Franco's Alliance V2.0Beta

[Daykeras]

While I agree that multiple army groups definately could be in Gibralter (malta I will not argue, it's bigger than it looks ), it is not big enough to house 30 or 50 divisions. That's where my principal draws the line, and considering how hard sea invasions are I can understand the lack of rough terrain.

Perhaps if ships could carry more troops per ship than it would make more sense.

I would just like to restate, I do agree that more troops could be put in Gibralter than we were alluding to, but the game does not have any limit I have found, hence my problem.

Now does anyone know the scaling we're using to decide how many men each unit represents?

[mdh1204]

By all realistic standards, I'd go along with the concept that there should be limits placed upon stacking as per geography. What exact limit for Gibraltar is hard to say. Mind you, Gibraltar is not just the mountain overlooking the straits. Its peace time population is around 30,000, not including the mountain's fortification abilities, and it is one of the most dense populations. It stands to reason that a war-time emergency type environment would allow for 10x the normal carrying capacity of a geographical setting. So for arguments sake, let's say that Gibraltar has capped its ability to maintain a healthy population at 35,000 or so. That adjusts to 350,000 as the war-time population carrying limit. Assuming we are playing at a corps level, then there are roughly 40-50,000 troops per infantry unit, or approximately 2-3 divisions. That would put a ground unit limit at 9 rounded up. It follows that the approach would be to put the mountains back, and make 9 the ceiling on acceptable ground unit stacking within Gibraltar.

[Daykeras]

I think that might even be a little high. It is a rock after all. Whether it is high or not doesn't matter as much as the fact there is no way known to me to cap an area's troop amount.

Hmm, maybe in the next patch after the TCP/IP one.

[mdh1204]

No, its a peninsula, with approximately 8 miles of coastline and 2.5 square miles of space, and the 'Rock' is a fortress with miles of tunneling.

[mdh1204]

Okay, let's further elaborate on this line of inductive logic (inductive in the sense of 'given this' then 'such and such' follows). Assuming that the numbers are correct, and 1 infantry army group is actually an infantry corps, then let's use another model to analyze the problem. The hexagon is the universal model of the world, in that it represents the individual in the center of his or her waking world as defined by 6 points; and so therefore, let the emergency war-time carrying capacity of a given geographical setting be based upon the peace-time population maximum x 6. Given that Gibraltar is capped at 35,000, then 210,000 would be the maximum manned military garrison. That would allow for 5+ corps, and rounded up, 6 infantry units in W@W terminology. Given the numbers and dimensions, that might be a little low, but surely 'balanced' and realistic.

[Daykeras]

I agree. Maybe 7 would be fine. But anything between 6-10 would be perfectly great by me.

Now we just need to rewrite the code to allow it

[JanSorensen]

Just play it as a house rule - much easier than getting the code rewritten.

[Daykeras]

Liess... LIESSSS. Nothing is easier than writting line after line of code instead of just using house rules. You are trying to trick us!!! HOW DARE I ACCUSE YOU OF TRICKING ME!

Yea, that's right. What now? What... Now...?

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen

As with all "what-ifs" both sides have merit. So, its more a matter of opinion than right or wrong as far as I am concerned. Considering many of the other things Hitler did do I dont think that attacking Spain is too far fetched. As I recall Hitler did ask Spain to join in the war but the Spanish answer was "sure, we just need x, y and z" which was too much. If Hitler had been in a bad mood I could easily see him saying "screw that - if they arent with me they are against me." As such I would not call either more historical accurate - just different views. As such I think you are off base. Not because your view is wrong - but because you fail to acknowledge that its just one possible view.

My conjecture is that Spain would have joined the war on the Axis side if offered x, y, and z. I think it would, however, have been less than the troops and logistics required by Hitler to conquer Spain, especially with the dodgy state of the French railways, and the difficulty in crossing the Perrinies.

If you do some reading on the history or have a look at a game like Days of Decision, you'll get an understanding of what Franco required of Hitler. It wasn't that far fetched, but then again it was probably more than Hitler would have gained out of the Spanish joining the war.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: mdh1204

No, I understand what you are doing. However, I almost never go through Spain to get to Gibraltor.
If the Allies make their defense very strong, then they make it very strong, and that's how it is. It's
not as if you should make Gibraltor more accessible because you opt to make Spain a frozen ally.
Don't you realize that the inherent impregnability of fortified mountains at sea is the reason why
Germany never attacked Gibraltor and Malta? If you want to attack heavily fortified mountains at
sea then you should be willing to pay the price and not pander to some farcical notion of 'balanced
accessibility'. Simply make Spain frozen, and that's it and that's all, and leave the natural defensive
system of geography and fortification in place. Otherwise, you imbalance the game toward some
completely irrelevant notion that these exquisite historical fortifications should be more susceptible
to exploit.

Agreed. Gibraltar is a fortification. Trying to drive a panzer army or infantry corps into it isn't
going to work, it's quite a small space.

[delatbabel]

3: Gibraltar and Malta no longer have rough terrain, and Gibraltar gains rail.

This bit I have a real problem with. Gibraltar is "rough" as all hell, and there is
certainly no rail line between it and Spain. Nor is there the space to build one.

Otherwise I think most of the changes in this mod are fine.

Is it possible to post-operate on the mod to remove the rail and add rough terrain
back into Gibraltar?

[Lebatron]

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

3: Gibraltar and Malta no longer have rough terrain, and Gibraltar gains rail.

This bit I have a real problem with. Gibraltar is "rough" as all hell, and there is
certainly no rail line between it and Spain. Nor is there the space to build one.

Otherwise I think most of the changes in this mod are fine.

Is it possible to post-operate on the mod to remove the rail and add rough terrain
back into Gibraltar?

Sure you could do so just by going into the region_fa file and changing region 56. But why would you do that when I changed Gibraltar back to rough and fortified in Franco's Alliance 2.4. You are in an old thread of my mod and should look for the latest version. If you have suggestions for Franco's Alliance use the lastest version's thread. Look for it in the "top" area just above the regular thread area.

[Lebatron]

Here's the link to it http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1002393

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Lebatron

Here's the link to it http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1002393

tm.asp?m=876131

Which is the "list of mods" thread still links to 2.0 and not 2.4, which is how I found the wrong link.