majority were off doing other things, the British Official History names a lot of the shipping actually used, and there is an RN website which names combatants by theatre (but would be a lot of work.) If you use all of the shipping provided, the RN has the ability to swamp the Kriegsmarine and totally wreck any German plans.

Movement on the map.
File pwhex is done in the editor, which is used for Pacific battlefield. There is no difference corresponds to the movement. Support units are provided in the range of 0.85 to 0.95% of the power units. (Approximately as in the original AE)
This is not a scenario "Bn size" is the size of a normal AE. Distribution of certain divisions and brigades I have already explained. Dali
What I mean is that the AE engine, designed for Island warfare does not handle Continental Land Combat very well in AE let alone a fully Continental Campaign as in Europe. Added to this is the stopping power (in game) of a Company or battalion sized unit. You can have a stack of 2 Infantry & 1 Mntn Division held up for a day or 2 by a company, while it happened from time to time, you also see men running from the overwhelming force approaching them. (In a board game you would see an overrun at high odds)Its just something AE doesnt do well. I think it would do a good WW1/ACW or Napoleonics campaign quite well

quote:

- give airdroppable seamines to both sides as Germany as well as Britain used those

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dali



- edit ships to give them the right radar for the timeline (Brits no radar, Germans Seetakt)
This is partly done. I tried to bring the ship into a state RN 1940. But there may be some mistakes.

Be carefull, not all radar that is listed for 1940 was there in April. You might even have all the RN ships right, but German radar (which was better than the British at that time) is totally missing.In 1941 some(?) British BBs had radar. I am not so sure about May 1940.

- remove all Danish troops from the scenario including all minefields. As land units move slow, it is then possible to use the Danish bases in about 10 days, which is almost in line with real life
No. The Danish army had existed, and certainly it will not delete. Axis player must defeat her. Move the German troops (largely on foot and horse-drawn vehicles)
corresponds to reality. With the exception of Copenhagen, Denmark can take for about 10-12 days. I consider this to be acceptable.

Do you think, that Germany would have fought 12 days with Denmark? The Wehrmacht finished Poland in 4 weeks and France in 6.The Netherlands and Belgium, both of a comparable size but much more difficult terrain lasted about one week. Peksy Denmark would be finished much faster. That was the reason Denmark stopped fighting immediately. Don´t you think, that a PzDivision would be transfered to Denmark in case of resistance? You don´t give this possibility to the German player as the reinforcement is hardcoded.

- include some garrisons to stop the loss of VP
I do not understand. A lot of places (from Warsaw to Tromso) you need to have Garrison. You need to allocate some units. You see it in the game ...
I spent quite a lot of attention Wh sicher units in the game is a lot of small German units

When you start this scenario, each player looses VP on base of to small garrison forces in some bases. As neither player has those forces in the beginning (they might come later), one gets this unnecessary message each turn. I am quite sure, that Germany HAD forces in Warsaw and Kattowice at this time of the war! Additionally you put garrison needs on bases which were German towns with German population,eg Danzig.


- edit the mountain gun
??
mountain gun 1213 (1231?)has a range of 0 should be 10. You just missed the number

- include the Allied forces planned to use in Norway
Also I do not understand ...
All British, Polish and French troops in Norway appear exactly in line with history.
Reply to this a few posts above.
There are missing some specific units?

The Allied planned to land 4 divisions in Norway and to mine Norwegian waters. The Germans were only some hours faster than the Brits to land forces.
Search for Operation Wilfried and Plan R4 just to get an idea. This might be interessting alternative history scenarios though.

Why do British French or Polish units appear in Norway? Shouldn´t they start in London and then be transferred by ship? The same is true for German forces in Norway

- give airdroppable seamines to both sides as Germany as well as Britain used those
You should be intensely interested in history.
Britain in April 1940 had no airborne units ...


ähm, mines are no airborne troops.


- if you add all ships of the Royal Navy, you should add all planes for Germany.

Wrote several times that I have not add any British ships.
Entire German Air Force will appear on the map in the period prior to 10 May 1940.
Now, that is the point:
German Luftwaffe and landunits will be put in the scenario one after the other, the RN is represented from the very beginning. IRL there were about 144 German divisions and about 4000 German planes from the beginning of Weserübung till the end. Additionally the allied forces will of course come lateron.

You added all and every ship, that belonged to the British seazone commands. That does not mean, that those ships were all in harbour at that time. Many were on patrol, some had to be repaired etc. Don´t get me wrong, the RN was much much stronger than the KM, no question here, but the way the ships are given to the Allies they are even more powerful as they have nothing different to do as to kill German invasions


- There were enormous minefields in the Northsea at that time, which had to be maintained and used up forces from both sides, too.
You're right, but I still do not get ....
As those minefields had to be guarded and maintained, you should give large amounts of mines to the Allies as well as the Germans. I have lerned, that it is impossible to edit minefields in a mod, therefore the nations should be given the ressources to lay this minefields in larger scenarios.

quote:

- give airdroppable seamines to both sides as Germany as well as Britain used those
You should be intensely interested in history.
Britain in April 1940 had no airborne units ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Parachute_Brigade_ (United_Kingdom)

Two small French airborne troops were deployed during this period in Africa.

quote:

Rodney and Nelson had received sets by august 1940.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

HMS Hood new art for anyone interested in this historic ship.

Art by the Rogue-USMC

WITP Admiral's Edition: Ship & Sub Art/Base Unit Art/Map Icon Art

"If destruction be our lot - it will come from within"...Abraham Lincoln

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

@WDolson: True, I suppose in the end it was all about economics when it came to winning. We won the war relatively quickly and maybe it would have taken longer had we stopped periodically to retool. I wonder what things would have been like had the Germans not continually retooled their industry? What if they had stayed with the PZIII the whole way through as their primary battle tank? In the end I suppose it didn't make a difference one way or the other. They would have lost either way.

The Germans had the Panzer IV from the start of the war. It was still a front line tank right up to the end of the war, though it was getting very obsolete vs Russian armor. What drove everything in tank development was the arms race on the Eastern front. German mid-war armor was adequate against the western powers right up to the end of the war. Even Lee/Grants were superior to Japanese armor right up to the end of the war.

If the Germans had standardized on the Panzer IV, the war in the Eastern Front may have been over earlier than history. On the other hand if they had more total tanks it might have gone on longer. It's a good "what if" question.

Bill