Our scenario modifications

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Thu Mar 15, 2001 10:51 pm

It might be interessting to see what changes you people are doing to the scenarios with this new wonderful scenario editor. I'm not referring to pure reorganisations, but rather things that will affect the game balance or are historic improvements upon the original scenarios.

My changes are:

-Victory Objectives: Moscow is only worth 1 Axis VP, since I do not belive the capture of Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad would have made the Soviets surrender.

-Cities: Belgrade, Warsaw, Krakow and Lodz are Soviet allegiance. They were (rather brutally) occupied by the Germans and would not have contributed any manpower to Germany.

-Factories: In January 1943 Germany get capacity 1 Heavy Industries in Leipzig, Dresden, Danzig, Breslau, Königsberg, Prague and Vienna. This is to represent the "Total War" effort commenced after Stalingrad, with the assumption that even without Stalingrad such an effort would have been deemed necessary by 1943.

-Tank Types: The Pz-IVe is moved to the slot now occupied by the Pz-IVd. In the slot now occupied by the Pz-IVe i make a new PzKpfw-IVf2, which has attack 14, defense 7, cost 5 and is available in early march 1942. Icon is the same as Pz-IVg-j. All PzKpfw-IVd's in the pools and units are replaced by Pz-IVe's. The PzKpfw-IVh is not available until March 1943 (when the first Pz-IVg's with a 75L48 gun were produced).

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Fri Mar 16, 2001 4:36 am

your idea of moscow being worth 1 vp is good. the oil fields should be worth more. there should be a way to cut off or destroy the facs in the urals if the german got into a position to do so. full wartime economy eariler is good also.

Mist · Post by **Mist** » Fri Mar 16, 2001 5:31 am

Good ideas, Yogi!It will make more sense playing 1942 after Moscow and Stalingrad(too easy against AI) being captured!
I did not try to create my own scenarios with editwir, but my idea is to increase importance of the south of Russia by putting more resources there and/or decreasing Germany's own resources.
I also would like to see Crimea as little more important objective for both sides. The problem is that I can't imagine how to do that without putting railroad hex connecting penisula with Caucasus. Crimea is completly unimportant target in current version.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Fri Mar 16, 2001 7:16 am

Originally posted by Mist:
I also would like to see Crimea as little more important objective for both sides. The problem is that I can't imagine how to do that without putting railroad hex connecting penisula with Caucasus. Crimea is completly unimportant target in current version.

The reason the Crimea is unimportant is because the Soviet AI does not use the Crimea as a base for strategic bombing against Ploesti. This was the reason why Hitler was obsessed with taking and holding the Crimea.

Mist · Post by **Mist** » Fri Mar 16, 2001 8:24 am

Originally posted by Yogi Yohan:
The reason the Crimea is unimportant is because the Soviet AI does not use the Crimea as a base for strategic bombing against Ploesti. This was the reason why Hitler was obsessed with taking and holding the Crimea.

Crimea was also supposed to be a platzdarm to launch attack to the caucasus(for Germans) and was a threat for their southern flank. So they couldn't just ignore it like in WiR. Crimea was more or less supplied by naval lines. Not only Sevastopol. I do not mention naval landings because they are beyond WiR scope.

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 4:15 am

by adding the crimea it would make any drive into the oilfields hard until you capture and hold that area. did the russians have any industry in that area. i will have to do some research into the importance of the crimea. i does seem like it should be included .

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sat Mar 17, 2001 12:02 pm

Originally posted by crusher:
there should be a way to cut off or destroy the facs in the urals if the german got into a position to do so.

Not without extending the map another 300 miles or whatever the Urals sit a little back from WiR's map, they don't start 2 squares beyond the edge of the current map. They also extend north beyond the northern most part of the map, and there is a LOT of space between the Urals and Siberia.
Besides, there wouldn't be much point in adding this, as the USSR will collapse production wise if you've gotten to Leningrad, Vologda, Gorki, Stalingrad, and Maikop.

crusher · Post by **crusher** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 5:32 am

i see your point in that urals and siberia facs are a long way but in a game that you make the oil fields worth more and moscow only worth 1 vp you still have to fight on even after capturing key cities such as leningrad ,moscow ect. maybe a stratgic bombing like the us. and england do to germany.

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 9:23 am

Originally posted by crusher:
i see your point in that urals and siberia facs are a long way but in a game that you make the oil fields worth more and moscow only worth 1 vp you still have to fight on even after capturing key cities such as leningrad ,moscow ect. maybe a stratgic bombing like the us. and england do to germany.

I don't want to be restrictive, but this thread was supposed to be about changes we (the WIR playing community) have made ourselves. I find your ideas very interesting, but perhaps we should start a new thread about change proposals for the next version?

Ed Cogburn · Post by **Ed Cogburn** » Sun Mar 18, 2001 3:39 pm

Originally posted by crusher:
i see your point in that urals and siberia facs are a long way but in a game that you make the oil fields worth more and moscow only worth 1 vp

Giving Victory Points for oil fields is unnecessary in WiR, because the game uses oil production as a part of the economic model. Taking Ploesti doesn't give you VPs but it does take a lot of oil production away from your opponent. If this game were like, say Third Reich, then your suggestion would make sense, since 3R doesn't track oil production or use it as part of its economic model.

you still have to fight on even after capturing key cities such as leningrad ,moscow ect.

If you reached the cities I listed, then you've collected almost all victory points available. The USSR will surrender, no need to fight on.[/B][/QUOTE]

Yogi Yohan · Post by **Yogi Yohan** » Thu Mar 22, 2001 7:14 am

Some points have come up regarding the way allegiance works, that have made me change my custom 41 campaign. Apparently, the initial population of a city does contribute replacement squads to the inital owner of the city. Therefore i have made the following changes:

Cities:I now let Warsaw, Krakow, Belgrade, Kaunas, Riga and Tallin have an inital population of 0. Lodz has an initial population of 1 to show the German minority in Poland. Warsaw, Krakow, Belgrade and Lodz are Soviet allegiance. Tallin, Riga and Kaunas are Axis allegiance.