Translations for our friends around the world.

Click on banner for Schwerpunkt website

 Save

Author Topic: WWII Europe  (Read 416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ronster

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • New member
WWII Europe
« on: February 24, 2018, 02:29:38 PM »
I look forward to getting the enhancements done and seeing this game go to its full potential.  WWII Europe is a real cool game.  I look forward to many hours of playing.

Offline Schwerpunkt Valencia

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • New member
Re: WWII Europe
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2018, 10:47:08 AM »
Hi All,

I donīt know what enhancements we are talking about as I have seen several wish lists.

I have listed below my suggested list of enhancements as well as some comments why I think they are important. They were already listed in the topic below:

http://dogsofwarvu.com/forum/index.php/topic,2637.0.html

1) Defense modus: give ground, normal & hold ground:
A must if attack can be graded similarly. Also important for an elastic defense or hold cities to the bitter end.

2) Railway conversion in the USSR:
German supply -and Soviet- depended on that. Historically Germans were not able to keep their drive without some rail lines being reconstructed. As their engineering capacity was limited that lead to some prioritization.

3) Some flak defense for ground units:
Some air losses are to be allocated if a ground unit has powerful flak defenses. Easiest way is to model that on ground unit factor.

4) German artillery units in France 1944:
In order to model the Atlantic Wall fortifications particularly at ports some artillery units as in AGW.

5)    Optional rules and units:
5.1 Artillery units: Any artillery unit should be destroyed if forced to retreat exactly as the German artillery units in the Atlantic Wall or the Super Heavy German artillery unit: Explanation is that these units were more vulnerable to be overrun as they could not easily evacuate their guns. Historically Soviet artillery corps were very powerful but it took them a long time to set up, preplan their fire, correct range, etc. Also they could not occupy enemy ground as they were rather inmobile. This can better reflect the fluctuating nature of a battlefield that has been pounded by Soviet artillery but has to be occupied by infantry or tanks being thereby more vulnerable to German mobile counterattacks.
5.2 Optional German Super Heavy Artillery unit: historically the Germans assembled some huge guns that helped to break into Sebastopol and that were supposed to be used to assault Leningrad. As the Atlantic Wall artillery units this unit should be destroyed if forced to retreat.
5.3 German V weapons: although their tactical effect was negligible, Allied air forces were forced to divert many fighter units as well as antiaircraft regiments to defend Great Britain and the port of Antwerp. That could be factored with less Allied fighter support from July 1944 on.
5.4 Electro uboats: if they had been operational less warships would have been available to the Allies and sea trade limited. Perhaps that could be modelled with less Allied warships, less Allied replacements.
5.5 Optional artillery units:
a) Kronstadt island around Leningrad had sizeable artillery assets that helped to hold the Oranienbaum bridgehead for years.
 
b) Sicily had some Italian artillery defenses. No idea if they were important or are already embedded in the infantry coastal divisions.
 
c) Norway had some impressive German defenses from 1942 to 1944. A lot of artillery was there.
 
d) Southern France had in the 1944 summer some artillery units as well -many of them taken over to the Italians-, yet were far less powerful than the ones at the Atlantic Wall.

6) Air supply:
Has to be constrained. At the moment is way too powerful. With just one air unit you can theoretically supply a full army group which is historically biased. I loved the way AGW worked out air supply. It barely provided the minimum for one attack or movement -not both- which was more accurate for just the unit which air supply was carried out on. It did not provide an unlimited supply for all units nearby.

7 )   Movement of unsupplied units:
Mechanized units should not move as they do when they are out of supply. Historically whenever supply was unavailable they stopped on their tracks. No petrol no movement... Some little movement could be allowed in direction to the nearest supply source. In my play testing German mechanized units were advancing into the void in several East Front scenarios what was ahistorical.

Well, that is all by now. Hope Ron will not get fed up with me...  :) :) :)

Schwerpunkt Valencia

Offline pzgndr

  • New member
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • New member
Re: WWII Europe
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2018, 05:14:02 PM »
It would be nice to see Ron post a list of the enhancements he's considering and their priority/difficulty.  At least let us know what's on the plate and what we can expect.

#1 should be doable, since we had it before.  #2 and #7 are critical for better Barbarossa results and for other situations; I would argue for 1/2 MF for mech on first week OOS and then less after that.  #3 would be good, but I'd also like to see FOW imposed on the computer opponent so unspotted units cannot be wantonly harassed by bombings.  The list also needs to include penalties for out of HQ range, like we had it before.

The game is much improved but there are still too many annoying quirks that should be addressed, and should have been resolved by now.  So close.  We continue to wait.   

Offline schwerpt

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 98
  • Schwerpunkt Games Developer
    • Schwerpunkt
Re: WWII Europe
« Reply #3 on: March 02, 2018, 12:55:12 AM »
I am continuing to focus on building battles for v1.0.10.  See Gary Gardner post and my reply.

I do think the next two enhancements I plan on adding as part of v1.0.11 will be long range railroad movement and country entry, both of which are needed for the #102 Campaign Scenario.

Ron
Click.gif