Page 26 of 39
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:40 pm
by JJKettunen
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
Interested, of course. Now, I feel it will be difficult to include such events when the railroad is mostly a jumplink with an oof-map box and railroads are repaired in 15 days in the AGE engine. But I will take all ideas and doc of course.
It would slow Allied troops significantly if the railroad at Segezha was destroyed...*
Below is the map of historical Allied advancement. My editing is in red.
*e: Actually, it wouldn't. Doh! [:o]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:43 pm
by JJKettunen
Argh, there's a mistake! The first text should be "March '19", not "May '19".
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:51 pm
by JJKettunen
The source book
Suomalaiset ensimmäisessä maailmansodassa [Finns in the WWI] is here:
http://www.vnk.fi/julkaisukansio/2004/j ... pdf/fi.pdf
Despite its title, it includes plenty of info about Finns in the RCW. I didn't know there were Finnish Reds at Omsk and Perm, for example!
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:01 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
Interested, of course. Now, I feel it will be difficult to include such events when the railroad is mostly a jumplink with an oof-map box and railroads are repaired in 15 days in the AGE engine. But I will take all ideas and doc of course.
It would slow Allied troops significantly if the railroad at Segezha was destroyed...
Below is the map of historical Allied advancement. My editing is in red.
Thanks. [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:02 pm
by Chilperic
This new version delivers both new Siberian option and rules described in the last post and fixes some bugs signaled in the Matrix forums ( AI warning message, Sudden death FUBAR, etc)
BEWARE: due to lack of time, I haven’t tested this version. So the older remains available, when the new in the box is named Fatal Years mod RC.
Compatible with ongoing games, if it works.[:D]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:05 pm
by JJKettunen
Compatible with ongoing games, if it works.[:D]
I will try and curse aloud if it doesn't. [;)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:30 pm
by Nikel
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
I have been searching for a japanese order of battle in Siberia, but without luck [:(]
The official RUS OOB is very solid. I have not real infos about Japan, so I'm just releasing Japanese troops present on the map and creating new Japanese divisions to guard the Transsiberian; These latter have never been engaged in RCW, so it's pure conjoncture. I supppose Japanese divisions to be taher built on the same model in 1919, but during WW2 Japan had very different OOBs between divisions, in part because of experiment and specialization. I wonder if it was yet the case in 1919...No clue about.
I comment this because there are no japanese cavalry units in the game, and there are several pics where cavalry is present.
An idea, just in case you are interested [;)], would be to use the divisional organization of the japanese forces in the russo-japanese war, I guess it was not very different. Look that for example the 12th division had a cavalry regiment attached
http://www.cgsc.edu/CARL/nafziger/904JHAA.pdf
This site looks a translation of the japanese wikipedia
data.lullar.com/剣兵団
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC1 ... %E8%BB%8D)
For the pic, the unit in PON in 1890 looks nice

RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:41 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
I have been searching for a japanese order of battle in Siberia, but without luck [:(]
The official RUS OOB is very solid. I have not real infos about Japan, so I'm just releasing Japanese troops present on the map and creating new Japanese divisions to guard the Transsiberian; These latter have never been engaged in RCW, so it's pure conjoncture. I supppose Japanese divisions to be taher built on the same model in 1919, but during WW2 Japan had very different OOBs between divisions, in part because of experiment and specialization. I wonder if it was yet the case in 1919...No clue about.
I comment this because there are no japanese cavalry units in the game, and there are several pics where cavalry is present.
An idea, just in case you are interested [;)], would be to use the divisional organization of the japanese forces in the russo-japanese war, I guess it was not very different. Look that for example the 12th division had a cavalry regiment attached
http://www.cgsc.edu/CARL/nafziger/904JHAA.pdf
This site looks a translation of the japanese wikipedia
data.lullar.com/剣兵団
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%AC%AC1 ... %E8%BB%8D)
For the pic, the unit in PON in 1890 looks nice
Yes but I will never use PON stuff, for copyright reasons.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:47 pm
by Nikel
Copyright? I can ask for permission if you want, there should be no problem [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:56 pm
by JJKettunen
I played one more turn with updated version and there were no problems, so far. It's late December '18 now.
My question: Is full Allied intervention required to save the front in the long run? The reason I ask is that the AIL has been 12 for a couple of turns, and now I have enough EPs to try diplomatic effort while EPs won't go under 6 (which presumably causes other problems). Clovis?
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:52 am
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Copyright? I can ask for permission if you want, there should be no problem [:)]
I will never use copyrighted material in FY or SVF. Easier, simpler, safer [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:54 am
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
I played one more turn with updated version and there were no problems, so far. It's late December '18 now.
My question: Is full Allied intervention required to save the front in the long run? The reason I ask is that the AIL has been 12 for a couple of turns, and now I have enough EPs to try diplomatic effort while EPs won't go under 6 (which presumably causes other problems). Clovis?
Thanks.
High AIL will keep Allied help, Allied units in the North, possible American tanks, and indirectly could serve Southern Whites by releasing French and Greek troops in the South.
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 6:08 am
by SirGarnet
Thanks for your good work! For the Japanese Intervention option, I understand the chance is a one-time 15% each of the next 4 turns, and the negative kick in immediately even if it turns out the Japanese decline?
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:11 am
by Nikel
ORIGINAL: Chliperic
ORIGINAL: Nikel
Copyright? I can ask for permission if you want, there should be no problem [:)]
I will never use copyrighted material in FY or SVF. Easier, simpler, safer [:)]
OK, anyway I will ask what is the source of the japanese order of battle in AGEod forum [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:15 am
by JJKettunen
This doesn't look right:

RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:32 am
by JJKettunen
Just noticed that Volga Flotilla is set to WHI (Southern Whites).
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:20 am
by JJKettunen
I guess an easy fix for the Murmansk situation would be to keep Allied forces fixed for a longer period, so that the Reds have ample time to garrison Sezhega (and Petrozavodsk).
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:21 pm
by Nikel
Hi keke, for example the british units in Murmansk could be fixed till the arrival of General Ironside
Kalmykov portrait added [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:50 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: MikeKO
Thanks for your good work! For the Japanese Intervention option, I understand the chance is a one-time 15% each of the next 4 turns, and the negative kick in immediately even if it turns out the Japanese decline?
No, the negative effects fire only if Japan accepts to give help. The Siberian demand has no bad effect in itself, except the loss of 3 EPs.
Thanks. [:)]
RE: Fatal Years for 1.03
Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:52 pm
by Chilperic
ORIGINAL: Keke
This doesn't look right:
Yes that's something I've noticed in some saves and I have yet found why. I will need the next time the save and the backup1 turn to search why. The save must be the one of the Poland MC of the region. [&o]