New Scenario: 2194 Days of War 1939 or 1936

[Pap1723]

Looks pretty good. I would definately make France a separate civ. Making the neutrals barbarians isn't a bad idea. Why don't you give them very strong, immobile units so they can't attack anyone and nobody can take them over. I would change Manchester because it is not only in the wrong place, but on the wrong coast. Also, based on your previous scenario (which was very good) I would put a lot more cities in Africa, especially Ethiopia.

Making the neutrals barbarians would also allow me to start the scenario in April of 1939 right after the Dismemberment of Czechoslovakia. France will be the new civ that takes over control of the Neutral slot. Except here is the new problem...What French units to include, especially from the later years of the war when they were not producing new units...???

I'll post the units I have right now, I'll need your help to decide which to include and which to get rid of to make room for the new French units.

Pap

[Pap1723]

Here they are, many of them are Curt's because he is my favorite unit artist right now!

[Pap1723]

I was planning on making this scenario have only 1 units file, but would you guys prefer that there is not much military technology and more units through the use of multiple events and rules files??

Pap

[Dr Kellogg]

By sending a diplomat into a barbarian city, you make peace with them. You can also create an alliance with them via hex-editing.

Originally posted by Pap1723
I was planning on making this scenario have only 1 units file, but would you guys prefer that there is not much military technology and more units through the use of multiple events and rules files??

Pap

Do you think multiple unit files are necessary? I like both, but I prefer 1 unit file..

[jim panse]

Originally posted by Pap1723

Do you mean that I should rename Wroclaw, Breslau and Lodz, Krakow??

Pap

Wroclaw => Breslau

Lodz => Krakow

That´s exactly what I meant.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Pap1723

I chose Manchester because it was a bigger city than the other 2 in 1938 when I have population sizes for. How important is it that I change it?? According to the website where I based all of my population statistics on, Birmingham and Glasgow had very similar populations during 1938. Since then however, Glasgow's population has lost more than 400,000 people so it is much smaller than Birmingham.

Pap

..and Manchester still is bigger than Hull or Newcastle, or Liverpool, for that matter. The problem is it's not a coastal city and is west of the Pennines (the ridge of hills/mountains that runs down the central part of the North of England). It was an important industrial city and home of Avro, for example, who made the Lancaster bomber.

Placing it on the North East coast of England is somewhat like placing Detroit in New England, however. The important town for the shipping industry in the North-East was Newcastle; Tyneside (Newcastle), Clydeside (Glasgow) and Belfast were probably the biggest shipbuilding areas in the World prior to WW2. On these grounds alone I'd turn Manchester into Newcastle, although it pains me to say this, being a Manc.

BTW, I'd be interested to see that site with the population figures. Any chance you can post a link

[Pap1723]

By sending a diplomat into a barbarian city, you make peace with them. You can also create an alliance with them via hex-editing.

Great information, thanks!

Do you think multiple unit files are necessary? I like both, but I prefer 1 unit file...

In this scenario I also prefer 1 unit file. Should I perhaps not include any French units and instead just give the French all British units since we have no idea what they would have produced during the later years of the war?

Wroclaw => Breslau
Lodz => Krakow
That?s exactly what I meant.

Great, I'll fix it, but now Poland might look a little differently if they are a seperate coutnry from the start.

..and Manchester still is bigger than Hull or Newcastle, or Liverpool, for that matter. The problem is it's not a coastal city and is west of the Pennines (the ridge of hills/mountains that runs down the central part of the North of England). It was an important industrial city and home of Avro, for example, who made the Lancaster bomber.

Placing it on the North East coast of England is somewhat like placing Detroit in New England, however. The important town for the shipping industry in the North-East was Newcastle; Tyneside (Newcastle), Clydeside (Glasgow) and Belfast were probably the biggest shipbuilding areas in the World prior to WW2. On these grounds alone I'd turn Manchester into Newcastle, although it pains me to say this, being a Manc.

BTW, I'd be interested to see that site with the population figures. Any chance you can post a link

Thanks for the information about that area of England, very informative. I was considering turning Manchester into Leeds since during WWII Leeds had 700,000 plus people. I will look into Newcastle though, especially since you tell me it was an important shipyard.

Here is the link for you:

http://www.library.uu.nl/wesp/populstat/populhome.html

Pap

[curtsibling]

Yeah, baby!

I'm liking the look of this sceanrio!

Great work, Pap, my man!

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Pap1723
Here they are, many of them are Curt's because he is my favorite unit artist right now!

Thanks!
Helping the CIV2 community is my biggest high!

[Yurt]

I wouldn't worry too much about the later French units. They shouldn't be designed as a human player, and they should be weak enough to be knocked out early in the game so their technology doesn't matter too much anyway. You probably just need a French infantry.

What would be really interesting would be if you simulated the Vichy France/Free France split. To do this you would need to put in all the French colonies in Africa and South America. I don't know if it's possible, but when Paris is captured, France should split with central Africa and the Caribbean colonies forming Free France and the rest stay as France.

Don't forget these details:

-I'm not sure when in May you are starting the scenario, but the Norway conflict was still going on at that time. Narvik was captured by the allies on May 28th and wasn't recaptured until June 8th.
-Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania were still independant (annexed 21 July).
-Italians still had Ethiopia and were actually winning the war, they had a strong(ish) air force there and eventually forced the British out of Somalia (later in the year).
-Saudi Arabia shouldn't be British
In your earlier scenario, Prague and Iraq should also be independant, but it's probably too late for that now.

This is a great WW2 timeline, it helped me in my Civ3 scenario:

http://www.euronet.nl/users/wilfried/ww2/1940.htm#top

[FiGu]

oh, and a another detail! Finland joined the axis first in 1941 summer.

[EmuGod]

Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary had also not joined the Axis until just before the invasion of Yugoslavia, if I recall correctly.

[Pap1723]

Here is an updated look at Europe, Russia, Asia and the United States respectively...

[jim panse]

I suggest you exchange Breslau and Krakow, Pap.

Also, the Netherlands and Belgium "entered" the war on May 10th, 1940, the day when Germany attacked. They should be neutral too.

And something concerning your units: I would think about giving the Germans only the medium tanks. On September 1st, 1939 there were not even 300 PzKw IV. The Wehrmacht attacked Poland mainly with PzKw I and II.

[OzzyKP]

You simply can't have the start date of 2194 Days of War be in 1936, you'll have to rename the scenario!

"3289 Days of War and Buildup to War"