Late 80's Military Units

[Eternal]

I was/am contemplating doing a scenario focusing on the battle in Germany, including surrounding countries. Is that what you are now doing?

BTW, you don't have to include Spain in much depth, because after all they didn't join until 1982, and they weren't a major player at any rate.

[master on high]

don't go overboard...keep a listing of the cities you've built for each civ.

That 255 max. comes way too quickly.
[This message has been edited by master on high (edited May 08, 2001).]

[Grothgar]

bit late there master on high. i reach the 255 limit and i didnt even know there was one lol. So there i was working away on the nato allies city and it says i cant build any more. I was gutted to say the least. So ill have to shelve this product until i can find a more suitable map because master on high although it is an amazing map it is too bloody big lol. So has anyone got any maps in mind that could represent the war in europe?

------------------
I am the LORD OF STRONDAR

[Eternal]

The same thing happened to me, I was using a GIGAmap of the general CENTAG area, and just from doing southern Sweden I realized that I had to do some calculating whether I would have enough space for all the cities I needed.

[master on high]

yeah...that's the only bad thing about it.

[Xuenay]

I dont think it would be very accurate to include Finland in the Allies. We were very, very, very careful in maintaining absolute neutrality.

There even was a memorial sign about the Soviet bombing of Finland during the Winter War that suffered from this - I think it was 30 people who were killed during the bombing, but the sign only said something like "these damages were caused during the war", with mentioning the dead people. This was made so that it wouldnt annoy Soviet!

No reason to dump the entire concept - just reduce the number of cities and start from scratch.

------------------
Truth is stranger than fiction, because fiction has to make sense.
My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
What if this weren't a hypothetical question?
All generalizations are incorrect, including this one.

[Goingonit]

quote: Originally posted by Grothgar on 05-05-2001 04:31 PM Im just now making a scenario based on Tom Clancys "Red Storm Rising" and the book is set about 1988 so thats when ill base it.

Great... I've always liked that book and I was just waiting for somebody to make a scn about it!

Just a few thoughts...

Frisbees (if they are included) should be either very expensive or nonbuildable.

Also, remember the importance of Antitank weapons in the book! Give NATO some events that emphasize their importance, I think. Maybe huge forest defense bonus...?

Sounds great altogether!
[This message has been edited by Goingonit (edited May 15, 2001).]

[Eternal]

quote: I dont think it would be very accurate to include Finland in the Allies. We were very, very, very careful in maintaining absolute neutrality.

You didn't have a chance in the manner. You were just scared of the Soviets. They restricted you to have a very small armed forces and you were sensible enough to honor the obligations of the treaty you signed.

Nevertheless, you were have been in the path of Soviet units on their way to Norway. I don't know if they'll bother to occupy Helsiniki, Tampere, and that area, but they would pass through the north, and most likely Finland wouldn't offer resistance... Therefore, Finland is more like a Warsaw Pact country.

Incidentally, Soviet plans also called for a shortcut through northern Sweden. It would have been neat to see how the Swedes responded.

BTW, as I recall Red Storm Rising was published in 1984... That's the same year that the M1A1 was beginning production. I can't recall if Clancy used Abrams in the book or not...

[Henrik]

quote: Originally posted by Eternal on 05-16-2001 12:08 AM Incidentally, Soviet plans also called for a shortcut through northern Sweden. It would have been neat to see how the Swedes responded.

"Neat" is hardly the word we would use, being crushed by the Russians isn't something we where looking forward to (Sweden would probably try to defend themselves but they would also likely not be very succesfull), what could possibly save Sweden would be American intervention, no matter how neutral Sweden was all of the swedish sea was filled whit American submarine spying eiquipment, therefore Soviet would be folish not to attack Sweden.
Since if they wouldn't attack the americans would know about every little troop/fleet movement they made in Scandinavia...

I haven't read the book though, so I am only telling you about how it really was.

[master on high]

nah. Finland wasn't in Cominform or the WPO so they'd be like Yugoslavia, just a nuetral nation.

[Eternal]

Henrik don't be so pessimistic. I think Sweden actually stood a pretty good chance against the Red Army units that passed through it. The primary objective wasn't taking Sweden but to capture the ports and airbases along the northern Norwegian coast, which would be of the utmost importance because if their subs didn't clear the coast they wouldn't have any hope of intercepting American reinfocrements. Given the mountainous terrain and the many rivers the offensive wouldn't necesarily be very easy.

And of course Sweden took it's military even more seriously than Norway. It had plenty to keep the Soviets at bay, unless the full force of the offensive wheeled around on them.

[Henrik]

Still, the russians would have been stupid if they didn't take out the american sub spying thingies in the ocean...
Lots of other spying euqipment where used via Sweden against Russia too, the Russians knew about this.
One of the first russian objectives in case of war was to attack Sweden, partly becouse they wanted to reach Norway and partly to be able to knock out all the american inteligence thingies in Sweden.