Raw Deal '40 - GG WAW mod

[Oleg Mastruko]

Well.... my line of thought was, again, pro Russian. I think the poor Russians are the most screwed of all sides in WAW.....

Frozen in place Ruskie player watches like rabbit caught in the headlights as Axis sharks mass armies in East Europe and Manchuria, waiting to be slayed....

I thought about making Ruskies activate or "semi activate" (only strat movement, no tactic, no attack) if number of units in Rumania, West Poland, East Prussia and/or Manchuria goes above some level. Japanese mass more than 10 units i Manchuria => Ruskies activate, take that, Mr. Tojo!

Kind of opposite of current garrison rules, where sides activate if the number of units it too small.

What's the opinion on this?

O.

[SeaMonkey]

I'm ok with the entry parameters currently. Maginot is right, "Monroe Doctrine" prohibits Axis attack on western hemisphere (N,S,C, America), that should activate US, triggers in Pacific are OK also.

US, IMO, would not have been activated for UK invasion, as US was not fond of British Empire philosophy.

We all know, it was just a matter of time for the German-USSR conflict, one way or another, they were on a collision course. Why not 43?

[SeaMonkey]

I'm not sure Oleg on garrison requirements. I see the logic, but the historical facts dictate that if Stalin was still in power, his policy was of non-belligerency as far as Germany was concerned. He and the Russian intelligence were well aware of the Axis buildup to Barbarossa, there was even an executive order of "no action" on German reconnaissance flights over Soviet territory.

[GenTroy]

[:D]Nice mod! Im enjoying it! I use it and play on total domination rules mode. I give Germany 400 Transport +2 Attack. I give Japan +2 Attack and 200 Transports. I give everyone else 100 Transports and normal attack. I find that it makes for a better game. I also boost Japan 10 supplies per turn. I do this because I'd rather have a more open ended game. So I try to balance the game so that either side can win. I like Axis and Allies type games just the way this game was made, not very attractive to play as Axis and try and dominate the world..heh heh! Thanks for the mod!

GenTroy

AKA...Another Canadian Arm-Chair-General! [:'(]

[5cats]

Well GenTory, if you boost any side that much it'll roll over everyone!
Yes the US should activate if the Axis cross the Atlantic at any point. Not for Britian falling, but perhaps an increase in their factory multiplier??
Letting Russia pull units away from the front before a German invasion would make life very difficult for Germany. Too much so! Anyhow it sometimes takes 2-3 turns to build up properly, so triggering an early Russian entry is a bad idea.

[Traveler]

Do the Raw Deal files work with the new patch?

[Oleg Mastruko]

They do (mod itself is totally harmless and does not interfere with any "official" file, except scenario.txt, as documented in the readme).

However, patch brought some changes so I plan to make revised version of Raw Deal soon.

O.

[Ancient One]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

However, patch brought some changes so I plan to make revised version of Raw Deal soon.

O.

How soon? [8D]

By the way, if you're going to give a factory to Hungary, why not one for the Low Countries as well?

[Oleg Mastruko]

Soon [8D][8D]

I am not sure it would be a good idea, I don't want to overdo with factories. Hungary raised their own militia, and produced their own aircraft and even light tanks, thus contributing to the Axis war machine. Low Countries, apart from small number of SS volunteers, never did such a thing. In 44-45 Holland had problems to feed their own population (which led to mass starvations).

O.

[MikeB]

I KNOW i am treading in deep waters when
A/ I have NOT tried the mod.
B/ I have not read page 2 of this thread.
C/ Of page 1...i have not STUDIED the comments/arguements.

Wargamers like to quibble ...so here goes.
1/ Finland troops. Winter season or winter conditions(ie winter in n Russia : Finland, Leningrage, Karelie, Archangel) one turn more than in normal standard game.
Finland troops are BETTER in winter. 4 turns a year...mean all of Spring and all of fall. Perhaps a 50% die roll chance of such might be more appropriate.

1A/ As for Finland troops in 44....perhaps "tech improvement" is only 1/2 that of improvment of G Troops. Alternatively, Allied G troops are somehow seperated from tech improvements of G troops. Currently, game does NOT allow for such.

2/ Gibraltrar - Spain - rail
I am against this idea. Without detailed knowledge, wasnt the meat/center of Gibraltrar somewhat a rocky small space where movement would be seriously restricted for Tanks and/or heavy equipment?
Perhaps inf can move via rail to Gibraltrar. Other units need to stop in Spain and MOVE. is my thinking.

3/ G Hvy Bmbr armour issue :
I suspect the quantity of available mineral material may have impacted upon G use of such on their bombers. Certainly, the fuel shortage likely impacted upon design of such a bomber with heavier armour. The game does not equate bmbr weight with fuel usage. How detailed would one want to go in a game. A NEW G hvy bmbr unit with move 4...but less armour might be considered?

4/ Alaska - Vladivostok transport
I was unaware of such until i read this thread. I suspect it can seriously damage the game balance. It will certainly impact upon Japanese "play"...and perhaps add more "gaminess" to the game than players might wish.

5/ East Berlin fortification.
My vote would be AGAINST this fictitious fortification in the game.
By the time Russians arrived in Germany, German forces were miniscule and doomed to piecemeal destruction. One might increase the Russian cost of rail conversion...for those multiple supplies needed for attack...from West Poland/Rumania westward. This might better represent the delay of Russian advance into Berlin.

6/ I do not remember reading much if anything about my latest strategem whereby 3 G Hvy bmbrs in Rumania + 3 TAC in Bulgaria destroy Caucausus land units...for free landing of G parachute and destruction of the R resource centers in Caucausus. Admittedly, i am unaware if the R improved his initial defence capabilities of his inf as might have been done historically. Come to think of this, my particular R opponent has inf @ 7 attack and @4 defence in Fa41. His loss of Caucausus may be justified by the tradeoff...i happened to discover/plan for.




Rather than bias of participants...the bigger, perhaps real issue is...
is this game meant to be more simulation or more game?

Hope i have not tread too hard on any one's toes.
Mike B