WW2 Europe scenario - Atom Bomb needed?

[curtsibling]

This thread certainly has kickstarted a fun debate!

I tracked down the Struggle for Europe scen (thanks, Agricola!) and it is indeed a mega-epic.
It uses the 'hi-res' style of units, which are loved by some, but not my preferred choice.

In any case, the super-abundance of events and nifty batch file make this scen very interesting,
and is encouraging me to take a faltering step into the unknown (for me) of multi-file scenarios...

I have made my tech tree already, and I think it is my best one yet, but multi files would allow
me to evolve the looks and capabilities of each unit as time elapses...That is too good to ignore.

And the seasonal changes would affect performance of campaigns, which is something I realise
has to be addressed in a proper WW2 scenario, as in historical wars, the weather meant all,
and in the Eastern front it was a massive factor!

So I am going to give some VERY serious thought to making this new scenario multi-file,
although I will have to call upon anyone with batch-file experience to help me out!

[Eivind IV]

Hmm, my version of the STFE has all nemo units, which are equally ugly in my opinion. I've had this version since I played it in a pbem back when it came out. Is the original really all good ol' high res? Brings back memories of the high-res/nemo esque beef that raged the community. Civfanatics had the anti nemo gfx association and apolyton the anti anti-nemo gfx association!

Btw, maybe any of this could be helpful: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...ght=lebensraum

Looking forward to this 'contest' either way!

[McMonkey]

Mercator's CivSwap utility allows for the smooth turnover of files when using the Batch file method. I am not sure if anyone has used it in a scenario yet so we can all learn new tricks!

I used summer and winter rules files in WWII Europa mainly to slow down road movement. Reducing the range of aircraft would also be a neat method for representing poor flying conditions. I wasn't planning to use winter graphics but this debate has inspired me to give it a shot.

I found that making multiple rules files before I had perfected the units stats led to lots of extra work. This time I plan to test the stats thoroughly before modifying them for the later dates.

Viva Civ II

[curtsibling]

Heh!
Who could forget the glorious days of arguing over unit graphics!

PS
In case anyone is wondering I have put Vendetta on hold,
as my new WW2 scenario will be a test case for the map,
and that this new emphasis on multi files is more tasty!

Also, I have managed to use all of fairline's 1946 units.
They fit within the spectrum of this multi-file scen too!

PPS
What is this contest?
Have I missed something?



We are all a team!

Long live CIV2!

[Gelion]

With regard to the original question
I say the atomic bomb was a doable project not only in USA or but also in Germany and possibly even Soviet Union.
I like very much the idea of "Little Boys" being created by events, but there's a little problem: in 1946 US had as many as (IIRC) 50 weapons to be dropped on USSR in case of war. This clearly demonstrates US industrial capacity as well as an eminent risk of a nuclear war in Europe.
If you want the scenario to follow historical route then the choice is simple: event nukes for US. Missile technology to the Germans, even more tanks to the Soviets.
If this scenario is a modeling of WW2 (which I think it is) then I say scrap historical realism.
USA - very expensive nuke unit and 2 created by events after Manhattan project.
Germany - either give a research technology after Los Alamos events or a longer path towards nuclear weapons.
Soviets - in case you want to simulate later Allied-Soviet split I'd either give the Soviets a chance to steal a technology that allows for nuclear research path or give the m the technology from the start or after Los Alamos (like with the Germans)

Dixi

[Case]

Originally posted by Gelion
I say the atomic bomb was a doable project not only in USA or but also in Germany and possibly even Soviet Union.

I'm not sure about Germany, but the Soviets certainly could have pulled it off - albeit with difficulties and at the cost of a lot of conventional weapns.

in 1946 US had as many as (IIRC) 50 weapons to be dropped on USSR in case of war.

I think that the number was much smaller than that. The US used up all of its bomb materials making the first four bombs (the trinity test bomb, the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs and the bomb which wasn't used) and I believe it wasn't until well after 1945 that the US stockpile reached double figures.

As for the question of whether the US would have used the bomb in Europe, I don't think that there should be much doubt that they would have. The US participated in the deliberate destruction of German cities, including the attacks on Hamburg and Dresden, so there's no reason they would have baulked at using atomic weapons against German targets. This is especially the case if you accept the theory that one of the reasons the bombs were used against Japan was to send a message to the USSR - this would have been much more effective if the bombs have been used in Europe.

[Gelion]

After some research (which was not that easy) I have found a list of plans that US developed post WW2:
June 1946 - Pincher (50 nuclear bombs to be dropped over 20 cities)
March 1948 - Broiler (34 bombs over 24 cities)
December 1948 - Sizzle (133 over 70 cities)
October 1949 - Shakedown (220 over 104)
end of 1949 - Dropshot (300 over 200)

If you like you're welcome to do further search using the names I have found. My point being is that as early as 1946 US had over 30(50?) nuclear devices that it could have dropped over Europe. Scenario of a one sided nuclear war against USSR in 1946 is not as hypothetical as it sounds.

[curtsibling]

Not wishing to enter into the historic fray too much, I think
Churchill might have had issues with A-Bombs over Europe.

Late in the war, he was growing more distrustful of the US,
and even made negative comments on the Dresden raids.

But if the war had went into the Axis favour, and if London
had fallen, or D-Day failed, then all bets would be off...

This said, I may just go with the events-driven A-Bomb
for the Allies. This would only be given after Jan 1945,
and if London falls, or some other bad crisis arises...

[fairline]

Originally posted by Eivind IV
..... Brings back memories of the high-res/nemo esque beef that raged the community. Civfanatics had the anti nemo gfx association and apolyton the anti anti-nemo gfx association!

I remember some reprobate upstart who had the cheek to post Nemo-esque units at Civfan felt the full force of the Kobayashi ire and kicked off the whole ANGA / AANGA thing. Who was he again?

[fairline]

Originally posted by curtsibling
PS
In case anyone is wondering I have put Vendetta on hold,
as my new WW2 scenario will be a test case for the map,
and that this new emphasis on multi files is more tasty!

Also, I have managed to use all of fairline's 1946 units.
They fit within the spectrum of this multi-file scen too!

Phew, that gets me off the hook for a bit. Sorry to be so damn slow mate!

[curtsibling]

No sweat, Gareth!

You have already given me a veritable treasure trove of units to work with!

I am totally in your debt, mate!

PS
I think you'll like the winter unit variants I have made!

[Case]

Originally posted by Gelion
After some research (which was not that easy) I have found a list of plans that US developed post WW2:
June 1946 - Pincher (50 nuclear bombs to be dropped over 20 cities)
March 1948 - Broiler (34 bombs over 24 cities)
December 1948 - Sizzle (133 over 70 cities)
October 1949 - Shakedown (220 over 104)
end of 1949 - Dropshot (300 over 200)

If you like you're welcome to do further search using the names I have found. My point being is that as early as 1946 US had over 30(50?) nuclear devices that it could have dropped over Europe. Scenario of a one sided nuclear war against USSR in 1946 is not as hypothetical as it sounds.

I'm pretty sure that I've read that the US nuclear plans during the early years of the Cold War called for the use of more weapons than the US actually had. It's important to remember that the Manhatten Project was by far the most complex and expensive government project in history and it only resulted in 4 bombs by August 1945, so nuclear weapons were very time consuming (and expensive) to produce.

[Arthedain]

Looks like you've found your solution Ciaran. Now bring forth the previews!

[curtsibling]

Heh!

Working hard on the multi unit files right now!
All 12 of them - Winter and Summer versions, the works!

It's pretty cool being able to use a whole range of WW2 weapon types!

[Arthedain]

Since you're going for the multi-units I'm looking forward to see many of Fairline's units, that haven't been used in scenarios yet. And of course your own.