Total war in europe sourhern front

James Ward · 06-19-2009, 09:51 AM,

Too bad you can't save a scenario into another scenario. Then you could link scenarios into one big campaign by have scenario ending be the set up in the new scenario and so on. Then you could change turn length, replacement rates and such while still allowing some player control to move units, change deployments etc.

von Schwarze · 06-19-2009, 10:01 AM,

Your welcome Michael, I really love to see players contributing to any series with scenarios, it is a thing a lot of players never see... that there is a lot of fun to be had creating them. You pay for the editors, so get your money's worth. If I can help, let me know, but Glenn is the guy I think in this instance, not really my area.

Ricky my friend, tell Adam I remember him well from the Applebees in Denver, hope he is doing well, he must be getting quite old now, what is it? 15 or 16? That was fun.

The picture is of me of course, in another life, see my Iron Cross and I had to have a map on the pic for obvious reasons. But I'll get you back, wait and see, good to hear from you. BTW you should think about this CG as well.

Tortue Agile · 06-19-2009, 10:19 AM,

Michael,

What will you do when units will need to be upgraded?

~~Krak~~ · 06-19-2009, 10:45 AM,

David

At this stage we are limited by the OOB. However, for example we have a 1941 21st Pz and a 1942 21st Pz, check the OOB file. So all we do is set the 1941 21st to withdraw at said date, and the 1942 21st arrive as a reinforcement at a later date. The player has no say in when the withdrawal occurs so he must plan for it. As to where the new unit arrives this can be controlled by the player via strategy options eg the new 21st arrives at either Tripoli, Bengazi or Tobruk. As to the Effectiveness level of the new unit the jury is still out, I am thinking 50%. Its a clunky upgrade but it would work. Thats all I can do right now. I have some other ideas but that would require some work by HPS.

I think the the TWiE system will progress as the PzC series has. If enough people lobby HPS for campaign type rules etc I am sure they will listen. *Hint*

James Ward · 06-19-2009, 10:44 PM,

Krak Wrote:I think the the TWiE system will progress as the PzC series has. If enough people lobby HPS for campaign type rules etc I am sure they will listen. *Hint*

I hope they can come up with something even if it is just the ability to mod a long campaign scenario into existance.

Outlaw Josey Wales · 06-19-2009, 11:37 PM,

You could always make it larger than North Africa. Include East Africa, Middle East and Iraq as well. Maybe even include the invasion of Greece which had an impact on North Africa, but maybe not limit the allied commander as to what forces to send to Greece, if any. He would have choices from the whole theater instead of the desert spearhead. A what if type of thing.

Dog Soldier · 06-20-2009, 02:26 PM,

Krak,

Best wishes in your design. As Blackie mentioned, there has not been a dearth of mods for this game series. The issue I was trying to point to was players having the capability to end such a campaign because one side has a distinct advantage.

Look at the "Compass" campaign. IIRC, it was events outside the NA theater that brought an end to the British advance after smashing the Italians. What player would want to stop at that point and allow Rommel and the 15th light / 21st panzer division even land in Tripoli due to a constraint beyond their control?

Same for Rommel after the Kessel battles in his race for the Nile. Indifference in the Axis high command played as much a part in stopping Rommel in 1942 as Allied attacks on Axis supply shipping.

Besides the strategic aspect of Greece, there was Crete and Malta. How would the effect of invading or not invading these islands by the Axis affect the NA campaign has been a discussion since the war ended. I do not yet have a copy of the game, but I would guess that at the TWiE scale these island campaigns would not be modeled, except in the abstract.

Such things are hard to model in games, which is why most games have a more limited scope. If you can solve such issues, then this project should be a success.

Dog Soldier

Tortue Agile · 06-20-2009, 10:18 PM,

Maybe having the possibility to create "events" would help.

Dog Soldier · 06-22-2009, 04:03 PM,

Tortue Agile Wrote:Maybe having the possibility to create "events" would help.

Not a bad idea. Would these events work like the "Strategic Options" in PzC, except maybe a little more abstract? Each side chooses from several options. The game would then match these choices at the right time and determine the effect on the NA campaign. Perhaps increased/decreased forces on future turn or supply changes for both sides.

Dog Soldier

von Schwarze · 06-22-2009, 10:57 PM,

Just throwing out ideas here for you Krak. DS you reminded me of thoughts I had some time ago... thanks.

I was thinking that the strategies option could be used, but tied to the number of VPs each side has at that point in time. I think you could do it right now with the rules we have in place, but you would have to have a sort of "gentleman's agreement" between the players.

EG, you would have 3 or 4 choices:

1 300VPs choose this option
2 500VPs choose this option...... etc etc

So if you had done well you would get better or more equipment, men, effectiveness, supply %s and so on.

The problem would be setting up believable/accurate choices and also players would have to have the honesty to play this way. I think overall most players on the Blitz are trustworthy enough to do this. Krak you could certainly find enough players of this calibre to playtest this for you.

What do you think?