TRP - Total Realism Project for War in Europe (1.10b Download)

[Taxman66]

Bugs:
Need to modify the text of the US -> Russia shipments via Persia DE, as you did the Vlad.

Town & Port of Norfolk (as well as a few other southern cities) are stuck at value 5 and did not increase upon US entry into the war.
-Do not try and tell me/argue that Norfolk was not a major naval yard capable of fully repairing ships.

Their is nothing I can do to increase them. That is bassed on weather a Primary or Secondary Supply (for your side) exists and if you cooperate with it.

Also I believe it is based on the Logistics tech as well. As far as I am aware their is no event that will make them go up.

Will look at the other items you reported.

OK, I was partly wrong in my assessment.
You have Pittsburgh, Baltimore & Richmond set at 0 at the start of the game.
Because of Richmond, Norfolk and the other Southern towns can not grow until Richmond grows to 5/6 first.
Strongly suggest one of the following:
1. Put Richmond back to the 10 she starts with in all other games. (I would argue the same for Baltimore & PIttsburgh too)
2. Have Richmond (also suggest Baltimore & Pittsburgh as well) come on line at the earlier industrial trigger for the US (The one based on Barbarossa and hopefully includes a back up trigger date as well). This should provide Richmond time to grow enough before US entry so that Norfolk grows as well.

----
Suggestion regarding US->Russia Vlad & Persia shipment DEs.
Since there are more turns per year in your game, I would suggest lowering the per turn amount that is shipped.
I also suggest giving the US at least a little bit of a discount as well. For example instead of 40/80 per DE (Base Game) or 80/80 per DE (TRP)... Maybe 45/60 per DE.

[Taxman66]

What's your reasoning for that?

Carriers absolutely dominated naval engagements in WW2. So much so that as strong as they are in SC, they are still far weaker and much, much more vulnerable to surface and sub engagements than they were in real life. Having a CV (at naval 2) lose more of its air wing than doing in damage vs. a DD with AA 3 seems rather silly.

If you want to really go 'Total Realism', CVs need to be much stronger. On the other hand there should probably be a Force Z event sending UK ships out of theatre.

My thinking was that AA tech is useless for anything above 2 so I am trying to make them more worth wild. Also USA Light Cruisers were renown for having super high AA. Perhaps lowering the AA on destroyers to a 3 (need to review if fractions) and letting the others get to a 5.

Making Carriers stronger is something most definitely on the table, especially for World with all the additional ships.

Does anyone know exactly how it calculates the damage from planes to ships etc.. what stat vs what stat and what is the math formula?

The encounter I had was a UK CV (with Naval Wep 2) attacking an IT DD (with AA3) and losing more Air strength than the damage done to the DD. I shudder to think what would happen with higher AA levels.

However, the real problem is the SC naval system is just plain bad (and that is putting it kindly IMO) and is in need of a complete redesign from scratch with a new engine (again IMO). Trying to make it operational just doesn't work well and lends to favoring hit & run tactics and no sense of fleet building. The idea that surface ships could rush a CV (say on the Axis turn) and crush her in a surface action without the CV spotting and striking the surface ships (probably multiple times) is laughable. Just ask the Japanese Admiralty. Then you also have the whole issue of one side attacking with good weather and the other getting bad weather and unable to counter strike. There are lots of other issues, but those are the 2 biggies.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Making Carriers stronger is something most definitely on the table, especially for World with all the additional ships.

Does anyone know exactly how it calculates the damage from planes to ships etc.. what stat vs what stat and what is the math formula?

PM Elessar2 for those questions. His WitP mod for WaW has been fine tuned, and he knows the maths.

[Lothos]

What's your reasoning for that?

Carriers absolutely dominated naval engagements in WW2. So much so that as strong as they are in SC, they are still far weaker and much, much more vulnerable to surface and sub engagements than they were in real life. Having a CV (at naval 2) lose more of its air wing than doing in damage vs. a DD with AA 3 seems rather silly.

If you want to really go 'Total Realism', CVs need to be much stronger. On the other hand there should probably be a Force Z event sending UK ships out of theatre.

Ok been looking this over and came up with some initial thoughts to bounce off you

- Change Naval Research Cap from 2 to 5
- All ships (except Carriers) remain at a cap of 2
- All ships (which is what it is now) AA cap changes from 2 to 5
- All Planes with Naval Tech CAP changed from 2 to 5
- Escort Carriers and Carriers CAP changed from 2 to 5

This should negate the AA

Goal here is to make research the AA tech above 2 worth it, especially for Japan, USA and UK


----------------
Other notes not related
- Can someone confirm that USA is loosing production because some resources are shut being shut down causing other resources not being shut down by event to shut down because everything around them is 0? I was not aware of this design in the game engine but if true I can adjust which should increase USA production a little.

[vanandre66]

Playing August 1943 and US and GE have already reached Air Tech 5.
I think that with so many turns availables research growth should be lowered. Every country has already studied at least lv.4 in many research branches.

I also noticed that the axis, playing the allies, are not reinforcing north africa. They took Egypt and jourdain losing assets, and they could have pushed to iraq, but they had to stop because the did not receive any reinforcements.

[Lothos]

Playing August 1943 and US and GE have already reached Air Tech 5.
I think that with so many turns availables research growth should be lowered. Every country has already studied at least lv.4 in many research branches.

I also noticed that the axis, playing the allies, are not reinforcing north africa. They took Egypt and jourdain losing assets, and they could have pushed to iraq, but they had to stop because the did not receive any reinforcements.

Ok, added to my look into list

[Lothos]

Released Alpha version of TRP for World at War on that forum

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p5010333

[OldCrowBalthazor]

Released Alpha version of TRP for World at War on that forum

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p5010333

Will take a look.
Btw..I think Taxman is right about research needing to be slowed down considering the extra turns...however Unfortunate Son and I are doing daily turns and are just getting into early 1940, so don't have complete data to support this opinion quite yet.
I have to say the UK research is maxed, and been getting a lot of breakthroughs. No complaints there but the UK already is at Armor Weapons 1 and about 25% towards 2. It January 1940 atm-phoney war.
Also..it has been some time since I played WiE and FallWeiss V.9.2...but they were were not simultaneous turns either.

Anyways...you got 3 of us testing (at least), and Taxman is the WiE expert here...so that is a good thing for a modder to have: Input!

Will down load the Alpha TPR-World. Excited about that!

[Taxman66]

1. Still suggest that Richmond (and less importantly, Baltimore & Pittsburgh) start up at the Barbarossa USA industrial trigger.

2. Fully upgraded INF Corps can barely dent other fully updated INF corps. They can't touch big boy units. They (or at least the Russian INF corps) can't even hurt a Tank Corps (at adv tank=2), when the tanks are at 0 supply and their morale/readiness is in the toilet. I'm not even sure they could hurt them if said 0 supply tank was in a urban hex taking that penalty too. Maybe if they were stuck in a swamp hex.

3. Axis AI still needs work:
Better defense against Russian ooze and surround tactics.
Don't fly unescorted bombers and get them eaten by fighters, or at least stop once bloodied.
Better target choice with said bombers.
Need to get better at dislodging tough defensive positions.
Don't send fighters to get slaughtered in France (Normandy in particular), when the UK has nothing else occupying their own air.
If the AI is going to insist on using fighters to defend Germany/France from Strat bombing, then make sure there are HQs around for them to be attach to. HQs are cheap enough this shouldn't be a problem.
I'm not 100% sure but I think the AI maybe clumping the HQs too much.
Axis/GE AI may need to reevaluate its MPP expenditures ratios (particularly after the fall of France), in regards to units vs. Tech, and maybe in unit choice.
Needs to beef up better for Egyptian campaign, or it will have no hope.

4. Some of the convoy lines run through neutral port hexes. This is just plain obnoxious to deal with when hunting subs.

5. I get the feeling that trying to deal with subs in multi-player will be a nightmare. Not sure if I have any suggestions.

6. Bring back the naval loops. Saves on tedious naval movements. Adjust the length of time for them if necessary.

[Lothos]

1. Still suggest that Richmond (and less importantly, Baltimore & Pittsburgh) start up at the Barbarossa USA industrial trigger.

2. Fully upgraded INF Corps can barely dent other fully updated INF corps. They can't touch big boy units. They (or at least the Russian INF corps) can't even hurt a Tank Corps (at adv tank=2), when the tanks are at 0 supply and their morale/readiness is in the toilet. I'm not even sure they could hurt them if said 0 supply tank was in a urban hex taking that penalty too. Maybe if they were stuck in a swamp hex.

3. Axis AI still needs work:
Better defense against Russian ooze and surround tactics.
Don't fly unescorted bombers and get them eaten by fighters, or at least stop once bloodied.
Better target choice with said bombers.
Need to get better at dislodging tough defensive positions.
Don't send fighters to get slaughtered in France (Normandy in particular), when the UK has nothing else occupying their own air.
If the AI is going to insist on using fighters to defend Germany/France from Strat bombing, then make sure there are HQs around for them to be attach to. HQs are cheap enough this shouldn't be a problem.
I'm not 100% sure but I think the AI maybe clumping the HQs too much.
Axis/GE AI may need to reevaluate its MPP expenditures ratios (particularly after the fall of France), in regards to units vs. Tech, and maybe in unit choice.
Needs to beef up better for Egyptian campaign, or it will have no hope.

4. Some of the convoy lines run through neutral port hexes. This is just plain obnoxious to deal with when hunting subs.

5. I get the feeling that trying to deal with subs in multi-player will be a nightmare. Not sure if I have any suggestions.

6. Bring back the naval loops. Saves on tedious naval movements. Adjust the length of time for them if necessary.

Thank you for the feedback, will address each item

1 - This is taken care of for the next release (change is already in TRP World Alpha)

2 - Russian Infantry are weaker than German Infantry but can upgrade to level 3 infantry which then makes them just as good as German Infantry. This is exactly how it worked in Fall Weiss as well.

3 - All of this is in the EXE and only the devs can work on it. Germany AI is designed to build allot of Armor after the fall of France. It will also transport troops to North Africa (so does Italy). Not sure what you are referring to issues in the Egyptian campaign. You will need to be more specific or provide saved games with an explanation on what happened to get you to that point.

4 - Which convoy lines run through neutral territory? As far as I am aware their are none with the exception of Morocco to Vichy France and that is their in case Germany takes Gibraltar.

5 - What do you mean its a nightmare?

6 - No, the entire point of Africa was to get rid of the Naval Loops

[Taxman66]

Thank you for the feedback, will address each item

1 - This is taken care of for the next release (change is already in TRP World Alpha)

2 - Russian Infantry are weaker than German Infantry but can upgrade to level 3 infantry which then makes them just as good as German Infantry. This is exactly how it worked in Fall Weiss as well.

3 - All of this is in the EXE and only the devs can work on it. Germany AI is designed to build allot of Armor after the fall of France. It will also transport troops to North Africa (so does Italy). Not sure what you are referring to issues in the Egyptian campaign. You will need to be more specific or provide saved games with an explanation on what happened to get you to that point.

4 - Which convoy lines run through neutral territory? As far as I am aware their are none with the exception of Morocco to Vichy France and that is their in case Germany takes Gibraltar.

5 - What do you mean its a nightmare?

6 - No, the entire point of Africa was to get rid of the Naval Loops

2. Incorrect. Fall Weiss has Russian Inf Wep max of 2. Fall Weiss drastically limits Russian pre-war MPP, but then provides a plethora of units post Barbarossa. TRP also has a max of 2 for Russian Inf Wep. Though the issue I'm bringing up generally applies to everyone's INF Corps.

3. I was able to beat up on the Italians in Libya and drive into central Libya before any German units were ever spotted. What I did see was a German Mech, AT and ART (don't remember if the Rommel HQ was there). Everything else had fled.

4. The West African convoys run through the Spanish port of Las Palmas. The British Guyana convoy runs through the Venezuelan port of Cumana. After UK adjusts her convoy routes, don't recall about before.

5. The amount of territory that convoy defenders have to cover is vastly larger, so much so (even with buying out the DDs, CVLs and Maritime Bombers) that there really isn't a way to defend it. The only defense I can think of is to camp out around the Axis ports and wait for the subs to try and return to base. Also to make sure that Italian East Africa gets taken out and not ignored.

6. In my opinion making those moves is just tedious and annoying. Mostly just a quality-of-life issue.

[Elessar2]

Research timing. The way I estimate what % to use is to divide 80 by the putative % to get the number of turns before a country gets an advance. Why 80 and not 100? To account for the chance of a breakthrough, which is typically going to advance you 15-20% (on top of the regular advance-calculate with both 80 and 85 if you wish and average the results). Note that larger percentages will indeed get you more breakthroughs, but since you'll spend less time on a given level it all more or less works out the same.

EX: 5% for one chit = 20 turns. Since that 5% is also = to the chance of a breakthrough, you should get one every...20 turns, saving you 3-5, so 15-17 turns in practice over a large sample.
10% [double chitting] same thing, 10 turns, 10% chance of a breakthrough, so 7-9 turns.

[Taxman66]

Currently there is no double chits in TRP

[Lothos]

Thank you for the feedback, will address each item

1 - This is taken care of for the next release (change is already in TRP World Alpha)

2 - Russian Infantry are weaker than German Infantry but can upgrade to level 3 infantry which then makes them just as good as German Infantry. This is exactly how it worked in Fall Weiss as well.

3 - All of this is in the EXE and only the devs can work on it. Germany AI is designed to build allot of Armor after the fall of France. It will also transport troops to North Africa (so does Italy). Not sure what you are referring to issues in the Egyptian campaign. You will need to be more specific or provide saved games with an explanation on what happened to get you to that point.

4 - Which convoy lines run through neutral territory? As far as I am aware their are none with the exception of Morocco to Vichy France and that is their in case Germany takes Gibraltar.

5 - What do you mean its a nightmare?

6 - No, the entire point of Africa was to get rid of the Naval Loops

2. Incorrect. Fall Weiss has Russian Inf Wep max of 2. Fall Weiss drastically limits Russian pre-war MPP, but then provides a plethora of units post Barbarossa. TRP also has a max of 2 for Russian Inf Wep. Though the issue I'm bringing up generally applies to everyone's INF Corps.

3. I was able to beat up on the Italians in Libya and drive into central Libya before any German units were ever spotted. What I did see was a German Mech, AT and ART (don't remember if the Rommel HQ was there). Everything else had fled.

4. The West African convoys run through the Spanish port of Las Palmas. The British Guyana convoy runs through the Venezuelan port of Cumana. After UK adjusts her convoy routes, don't recall about before.

5. The amount of territory that convoy defenders have to cover is vastly larger, so much so (even with buying out the DDs, CVLs and Maritime Bombers) that there really isn't a way to defend it. The only defense I can think of is to camp out around the Axis ports and wait for the subs to try and return to base. Also to make sure that Italian East Africa gets taken out and not ignored.

6. In my opinion making those moves is just tedious and annoying. Mostly just a quality-of-life issue.

Thank you for your feedback

2 - Attached as screenshots from the Fall Weiss setup showing you that Russia can research up to Infantry Tech Level 3, their max is not 2. This is directly from Fall Weiss. Now I did look into it and their is a bug, USSR is capped at Level 2 instead of 3 in TRP. Must have happened when I did a mass Apply Data. I will fix this for the next release.

3. Remember you have hindsight to the future and the AI does not. Germany AI will not start sending troops to North Africa till after the fall of France (sometimes longer just depends). Italy on the other hand will keep sending troops as it finds fresh units to send. Now as the UK if you mass build a bunch of land forces and send them to Egypt knowing full well what is going to happen then well you have an advantage cause you know history and the AI does not. What I suggest is upping the difficulty level then. The other question is, did they try and send reinforcements and did you stop them with your Navy? If yes then that would also explain it.

4 . Ok, I see it, will change it

5. Welcome to the conundrum the Allies really had. If you could cover everything then it would not be historical and it would not be a challenge. Try investing in Intel, it may tell you were the subs are to help track them down.

One other note, I have made quite a few fixes from your feedback (and others). Do you want me to put out a new Release or wait till you finish your existing game in case their are more bugs to fix?

[Taxman66]

2. Attached are in game screen shots of Russian research tables for both Fall Weiss 9.1 (latest version) and Total Realism Project. Both show Russian Infantry Weapons maxed out at 2. Fall Weiss 9.1 RU infantry matches statistics with all other Infantry units.

However, my point was in regard to all INF, not just Russian.
Now, I haven't played as the Axis yet so I don't know for sure how feeble their INF Corps are against big boy units. I do know I observe Germany INF Corps at 2/1/2 barely scratching the surface of Russian INF Corps at 2/2/2 (middle number is AA so not important) and not being able to hurt Russian Tanks (albeit I haven't let a RU tank get cut off/0 supply to see if they are as feeble in that situation).

RU INF WEP.jpg (344.6 KiB) Viewed 787 times

3. I did not stop Italian Reinforcements with the UK navy. I did use the navy to make sure path was clear through the Med to send reinforcements to Egypt that way instead of sending them the excessively tedious and long way around Africa. I believe the Italian navy was cowering in the Adriatic for the most part.

Idea: Maybe freeze a GE HQ (like you do with the Strat Bomber) in the Rhine area or Belgium so it can support fighters defending against Allied Strat bombing?

5. And yet by Fall 1942 (after the Americans learned the hard way to listen to what the UK told them about convoying their merchant fleet), the sub war turned to the Allies favor. By mid 1943, heavily so. Beyond that it just got worse for the subs, to the point of absurdly ridiculous.

Convoys were sent in clumps with escorts attached. They merchants weren't on a long string like a conveyer belt (as this game is set up), that could be attacked at all times anywhere along the path. It's one of the many issues I have with the SC naval system.

[Lothos]

2. It is possible Fall Weiss changed it in a later version. The version that came with War in Europe has the research level of 3 with their infantry weaker. I actually liked the idea and kept it. Infantry should never be able to attack armor head on. Not sure what you are expecting here. I would suggest using combined arms, artillery strike, air power and try and cut some of its supply down. As an FYI, I did not change the combat numbers, these are the same combat numbers Fall Weiss had (in their version that came with War in Europe). I personally think they are fine and learned how to maneuver around if you only have infantry.

3. It may also be that you have to many ships near Malta, that would discourage the AI from reinforcing North Africa because it will see it as suicidal. I am surprised you have so many ships for the Med and you complain you do not have enough to cover the Atlantic and protect your convoys. It sounds to me you are sacrificing one for the other, that is a strategic choice. I thought about trying to force it to garrison an HQ somewhere but the problem is I have no way of knowing where the AI put its planes at. It is really an EXE issue. I mentioned to the Devs before that the AI has a habit of clumping its HQs.

5. That was the battle of the North Atlantic and not Central and South Atlantic. They were heavily protecting convoys from the Caribbean, USA and Canada. You still have all of those convoys that come from Africa that had very little protection most of the way.

You never answered my question if you wanted me to release all the fixes I have done so far now or do you want to wait till your current game is over in case their are more? If I release it now you would need to restart your game if you want the fixes/changes.

[Taxman66]

2. You're not listening to me. INF can barely dent other INF. INF can not hurt tanks even when tanks are at 0 supply and garbage Morale/Readiness. Even if also taking Urban penalty.

3. Nope. Not much around Malta. Also ships in Med include only a couple of DDs, the rest out sub hunting. Though I think with TRP, camping ports would be better idea.

5. Because very few subs had the range to go that far, and even the ones that could tended not to for the most part.

---
Go ahead release the changes. I'm only playing solo, and don't need to go any further in my current game. OCB, however, is playing a multiplayer game.

For the record there are 2 versions of Fall Weiss. The one in the Community Pact (which is very very old) and the reworked one download only (different thread in this Scenario Design and Modding group).

[Lothos]

2. You're not listening to me. INF can barely dent other INF. INF can not hurt tanks even when tanks are at 0 supply and garbage Morale/Readiness. Even if also taking Urban penalty.

3. Nope. Not much around Malta. Also ships in Med include only a couple of DDs, the rest out sub hunting. Though I think with TRP, camping ports would be better idea.

5. Because very few subs had the range to go that far, and even the ones that could tended not to for the most part.

---
Go ahead release the changes. I'm only playing solo, and don't need to go any further in my current game. OCB, however, is playing a multiplayer game.

For the record there are 2 versions of Fall Weiss. The one in the Community Pact (which is very very old) and the reworked one download only (different thread in this Scenario Design and Modding group).

2. Since I did not change the combat values from Fall Weiss I am not sure what you are referring to. I have never had these issues BUT infantry attacking infantry head on with no help and the defending infantry is entrenched well yea it is not going to go well. This was the entire point of Armor!

3. Would need to see a saved game

5. That's actually not true, Germans had raiders that would refuel in Neutral ports. They also had subs that would act as refueling tankers for other subs. They had subs going all the way down to South Africa.

-------
Some notes on combat
- I again checked just now, Infantry Corps and Armor Corps have the same combat stats as the base game with the same tech increases. I am starting to think the problem here is that you are use to using Infantry Armies to loosen up Infantry Corps so you can then advance. That strategy is no longer possible. Attacking is suppose to be expensive and not easy. You will need to build mass Armor and Mech. Use Artillery and Air Power to loosen their defenses and then punch through. If you're only option is to attack with infantry then you may need to do what the AI does. Focus on one unit and the first couple that attack are cannon fodder to lower their entrenchment and to lower their morale so that other units can do damage.

It is more starting to sound to me you need to change your tactics

Also, please tone it down a bit. I may be mis-reading your messages but I get the feeling you are starting to become hostile a bit. I have put considerable time into this and have gone above and beyond to read every comment you made and address it.

-----

I will put out a release in about an hour or two. Let me run one quick sim till 1941

[Taxman66]

I'm sorry I don't mean to come off as hostile. I just seem to have a differing opinion and am trying hard not to see your posts as 'dismissive'.

For the record I'm not 'testing' at higher difficulty levels, because I want to get a feel for how it would play in multiplayer.


2. With INF Corps vs. INF Corps (with equal max out tech), I'm only seeing an occasional ding for a point even after the defender has been de-entrenched and softened up.
As for the INF Corps vs. Armor: Do you think/believe cut off and starving Armor can't be hurt by INF (other than the elite units)?
Tactics wise, yes I can certainly beat up the enemy tanks with my own tanks, Mech or elite INF (if necessary), Tank Destroyers, planes etc... But if I cut enemy units off, it would be nice to take care of them with INF while my good units push forward. Now all I can do is pin the cut off strong units with INF and let them starve to death. It just feels like INF Corps are nothing but Anvils except against the poor man units, or those behind on Tech or soft targets.

2a. Speaking of which. Regarding German Static Infantry: For all intents and purposes (at least from the Allied perspective) they seemed completely interchangeable (Attack/Defense/Movement?) with INF Divisions.

3. Sorry don't have a save that far back.

5. Yes, but not in any significant numbers that I recall hearing/reading about.

[Lothos]

I'm sorry I don't mean to come off as hostile. I just seem to have a differing opinion and am trying hard not to see your posts as 'dismissive'.

For the record I'm not 'testing' at higher difficulty levels, because I want to get a feel for how it would play in multiplayer.


2. With INF Corps vs. INF Corps (with equal max out tech), I'm only seeing an occasional ding for a point even after the defender has been de-entrenched and softened up.
As for the INF Corps vs. Armor: Do you think/believe cut off and starving Armor can't be hurt by INF (other than the elite units)?
Tactics wise, yes I can certainly beat up the enemy tanks with my own tanks, Mech or elite INF (if necessary), Tank Destroyers, planes etc... But if I cut enemy units off, it would be nice to take care of them with INF while my good units push forward. Now all I can do is pin the cut off strong units with INF and let them starve to death. It just feels like INF Corps are nothing but Anvils except against the poor man units, or those behind on Tech or soft targets.

2a. Speaking of which. Regarding German Static Infantry: For all intents and purposes (at least from the Allied perspective) they seemed completely interchangeable (Attack/Defense/Movement?) with INF Divisions.

3. Sorry don't have a save that far back.

5. Yes, but not in any significant numbers that I recall hearing/reading about.

2. Infantry vs Infantry is basically World War I style combat and is suppose to be a slugfest. As for armor being surrounded and cut off. I am not sure if their is an out of supply modifier in the Editor. Anyone know of something that lets you control the penalty for out of supply units?

2a. German Static Infantry have the same base stats as Russian Infantry (and all Minors). They are suppose to be a cheap stop gap to help in France (historically) but AI does other things with them. Historically the Germans had a manpower problem and started using Russian POWs in divisions mixed with German regulars which is the basis for the static unit. During D-Day all the beaches were defended with Static Infantry except for Omaha which had a regular German division (hence why it took all day to break through).

3. Darn, keep that in my next time, may want to save on a regular basis (with different saves) it would be a huge help to sometimes see what you are talking about.

5. True, but its good to give the Germans the option. The pro is their should be little allied units down their. The bad is that it would take a long time for the Axis to get a unit down their. It provides a level of fun and strategy. Playing World In Flames (the board game) makes it allot of fun keeping those options open. I have thought of putting an Argentina Port as a refuel base for the Axis in South America (which is accurate).