Sahara and Himalayas
Moderators: Joel Billings, JanSorensen
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
Sahara and Himalayas
I have decided to make this operatable in the game.
But I am having problems.
I made them start as part of Commonwealth for WAllies and turned it into rough terrian. This works fine, but I can't move to into the locations in game.
I check the boarders in the regions file and all looks good and even found some information that himalayas were in the original plans to be included because some one went to the trouble of making them politically frozen until America joins the war.
I don't understand what is stopping any units from entering these areas, can the devs point some solutions out.
Edit: I have created this into a mod for download tm.asp?m=977652 and works with several mods for wider support.
But I am having problems.
I made them start as part of Commonwealth for WAllies and turned it into rough terrian. This works fine, but I can't move to into the locations in game.
I check the boarders in the regions file and all looks good and even found some information that himalayas were in the original plans to be included because some one went to the trouble of making them politically frozen until America joins the war.
I don't understand what is stopping any units from entering these areas, can the devs point some solutions out.
Edit: I have created this into a mod for download tm.asp?m=977652 and works with several mods for wider support.
-
- Posts: 2536
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 10:18 pm
- Location: Aalborg, Denmark
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
I am guessing you forget to change the SIDE value from 8 to 6 in the regions file. Remember to do so for each of the territories sharing the border and it should work. I dont know exactly what those values mean - but 8 seems to be prohibited and 6 seems to work for land borders.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
I don't want to flood with another topic, but is it possible to make it for example only being able to build flaks after the year 1944 ?
Or rephrased:
Is it possible to delay units to certain dates.
Or rephrased:
Is it possible to delay units to certain dates.
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
I noticed you have finished it now and posted for download. But what were you trying to do with the Sahara and Himalayas? From what I could tell your modding these territories so that ground units can enter them. Am I right? Right now only air units can enter them because the code 8 means air only I think. Changing it to 6 allows all land and air units into it. Thats what you did right? If thats the case could you elaborate on the reason why? It seems odd to me that you would want players to be able to cut through the desert and bypass the defense at Cairo. Maybe I misunderstand and got this all wrong.
Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
Well if you make it double lined and rough terrain with 0 of any use it'd just be like tibet is. Worthless and a waste of time.
-
- Posts: 2536
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 10:18 pm
- Location: Aalborg, Denmark
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
ORIGINAL: Davidovich Trotsky
I don't want to flood with another topic, but is it possible to make it for example only being able to build flaks after the year 1944 ?
Or rephrased:
Is it possible to delay units to certain dates.
I dont believe that is possible.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
ORIGINAL: Lebatron
I noticed you have finished it now and posted for download. But what were you trying to do with the Sahara and Himalayas? From what I could tell your modding these territories so that ground units can enter them. Am I right? Right now only air units can enter them because the code 8 means air only I think. Changing it to 6 allows all land and air units into it. Thats what you did right? If thats the case could you elaborate on the reason why? It seems odd to me that you would want players to be able to cut through the desert and bypass the defense at Cairo. Maybe I misunderstand and got this all wrong.
All the sides are six in the mod.
Yes, one of the main reasons is to be able to cut through the desert making africa a harder terrority to hold and more enjoyable experience. Also makes Cairo an important place to hold other then just the canal reasons, it makes it the only terrority stopping a large army in africa from entering asia/europe terrority.
It provides another staging ground for battles and fun things, adding to africa terrority resources and other such like things would make it a treasure chest that sides will fight for.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
ORIGINAL: Daykeras
Well if you make it double lined and rough terrain with 0 of any use it'd just be like tibet is. Worthless and a waste of time.
It makes africa alot more accessible though the mod I did just allows you to go through it, I do have future plans for making it more worthwhile.
- Uncle Josef
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 8:49 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
So is the Sahara and Himalayas rough terrain and 2 MP? And does the territory start off neutral or belonging to a side?
If you're playing as Axis I suppose its an easier way to take the rest of Africa...
And as for Tibet, well I always put a resource in there to make it worth taking. Otherwise it IS useless ;D
If you're playing as Axis I suppose its an easier way to take the rest of Africa...
And as for Tibet, well I always put a resource in there to make it worth taking. Otherwise it IS useless ;D
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
ORIGINAL: Uncle Josef
So is the Sahara and Himalayas rough terrain and 2 MP? And does the territory start off neutral or belonging to a side?
If you're playing as Axis I suppose its an easier way to take the rest of Africa...
And as for Tibet, well I always put a resource in there to make it worth taking. Otherwise it IS useless ;D
During the time period, it was basically owned by the alliance side, so I simply added it to part of the commonwealth.
It does come in rough terrian like the majority of africa is already, so it works just the same.
It will be an advantage for the Axis players to take the rest of africa and also provides a staging ground for Axis and Allied battles for control of the area.
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
Are you an Milton Bradley Axis & Allies player? I've been playing it since it came out in 1984. Loved the game. Which explains why I now love WAW.
Anyway I bring this up because in 1st-3rd editions of A&A you could blitz your North African tank strait down into Africa to grab IPC's. It was a standard move and if you play A&A I can see your reason for modding WAW to allow this. But have you played 4th edition A&A? Otherwise known as Revised A&A now published by Avalon Hill. In that version they changed the map to include the Sahara and Himalayas as impassible terrain. It was hailed as a great improvement. The new version forced a more realistic conquest of Africa via the need to take Egypt. In another game I have played(Third Reich by AH), there is a region called the Qattara depression which forces German troops to stay near the coastline of Africa.
I quess what I'm trying to point out is that the restriction currently present in WAW is not some gamey way to steer the Germans toward Egypt, but is actually grounded in real world logistics. It would probably have been a nightmare to try and cross the desert directly. Its just a guess since I'm no military expert. Maybe someone knows more about the reasons why in real life the Germans did not head directly south.
As far as marching an army through the Himalayas I'll give the same reason as above. Its too hard to do in real life.
Anyway I bring this up because in 1st-3rd editions of A&A you could blitz your North African tank strait down into Africa to grab IPC's. It was a standard move and if you play A&A I can see your reason for modding WAW to allow this. But have you played 4th edition A&A? Otherwise known as Revised A&A now published by Avalon Hill. In that version they changed the map to include the Sahara and Himalayas as impassible terrain. It was hailed as a great improvement. The new version forced a more realistic conquest of Africa via the need to take Egypt. In another game I have played(Third Reich by AH), there is a region called the Qattara depression which forces German troops to stay near the coastline of Africa.
I quess what I'm trying to point out is that the restriction currently present in WAW is not some gamey way to steer the Germans toward Egypt, but is actually grounded in real world logistics. It would probably have been a nightmare to try and cross the desert directly. Its just a guess since I'm no military expert. Maybe someone knows more about the reasons why in real life the Germans did not head directly south.
As far as marching an army through the Himalayas I'll give the same reason as above. Its too hard to do in real life.
Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
-
- Posts: 2536
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 10:18 pm
- Location: Aalborg, Denmark
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
The depression was largely considered impassable by vehicles - so even though its only ~100 km wide noone had any inclination to try to pass through it. Even if you didnt get stuck in the mud / salt marsh you wouldnt be able to run supplies through in any reasonable shape.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
Wikipedia is an awesome resource.
Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
Just tell me how you supply an army of any size across hundreds of miles of desert, with no infrastructure, and no water anywhere in sight? At times they could barely supply units in European Russia.
-
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 6:17 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
If an army really wanted to do it, they could do it, but they usually use sea to bypass it.
For "no infrastructure and no resources in sight" is rather like the "Scorched Earth" tactic the Russians have always used, yet this is not implicated in the game either.
Try it out, either love it or hate it, the "marmite" of World At War.
For "no infrastructure and no resources in sight" is rather like the "Scorched Earth" tactic the Russians have always used, yet this is not implicated in the game either.
Try it out, either love it or hate it, the "marmite" of World At War.
- Uncle Josef
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 8:49 pm
RE: Sahara and Himalayas
ORIGINAL: Davidovich Trotsky
For "no infrastructure and no resources in sight" is rather like the "Scorched Earth" tactic the Russians have always used, yet this is not implicated in the game either.
That's true... I wouldn't mind seeing that in the game. If Axis takes any Russian territory, the factories and resources there should be destroyed, so Germany can't use them for research/supply purposes.
Just a question... I've played games as Axis/Japan where I've had to conquer all territory on the map to win. Will I now have to take the Sahara/Himalayas as well or not?