SCENARIO: Modern World (In Progress! Nitpickers needed!)

[Jaguar]

Oh, I just realized that I have two empty spots, not one. Tell me where to use them.
1. England (Canada and Australia)
2. USA (Israel)
3. Japan (South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore)
4. EU (EU countries)
5. Russia (Little Asian countries, some of East Europe)
6. Southeast Asia (Thailand, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam)
7. Mexico
8. Andean Nations (Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador) (I think it needs a better name because Venezuela Colombia Ecuador Guyana and Suriname aren't very Andean)
9. Mercosur (Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile)
10. South Africa (All non-arab Africa)
11. Arab States (North Africa and ME)
12. Persian States (Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan)
13. China (NK, Mongolia, Nepal, Tibet)
14. India

So I have two spots. How should I use them? Maybe seperate Eastern Europe? Or make Australia or Canada their own state?

[sabrewolf]

currently you have on each continent these many civs (some civs more than once, so split)

- asia: 6.5 (!!)
- north america (+middle america +caribbeans): 2.33
- europe (- russia): 2.33
- south america: 2
- africa: 1.5
- australia+oceania: 0.33

so i'd say, don't add any more in asia.
there still is geographical potential in africa and australia.

my suggestions:
- you could split your england-civ into
a) "commonwealth w/o australia)" and
b) "australia+oceania"

- split south africa into two civs:
c) "south african states" (including RSA, ZIM, Kenya)
d) "middle/saharan african states" (bordering states are: cameroon, central afr. rep., sudan, ethiopia, somalia, border near the 5th degree longitude).
here's a great map:

both civ's aren't very powerful - but that is the status quo.


edit: posted too early

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior
Oh, I just realized that I have two empty spots, not one. Tell me where to use them.
1. England (Canada and Australia)
2. USA (Israel)
3. Japan (South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore)
4. EU (EU countries)
5. Russia (Little Asian countries, some of East Europe)
6. Southeast Asia (Thailand, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam)
7. Mexico
8. Andean Nations (Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador) (I think it needs a better name because Venezuela Colombia Ecuador Guyana and Suriname aren't very Andean)
9. Mercosur (Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, Chile)
10. South Africa (All non-arab Africa)
11. Arab States (North Africa and ME)
12. Persian States (Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan)
13. China (NK, Mongolia, Nepal, Tibet)
14. India

So I have two spots. How should I use them? Maybe seperate Eastern Europe? Or make Australia or Canada their own state?

to be ethnically correct, give kashmir to the persian civ (majority are muslim and from persian descent). but nepal should belong to the indian civ (90% of nepalese are hindu)

[Jaguar]

Land unit distribution:

I am not too sure how good my first estimates are so FEEDBACK PLEASE!!!!!!!!!

Units in the same section are upgrades of each other. As you move left to right they get more advanced. All units have their own graphics. There are multiple types of each level of tank.

[Jaguar]

Ok I think that I will go back to having 2.5 African ones... going to modify the chart. We're cross-posting.

[sabrewolf]

don't forget to power up the present day geographically small - but economically or politically mighty civs (US, UK+canada, EU, japan, maybe china too (allthough quite large))

[sabrewolf]

in comparison with "real life",
i think japan is too strong in your list but the US is too weak (US and israel probably have a more powerful army than all others together). also russia isn't that strong any more either. otherwise it looks quite good.

are you going to include nukes?

ok, i'll stop posting (bedtime) for now, so we won't be cross-posting any more

btw: who's that pretty avatar of yours?

[Jaguar]

Ok I'll make Japan weaker, and US stronger. In reality they're probably twice as strong in every area as the EU but that doesn't balance well.

Nukes will be included, possibly a medium range sort.

I think I made Russia pretty weak, but I'll take away some units. They'll be wimps except for their nukes.

My avatar is Jessica Alba.

[Jaguar]

BTW what do you all think is a reasonable number of ICBMs and tac-nukes? I'd say roughly 15 ICBMs and 6 Tacticals for the US, 12 and 8 for Russia, and 5 and 2 for EU. England gets 2 ICBMs and a tactical. Persian States gets 3 tacticals, India gets 4. Is this good?

[Jon Shafer]

Give Russia an economic disadvantage, but a military advantage. Give it more units than it can support (like the situation in real life). And Tass, nukes weren't exactly designed for battlefield usage.

I think you must make eastern Europe a seperate civ. That's a very important area, and lumping it into Russia would be a bad idea IMO.

Also, I think India and Persia have a bit too many nukes. Give them 2 each, perhaps.

Something that you have to realize (unfortunately), the US is heading more towards small, quick elite strike forces rather than large formations, like MA. On the same note, many countries (not Western though), for the most part have more armored units than America, but it's America's quality that makes their army so much more effective, even though it is larger than most other armed forces.

Militarily, Japan isn't very powerful (though it could be), but economically it's a superpower rivalling the United States. Make sure you represent that.

One final thing, I think you should keep both Canada and Australia in the Commonwealth. Making Australia its own civ would be kind of odd.

[Jon Shafer]

Silly commies, always trying to carve an empire for themselves.

[Jaguar]

Trip:

Making Eastern Europe its own civ: Probably gonna happen.

Russia: Units will stay as are. I will fiddle around with Russia's improvements and terrain to make its economy weak. It will bring in only 50 gpt or so, compared to maybe 500gpt for Japan and 300 for China.

US Army: Although I agree that the US has a lot of special elite forces, it has a large regular army as well. It should have more tanks than, say, China, because even if China had weaker tanks, it could upgrade relatively quickly and become more powerful than the US. It should have more unites than EU and England because it is more militarily oriented.

Nukes: Persia and India will have less. I didn't realize that I gave India more warheads than England.


Tass: Again, Russia's army will stay as is in the first chart. I think they'll be fun to play as - you attack the Persian States, which gives you some oil money, (enough to upgrade your army) and then you can build up and take a big country down.

[Jaguar]

Well, Russia should be 5th best army behind US, UK, EU, and China. Also 2nd most nukes, about 2nd largest army, and 6th highest GNP.

BTW, a new unit, the Technical (truck armed with machine gun) will be added shortly. Also, does anyone know if there is a 2nd marine graphic somewhere? So I can have modern marines as well as early marines. modern inf. will also be able to do amphibious assaults, but modern marines will have higher attack.

[Jaguar]

They're only two nukes less than US. No big deal.

[Jon Shafer]

That all sounds pretty good to me.

I still think that China should have more tanks than the USA, but of much inferior quality. Israel, Britain and the EU all have tanks around the same quality of the US (Germany's newest model of the Leopard II is actually the best tank in the world).