Franco's Alliance v2.4 is here

[Lebatron]

Thanks for pointing that out.

[mscoon]

Hi there,

I have a follow-up on the island-hoping rule. I am re-reading AJP Taylor's Illustrated History of the Second World War and there he claims that in the Pacific general McArthur advocated a direct thrust against the Japan mainland, while admiral Nimitz favored island-hopping. In the end of the day, McArthur did not have his way, but not because his opinion was overruled - probably because Nimitz would not cooperate with him and McArthur could not do it alone.

So, I have to question the "historical" argument behind the island-hopping rule. Although this is how the war progressed historically, it could have taken a different swing had McArthur had his way.

The game allows for many a-historical things to happen, some of which weren't even considered by the world powers at that time. I am not sure why you would allow this in the rest of the map but not in the Pacific.

[elhior]

quote:

5. Some have talked about the futility of fighting Russia if they waited until 43. I totally agree, the Russians have to much production. The problem is the factory production multiplier. Right now its x2 in 1940. I'm OK with that. Then its x3 in 1942. That's were I disagree, I think it should stay at x2 until war is declared. Stalin pressed hard in the late 30's to move from a x1 to x2 in game speak. With that milestone being achieved, I think the country would have stabilized at x2 for several years had it not been for the patriotic zeal to save the country after Hitler betrayed them. Hence the x3 then makes sense, but not before. So I have adjusted the Russian production multiplier. The Russians no longer go to x3 production in 1942 automatically. They have to be at war with Germany or Japan to get it. In most games this would have no effect. Only when Germany waits till well into1942 will this change have any effect.

I don't think this is historically true. Even before the second front was opened by the WAs, the Germans' defeat in Stalingrad and the annihilation of the entire 6th army have taken place, with the Russians being in the offensive everywhere else. They wouldn't reach Berlin, that's for sure, but I believe they were about to reclaim their lands even if the second front was delayed. What I'm saying is that the war for Russia was lost to the Germans before the second front. Now, the lend lease is an entire different story of course, it's quite probable (alternative historical senarios come always with a probability) that the Russians wouldn't make it without it.

[tlintlunfl]

Hi again Lebatron,
I downloaded your mod and followed instructions.
I decided to install new files on old WAW, since I already installed V 1.087 and will play it as standard game.
Something wrong in my installation.... I could not understand.
As I run the game, controlled to see if all works...... map has changed, fine!
New borders, new zones, all seems right.... but, additional troops in Portugal? Frozen Spain? New scenarios?
Nooooooooooooooooooo, only map changes appear, no sign of all other changes.
Can you help me?
TIA
Max

[Lebatron]

Maybe your having a problem like Justjeff88 from a couple posts above. Did you select english language? If you placed my folder in the correct location so that it merges with the original dat folder it should work fine, that is if english is selected.

[Lebatron]

ORIGINAL: elhior

I don't think this is historically true. Even before the second front was opened by the WAs, the Germans' defeat in Stalingrad and the annihilation of the entire 6th army have taken place, with the Russians being in the offensive everywhere else. They wouldn't reach Berlin, that's for sure, but I believe they were about to reclaim their lands even if the second front was delayed. What I'm saying is that the war for Russia was lost to the Germans before the second front. Now, the lend lease is an entire different story of course, it's quite probable (alternative historical senarios come always with a probability) that the Russians wouldn't make it without it.

Applying what happened historically would be a poor argument. Are you implying that the German player has to make the same identical mistakes Hitler made? If Hitler would have let his Generals do some of the thinking, then it would have been entirely possible for Germany to have pushed further into Russia. Clearly you have to let some historical what-if into the game. Otherwise your saying the Germans can't take Stalingrad and push a little further just because it didn't happen in real life.

Also your implying that I somehow broke the balance by removing a Russian factory. You seem to have overlooked the other balancing factors I added that tip it back to the Allies. The extra territories I added to the Soviet far east is a big one. The extra point I added to the AV. Its 71 to win via Leningrad and Stalingrad now, not 70. Extra free research has been given to Russia to compensate for the approximate 10 points lost during peace time build up. An extra point to infantry, 2 in both flak and fighters, and the bonus I gave to Russian tac air alone is worth more than 5 points. Remember by changing Russian tac air to 4 durability gives them a starting defense of 16, up from 12. That's basically giving them a free level in evasion. And in the long run if you choose to put additional research into Russian tac air they become really tough. Also I suggest that on turn 1, Russia should build a factory in the Urals. I explained this in my readme so I'm just repeating myself here. Anyway, Russia is not handicapped in Franco's Alliance as you assume. The favoritism to Axis double team Russia has been greatly diminished in my mod because I give the Axis other solid choices to consider. Take a look at the stock game closely. Is there really any other good alternative to the Axis double team of Russia? At least in my mod there is. Oh and lets not forget that when the Japs choose other alternatives, the Russian factory in the Soviet far east is spared.

[elhior]

Lebatron,

I didn't imply anything from what you mentioned, although your mail was a good and well-founded explanation of how the changes you've issued made the game more balanced and gave more choices to the players. I commented on your historical argument concerning the position of Russia just before the D-Day

[Lebatron]

Proposed changes for Franco's Alliance v2.4 Please take a look and let me know what you think.

1. Remove 1 jap infantry to offset the tank replace it with 1 militia.
2. Drop 1 resource in Chungking. Making it 1 again.
3. Add a Flak to Grozny to prevent the sinking of the transport in the Caspian Sea during the first turn of Barbarossa.
4. Remove some WA's supply and replace with some free tech points.
5. Move fighter and tac air from Southern Italy to Northern Italy.
6. Drop WS of Flak land attack to 5.
7. Drop Inf in North Africa replace with 2 Militia in each Vichy area. add 1 militia to S. France.
8. Drop some Inf in Spain and replace with Mil.
9. Add free research in some areas to encourage development of ignored techs.
10. Drop world standard on HF EV, add some free research points. OR drop HF dura to 3 and increase EV to 4.
11. Increase UN HB AA to 3 just for flavor.
12. Italy x3 production in 1943.
13. tweak the zoom levels a bit so that zoom level 3 is yet further out.

Proposed house rules:
1. Add stacking limit house rule to Gibraltar. Limit to 2 air and 2 land of any type.
2. Limit size of invasion force depending on year. No more than 5 transports in 1940 can be used for an Amphibious assault. 6 in 41, 7 in 42, 8 in 43. 1944 and up would have no restrictions on amphibious assault size, thus allowing an operation the size of D-day to take place. This is a variation on an idea HarryBanana shared with me.
3. Add timed victory levels as a house rule if I can't do so with the data files.

[a511]

my general comments:

3. Add a Flak to Grozny to prevent the sinking of the transport in the Caspian Sea during the first turn of Barbarossa.

noooo ... thats my favourite trick. but be fair, i think thats the right move. just remember to remove a flak unit from SU to balance the effect.

4. Remove some WA's supply and replace with some free tech points.

so long as this free tech pts are allocated to some ignored techs (say armor) and NOT to infantry tech, im indifferent on this.

7. Drop Inf in North Africa replace with 2 Militia in each Vichy area. add 1 militia to S. France.

i like this one!!

11. Increase UN HB AA to 3 just for flavor.

i object, given that HB ATT and EV is already the only unit that can tech up after 2 lvs of WS w/o the restriction under patch 1.087, its tempting for WA to create super HB unit. in fact, i prefer to restrict HB EV in the way other units are restricted.

1. Add stacking limit house rule to Gibraltar. Limit to 2 air and 2 land of any type.

i agree but want to clarify whether art and flak units are incl in the above limit. if yes, imo a limit of 3 land units is more reasonable.

2. Limit size of invasion force depending on year. No more than 5 transports in 1940 can be used for an Amphibious assault. 6 in 41, 7 in 42, 8 in 43. 1944 and up would have no restrictions on amphibious assault size, thus allowing an operation the size of D-day to take place. This is a variation on an idea HarryBanana shared with me.

is it a restriction on WA only? if no, Sealion will be virtually impossible in '41 as, unless GER is very lucky, the pop-up militia plus one or two infantry/ milita units are all WA need to defend england, the rest of WA's land units could be deployed to defend scotland. imo, the change may make Barbarossa the only feasible strategy for GER.
but if the restriction only applies to WA, im fine with it as that means no more "hit and run early italy surrender" strategy.

cheers,
a511

[elhior]

Hi there Lebatron,

I'm glad to see you continuously improving your interesting mod! I'm not an experienced player, and I've played only two FA games (currently playing the third), so I have only three comments:

ORIGINAL: Lebatron

4. Remove some WA's supply and replace with some free tech points.

Can you specify where?

6. Drop WS of Flak land attack to 5.

You mean reduce the land attack of German flaks to 5? If yes, I surely agree!

10. Drop world standard on HF EV, add some free research points. OR drop HF dura to 3 and increase EV to 4.

What's the reasoning behind this? From a first glance, I don't think I agree.

12. Italy x3 production in 1943.

I think that would be imbalanced (and unhistorical).

11. Increase UN HB AA to 3 just for flavor.

Err... HBs with laser guns? [:D]

I agree to all the rest! Good work!

[Lebatron]

Now that patch 1.2 is out I will be releasing Franco v2.4 soon.

A511. You had some questions.

11. Increase UN HB AA to 3 just for flavor.
i object, given that HB ATT and EV is already the only unit that can tech up after 2 lvs of WS w/o the restriction under patch 1.087, its tempting for WA to create super HB unit. in fact, i prefer to restrict HB EV in the way other units are restricted.

I believe its only the land attack of HB's that can tech up without a speed cap after it's 2 over world standard. Its other stats fall under normal rules don't they? I don't think there would be a problem with abusing HB AA and EV as you say. Anyway, I have decided to leave HB air attack at 2, but have put 3 research points into it instead.

1. Add stacking limit house rule to Gibraltar. Limit to 2 air and 2 land of any type.
i agree but want to clarify whether art and flak units are incl in the above limit. if yes, imo a limit of 3 land units is more reasonable.

I have been going back and forth on this one. At the moment I have settled on 1 air and 3 land unit stacking limit. In this way the Brits can have the traditional Infantry, Flak, and Arty combo and 1 air type of their choosing. The limit of 3 land units is overly generous considering the tiny size of Gibraltar. And 1 air unit would be all Gibraltar's 1 airport could hold. To project more airpower into the Med the Allies will need to secure North Africa to base more air in the region.

but if the restriction only applies to WA, im fine with it as that means no more "hit and run early italy surrender" strategy.

Yes, this restriction would only apply to the Allies. Its to stop the early gamey invasions as you say.

[Lebatron]

Now for your questions elhior.

4. Remove some WA's supply and replace with some free tech points.

Can you specify where?

Removed 5 supply from Cuba and 5 supply from Scotland.

6. Drop WS of Flak land attack to 5.

You mean reduce the land attack of German flaks to 5? If yes, I surely agree!

No, the land attack of their Flak will remain 6, however because I lowered the WS to 5 it will now cost Germany about 13 pionts to upgrade to 7 land attack. It used to only cost about 7. Now they can't create a decent offense unit out of their Flak without some additional cost.

10. Drop world standard on HF EV, add some free research points. OR drop HF dura to 3 and increase EV to 4.

What's the reasoning behind this? From a first glance, I don't think I agree.

Its way to cheap for the Allies to upgrade all their HF's to IOWA class battleships. It only costs them 9 points right now. Generally they are at 4 EV before Japan can attack Pearl Harbor. Since having just 2 HF's damaged can cost a player about 9 to repair, why not just spend these points to try and prevent the hits in the first place? Its one of the biggest payoffs in research. A good 33% increase in defense for all your HF's for the cost of just one. A very good bargain, too good. What I did was lower the WS of HF EV to 2 so that the cost would double when researching to level 4 EV. To compensate I added some free research to each nation as I didn't want the cost to exactly double for everyone. Here's what the current cost to upgrade to EV 4 would be for each nation now.
Germany old cost 7 new cost 10 (6 HF's assumed)
Japan old cost 7 new cost 8 (6 HF's assumed)
WA's old cost 9 new cost 15 (18 HF's assumed)

12. Italy x3 production in 1943.

I think that would be imbalanced (and unhistorical).

Actually I meant 1944. Well I wasn't all that serious about adding this. It was just a thought. I was thinking that it would be neat to give the Allies a bit more incentive to knock Italy out. Generally they always do, so this new mutiple would in most cases have no effect. But if for some reason Italy's factories are still happily online well into 1944 why not let them produce a bit more? Since Germany would be resource limited this may not even increase Germany's production, but would rather just allow them to build more in Italy and less in Germany. If the Axis are still doing well into 1944 then the Allies may have something to worry about, but I think that would be the point if the Allies ignored Italy for other targets.

11. Increase UN HB AA to 3 just for flavor.

Err... HBs with laser guns?

A HB AA of 3 is not a killer stat. Have you noticed that Japan's HB has an AA stat of 3? It's not really out of place then to make the WA's HB have an equal AA to Japan. The WA's bombers had pretty good gun turrets. Anyway, as I said above to a511 I left the stat at 2 and put 3 research into it. Now the WA's are half way to 3 AA.

[Lebatron]

Some extra planned changes.
1. Drop WS on HF AA. Now they can't become their own air escort, or rather it's much more expensive too.
2. I decided to drop adding a Flak to Grozny for what I think may be a better idea. I decided to move the factory from Southern Urals to Grozny. Now the Russian can build Flak at Grozny while still frozen. In other games I play like Third Reich, Grozny is a factory site. I quess it would make sense since there is so much oil in the area.
3. Since the port of Astrakhan is right on the Volga river that feeds into the Caspian Sea, I moved it over a bit so that it now lies at the border line of Grozny and Astrakhan. Then I changed the data files to have this port connect to Grozny rather than Astrakhan. Now if the trasport in the Caspian Sea is damaged it will return to Grozny for repair. I have yet to decide if I should allow Grozny to build new ships or just allow it to repair that transport only.
4. I put the factory from Kazan back because I wanted the Germans to have something to threaten if they were in say Vologda within blitzing range. But to keep the factory count at 12 where I think it's balanced I had to remove one from Moscow. It was the only place with 2. However I did place it in the que at Moscow partly built. So in a few turns Russia will have 13 factories.
5. Changed Southern Italy's port to connect with Central Med too.
6. Reduced Japan's x3 militia to x2. I had overlooked doing this before, since with my Pacific hop list, the US will have a long road ahead of them before they get to Japan. So the x3 to protect Japan is not that necessary.
7. Adjusting the Pacific hop list to simplify it.

[Lebatron]

For the new house rule involving amphibious assaults, I forgot to mention that I planned on resettting the WA's transport amphibious value back to 3. I never did like it patched to 2, but it was a fix that sort of worked. It just felt out of place to see the WA's have the worst starting transport value. So instead of starting under the normal value and researching just to get back to 3, I'm going to set it up so that the WA's need to get to transport value 4 to be really efficient at amphibious invasions. By limiting the number of transports that can be used in an amphibious assault, but not the value, this would encourage the development of this tech. More on this latter.

[PyleDriver]

Shouldn't Turkey be pro-axis along with Spain, with a Moscow-Iraq trigger to activate?

[8D]
Jon

[Lebatron]

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver

Shouldn't Turkey be pro-axis along with Spain, with a Moscow-Iraq trigger to activate?

[8D]
Jon

I never saw the pressing need to go beyond dealing with the Spanish problem. Since it is the key to Gibraltar. However I will think over your suggestion.

[Lebatron]

Hey guys, Franco v2.4 is now out. Go back to page one for the download link and new readme.

[PyleDriver]

You really know your stuff, a guy with no life but the recreation of history, like me,lol...On Turkey, it was thiers, the Middle East, until the stinking French and British, took it...They remember the blood bath of 1917, however they still have pride...Politics is the key, other times I spoke of Americian and Soviet entry, and why the Winter of 43 entry?... It's political, how at this point can it be build in?... Politics and consiquences...I think the WA ( besides Vichy ) never attacked a neutral nation. Should the Brits invade Norway in the Spring of 40, without Axis aggession there...NEVER...Anyone remember a old board Avolion Hill game called "Origians". I wish I still had it. You won by political gains 1936-40... Adding armies in Portugal is not the answer, but the threat of triggering Turkey, Spain and mabe Finland. Thier interstructure in tack, with an army, ouch...This game is so good, when I first saw it, being a old time wargamer since 1970, and a big WIR and Gary fan, I said what are you thinking with this Gary, cheesy,...But, oh what cheese, uhm,uhm,uhm goood... I agree with you Lebatron, but how do we do it without stuipid house rules...I think a land attack apon Japan should not allowed untill the Phillipians and Wake, are reaquired...US soil US pride. The old (illegal move) politically not allowed... Except Air bombing...Anyway, how can politics be built into the Game...The early invasion problem can be resolved by another counter, and must. Landing craft are a destinct weapon. The Allies took them from the Med for Overlord, later they were sent to Okanawa... If a area had defending troops, landing craft are needed. They draw thier defense from attacking units with them. No, upgrade involved, limited to a transport of 5, they can be damaged, but only destroyed if everything eles is too...Island forts are a good idea, not mainland. Say it's cost is 10 supply and 3 quarterly turns...On supply, I, until recently thought a chain of transports back to the factory was needed at the time of production, is that right, If not it needs to be.

Keep up the good work "Lebatron"

[8D]
Jon Pyle

[Lebatron]

ORIGINAL: PyleDriver

I spoke of Americian and Soviet entry, and why the Winter of 43 entry?... It's political, how at this point can it be build in?... Politics and consiquences...I think the WA ( besides Vichy ) never attacked a neutral nation. Should the Brits invade Norway in the Spring of 40, without Axis aggession there...NEVER...

The Winter 43 date is about the best ballpark they could come up with I guess. It works fine for me. I know a lot of you guys get sick of seeing the Japs hold off till Fall 1942. The reason you see that a lot is that's just how the stock game is balanced. As I pointed out, the Axis double team is way to common because of the way the game is setup. Since I no longer play the stock game, I see potential in other strategies. You won't see the Axis double team in half the games of Franco's Alliance so the entry date is of little consequence because the Japs attack the WA's a lot sooner. Mostly in Fall 41 or a turn later. As far as consequences to keep the WA's honest. When they attack neutrals they already pay a fine of 10 supply. I suppose that could be raised, but I don't think that will go over well.

Adding armies in Portugal is not the answer, but the threat of triggering Turkey, Spain and mabe Finland. Thier interstructure in tack, with an army, ouch

In my mod taking Portugal will trigger the unfreezing of Spain. The armies in Portugal are just there so that it's not a total cakewalk to invade. I guess I overlooked dropping the infantry by 1 when I introduced the transport invasion cap house rule. But that's no big deal, once you play Franco's Alliance for a while you will see that Portugal is never invaded, so what actually sits there is not worth nickpicking over.

I agree with you Lebatron, but how do we do it without stuipid house rules...I think a land attack apon Japan should not allowed untill the Phillipians and Wake, are reaquired...US soil US pride. The old (illegal move) politically not allowed... Except Air bombing...Anyway, how can politics be built into the Game...

The Phillipines and Wake are required before attempting an invasion of Japan. In a sense, my Pacific hop list does insert politics into the game. Politics were/was one of the main reasons we took the route we did. So by waring over the type B islands, for instance, both players would be injecting a bit of honesty into the Pacific theater. If you wish to have a semi historical/realistic Pacific war with your opponent, insist on using the hop list.

The early invasion problem can be resolved by another counter, and must. Landing craft are a destinct weapon. The Allies took them from the Med for Overlord, later they were sent to Okanawa... If a area had defending troops, landing craft are needed. They draw thier defense from attacking units with them. No, upgrade involved, limited to a transport of 5, they can be damaged, but only destroyed if everything eles is too...

Yes, having a real landing ship would be nice, However that can't be added through modding. But the cost of building them can be modeled into the game. And that is what I did by requiring the WA player to expend production upgrading his transport level up to 5. To get to level 5 the WA's will spend about 25 production. This extra cost to the WA's helps balance actually.

Island forts are a good idea, not mainland. Say it's cost is 10 supply and 3 quarterly turns...On supply, I, until recently thought a chain of transports back to the factory was needed at the time of production, is that right, If not it needs to be.

I'm not sure what your saying here. If your suggesting I make forts a buildable unit, I can't. I'm also not sure what your asking about the transport link. If its concerning the changes I made to the way resources are collected in South America and South Africa, I can elaborate. Take Chile for instance, before my change, it could send its resource production by land back to the US. That's very unrealistic. After my change you now require a transport link back to a factory or its resource production will sit there and build up. Since Chile has 1 resource, it can stockpile up to 3 resources before there is waste. So if its at 3 and you do not link a transport to it that turn, then the resource generated that turn will go to waste. Hope that answers your question.

[PyleDriver]

On the last question I agree the chain of transports back to the the factories should be unbroken. If the resource is inland, non-coastal, allow for one area away to the coast. Why should you recieve Chile's resources because you have Brazil...On a different note If the Soviets can't attack Japan until Germany is defeated, then why not say Japan can't attack the Soviets until Moscow is occupied?...Goodbye double teaming, and realistic. I'm playing a guy right now who attacked me (Russia) in the Sum of 40. Somebody tell me, is that Megagaming!

[8D]
Jon Pyle