Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

A forum to discuss custom scenarios, campaigns and modding in general.

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

Locarnus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2026 2:40 pm Perhaps those conversions could be triggered by the Axis player?
Eg the trigger could be that the coastal fortification next to such a port does not exist, either due to being destroyed by the enemy or deleted by the Axis player (using a zone for that would be nice, but is not necessary). Then the specific port hex next to that destroyed/deleted coastal fortification is changed, also not requiring a zone.
In some cases the AI (or even a human opponent) would capture the port city BEFORE destroying the nearby fort unit. Then it is all for nothing or even worse, since it would change flag anyway AND become useless as well after that.


Just noticed that in the screenshot the right side info panel "unit_name" as well as the "unit_type" formatting is different for the selected unit and the hovered over unit. Eg for the hovered over unit the 2nd line of the "unit_type" is cut off.
Ah, yes, indeed. I wanted to fix that as well before the release. Better now?

Italian4.jpg
Italian4.jpg (570.87 KiB) Viewed 761 times

I slightly increased the font size for that info panel (imho makes it a tad more readable), increased the maximum allowed unit name length (from 20 to 25, fits into 2 lines if no long word is in the middle of the unit name) and made some other minor tweaks to that info panel.
The problem with increased font size is that of course less characters would fit in the given space. Meaning shorter unit type names. In the "old" version of your screenshot the unit name "28 cm Kanone 5 r4" fits in one line, but in the "new" it requires two lines because of the larger font size. And also less characters can fit in the right "hover" window: while in the "old" there is "MaxAmmo" and "MaxFuel" in the "new" there is only "max".
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

Defense of the Reich (and air war in general) reworked


Following GeneralWerner's earlier suggestion, and also my experience with single and multiplayer games, Allied bombing of the German cities now results in 150 prestige for each per turn, up to a maximum of 450. But this deduction still happens at the end of the turn, and some of the prestige is added at the begining, so this system can still be hacked to some extent, if the player empties the "treasury" at the end of the turn, by leaving just a few unspent prestige points. Nevertheless, the potential loss is still higher than before, and I made some other changes so that the Allied strategic bombers pose a higher threat in both single and multiplayer games.

For example, the appearance and overall presence of the Allied bombers have been changed a bit as well, while their absolute numbers are basically the same, some of them may appear earlier in 1942. Until now, there was a big wave in early 1942 (depicting the so-called "Thousand-bomber raids") followed by mostly silence for the rest of that year, but now their flow is more steady after the initial big wave.

Another change is that British strat bombers also have their air and ground defense increased by 1-2 points to better represent their predominantly night-time use during the time span of the scenario. (Watching the great TV show "Masters of the Air" gave me this rather obvious idea. There is a scene in which the US bomber pilots contemplate that their British comrades had an easier time since they bombed during the cover of the night and wished they could do the same. It is somewhat silly I did not do it earlier since other night-time bombers like the Soviet U-2 or the German bi-plane nuisance bombers already got such a bonus for their predominantly night time use.)

JG 1, the German fighter unit which is in Berlin in turn 1 is now initially at maximum strength 5. Historically JG 1 had only one Gruppe with 3 squadrons in June 1941, so basically it had only a third of the strength of an average full strength Jagdgeschwader, and the 2nd and 3rd Gruppe were only added in early 1942. And thus it will only become a full strength unit in turn 16. The reason for this is part historical accuracy and part to prevent this unit from being transferred to Africa or the east as soon as turn 1. While it is still possible to transfer it, using such an understrength fighter unit at the frontline is of course very risky, even in single player against the silly AI, so not really recommended.

On the other hand, JG 27, the figher unit that starts in North Africa is now already there in turn 1, whereas earlier it only appeared in turn 6 or something. However, initially this unit is also understrength with max strength 7 and can only be full strength from turn 6. Now it is also a Bf 109E trop and not as a F version (as historically at that time), so it has to be upgraded as well.

AA guns in general are also weakened a bit since now they get only +1 bonus to their anti-air attack after each experience star, while earlier they got 2. The cheapest 2 cm AA (and its derivatives) is now a bit more expensive.

All this is of course to make the player pay more attention to the air defense of Germany in both single and multiplayer. Or face the consequence in the form of more prestige losses than before.

But, as always, there is a little compensation: now an additional bomber destroyer unit appears in turn 17.

BE 25_3.jpg
BE 25_3.jpg (683.99 KiB) Viewed 747 times

It is of course a Ju 88C, another new unit addition with somewhat mediocre stats, but still OK when appears. However, the better Me 110G and Ju 88G bomber destroyer units now become available a bit later. And a new bomber destroyer version of the Fw 190A-8 will also arrive.

And there are a number of other changes, like minor stat changes to most fighters, most notably better balanced Italian fighters, more sub-types for German and Italian bombers, and others, like one starting He 111 unit in the east was replaced by a Ju 88, since it looks like there were twice as many Ju 88 available for Barbarossa than He 111s. Actually, there are quite a lot of other smaller changes here and there, some are less obvious or "under the hood" or which I just forgot to make a note.
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

New or modified units, part 3.


Using the original (early war) P-38 icon by Bebro, I made a new version for the later war "silver" P-38J, basically just a reskin. But it looks so cool, isn't it? 8)

P-38J.jpg
P-38J.jpg (648.61 KiB) Viewed 732 times

The US Naval Air Forces now also make a (very) brief appearance at the start of the Torch landings to support the ground forces. It is only for flavor really, since these air units and their carriers soon disappear anyway as historically they were also withdrawn after a few days.

BE 25_6.jpg
BE 25_6.jpg (605.76 KiB) Viewed 732 times


Another new addition I made for this release is the US 37 mm M6 Gun Motor Carriage. Basically a US portee gun: a 37mm AT gun mounted on a Dodge light truck. It was used in the early stages of the Tunisian campaign. Of course it was already obsolete when first used, but it was there, so why not have it? Placing a weak AT gun on an unarmoured truck does not sound like a great idea, but for some reason US planners sent it to the frontline to face the veteran German forces in late 1942. :o

M6.jpg
M6.jpg (591.44 KiB) Viewed 732 times
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
PeteMitchell
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Posts: 2527
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:18 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by PeteMitchell »

Do you think it is still possible to win version 2.5?
Comprehensive Battlefield Europe AAR:
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=86481
PeteMitchell
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Posts: 2527
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:18 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by PeteMitchell »

Also, when playing through the pre-scenarios, do people prefer to come out with:

1. 3 tanks and 2 fighters OR
2. 2 tanks and 3 fighters OR
3. any other compositions?
Comprehensive Battlefield Europe AAR:
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=86481
PeteMitchell
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Posts: 2527
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:18 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by PeteMitchell »

Somehow I am still a big fan of this one: viewtopic.php?t=82546 :-)
Comprehensive Battlefield Europe AAR:
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=145&t=86481
Locarnus
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 932
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:14 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by Locarnus »

McGuba wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 11:49 pm
Locarnus wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2026 2:40 pm Perhaps those conversions could be triggered by the Axis player?
Eg the trigger could be that the coastal fortification next to such a port does not exist, either due to being destroyed by the enemy or deleted by the Axis player (using a zone for that would be nice, but is not necessary). Then the specific port hex next to that destroyed/deleted coastal fortification is changed, also not requiring a zone.
In some cases the AI (or even a human opponent) would capture the port city BEFORE destroying the nearby fort unit. Then it is all for nothing or even worse, since it would change flag anyway AND become useless as well after that.
Hm, yep. I guess flag change can be solved, but having an enemy unit sitting there could not (without using zones, and even then it would be messy).
I'm still thinking that the frustration of an Axis player not being able to use those ports when the invasion goes ahistorical outweighs the prevented flag change if the invasion goes historically?

McGuba wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 11:49 pm
Just noticed that in the screenshot the right side info panel "unit_name" as well as the "unit_type" formatting is different for the selected unit and the hovered over unit. Eg for the hovered over unit the 2nd line of the "unit_type" is cut off.
Ah, yes, indeed. I wanted to fix that as well before the release. Better now?

Italian4.jpg
I slightly increased the font size for that info panel (imho makes it a tad more readable), increased the maximum allowed unit name length (from 20 to 25, fits into 2 lines if no long word is in the middle of the unit name) and made some other minor tweaks to that info panel.
The problem with increased font size is that of course less characters would fit in the given space. Meaning shorter unit type names. In the "old" version of your screenshot the unit name "28 cm Kanone 5 r4" fits in one line, but in the "new" it requires two lines because of the larger font size. And also less characters can fit in the right "hover" window: while in the "old" there is "MaxAmmo" and "MaxFuel" in the "new" there is only "max".
Yep, imho much better. :)

True, fewer characters fit with the 1px bigger font size.
Though unit type length is already more restricted by the purchase/upgrade screen. And custom unit name could even be increased to the 25 characters (conservative increase, due to long word in the middle of the unit name being problematic).
I considered moving those little heart, fuel, ammo and entrenchment symbols, but I'm not good with graphics editing, especially with a background like the one of the statbase.png file.
Imho the icons for fuel and ammo are known enough from the low fuel and low ammo indicators near the strength plate and the heart for strength from the purchase and upgrade screens.

Even without the font increase, that "UnitStr:" line probably gets messy when the hovered over unit is suppressed, especially for two digit suppression numbers like -10?

Speaking of that suppression number, I also wanted to change the font color. Dark blue on dark grey is such a terrible choice for readability. Especially when that is the only place where that number is displayed.
I remember being unsure of what color to change it to, since dark grey background is not kind to anything but bright colors, and I was hesitant to introduce a much brighter blue or red for that one element. Perhaps I should simply use the yellow-ish from the unit name (which is also bold). Not great as a contrast to the white text color, but at least it is readable against the grey background?
longer, alternative "PG" like Campaign new version 0.34 from 2011.08.02 (another bugfix & now in zip format)
Uhu
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1471
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:16 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by Uhu »

Hmm, I don't know the historical results, but should not do British night bombers less damage as they are that time not so accurate? This would balance the stronger defense stats.
Image
Image
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

PeteMitchell wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 7:22 am Do you think it is still possible to win version 2.5?
Absolutely! But of course it mainly depends on the chosen difficulty level. Playing with the default random dice rolls also makes it harder to win with the Axis (but I still prefer and recommend that one) than limited dice chess or even chess mode. By the way, I have also reworked the difficulty screen for single player games, not recommended difficulties (Guderian and Manstein) are removed and replaced with ones that actually make sense for the mod and provide even more challenge for experienced players. The easier difficulties are also reworked a bit with recommended settings to make the mod more accessible to those who are just seeking some fun. More information is given in the pop-up boxes to help players to choose the right difficulty:

diff.jpg
diff.jpg (459.19 KiB) Viewed 580 times


These are only recommended difficulties, these can still be changed anyhow with the "Advanced" settings.

Other than that, I think the overall difficulty is more or less the same as before. The Axis side also has several advantages that it did not have before. The main difference is there are less ways to exploit the game mechanics and the weaknesses of the AI while being more accurate historically. Which is certainly good. It may be more difficult to achieve a total victory than before, though.

My previous multiplayer match vs. Duedman was very inspirational. Based on that experience, I tried to replicate the thrill and tension of playing against a human player as much as possible when playing against the rather silly AI. Multiplayer is still the best way to experience this mod, but it requires a lot of time and commitment to finish such a playthrough. So single player is the next best thing, especially at the higher difficulty levels.




Locarnus wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 11:34 am I'm still thinking that the frustration of an Axis player not being able to use those ports when the invasion goes ahistorical outweighs the prevented flag change if the invasion goes historically?
As I wrote earlier, not all the ports are affected so this frustration will be hopefully limited.

I considered moving those little heart, fuel, ammo and entrenchment symbols, but I'm not good with graphics editing, especially with a background like the one of the statbase.png file.
Just did that:

statbase.png
statbase.png (114.51 KiB) Viewed 580 times
Speaking of that suppression number, I also wanted to change the font color. Dark blue on dark grey is such a terrible choice for readability. Especially when that is the only place where that number is displayed.
I think having a red color works well. After all, if a unit is heavily or fully suppressed, the strength number under the unit icon also turns red to indicate that, so I guess it would even make more sense than the default dark blue (which is indeed somewhat hard to read):

sample001.jpg
sample001.jpg (738.44 KiB) Viewed 580 times
Uhu wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 2:57 pm Hmm, I don't know the historical results, but should not do British night bombers less damage as they are that time not so accurate? This would balance the stronger defense stats.
They already do. I have vastly reduced their soft and hard attack stats some time ago exactly for that reason. I just did not increase their defense stats back than. I don't remember in which previous BE version, but it is like that for quite some time now. On average, the British heavies do about half the bombing damage to enemy units as the US heavy bombers, while they often carried a heavier bomb load.
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
Uhu
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1471
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:16 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by Uhu »

Yes, I know that. I meant maybe the British night bombing - because of less so accuracy - could have less than 150 prestige per hex, let say 100. In that way, the player could be make different strategies to counter the Allied bombers.
McGuba wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 7:05 pm
Uhu wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 2:57 pm Hmm, I don't know the historical results, but should not do British night bombers less damage as they are that time not so accurate? This would balance the stronger defense stats.
They already do. I have vastly reduced their soft and hard attack stats some time ago exactly for that reason. I just did not increase their defense stats back than. I don't remember in which previous BE version, but it is like that for quite some time now. On average, the British heavies do about half the bombing damage to enemy units as the US heavy bombers, while they often carried a heavier bomb load.
Image
Image
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

Uhu wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2026 7:26 pm I meant maybe the British night bombing - because of less so accuracy - could have less than 150 prestige per hex, let say 100. In that way, the player could be make different strategies to counter the Allied bombers.
I don't think it is possible to differentiate between the overall effectiveness of the British and US strategic bombing campaigns. While it is possibly true that British bombers were often less accurate, they still did a lot of damage to houses, infrastructure and the morale of the population. But let's just ask the AI, shall we? :D

Question:
"British area bombing vs. US carpet bombing in WW2"

Answer:
British area bombing (RAF) and US carpet bombing (USAAF) during WWII were complementary strategies targeting different aspects of Germany, with the RAF attacking civilian morale and industrial centers at night, and the USAAF targeting specific infrastructure in daylight. While the USAAF focused on precision bombing to degrade industrial capacity, its inability to maintain high accuracy led to significant carpet bombing, especially in the later stages of the war.
Facebook

British Area Bombing (RAF)
Strategy: Developed from the lack of navigation tools, the RAF shifted to bombing entire urban areas, specifically targeting industrial workers' housing to undermine morale, known as "area bombing".
Timing: Primarily night raids to avoid heavy losses from German fighter aircraft.
Goal: Destroy industrial cities and break civilian morale.
Wikipedia

US Carpet/Precision Bombing (USAAF)
Strategy: The US initially targeted military-industrial sites in daylight, such as oil installations, ball-bearing factories, and aircraft plants.
Timing: Daylight raids, aiming to use the Norden Bombsight for high precision.
Reality: While aiming for precision, poor weather, smoke screens, and enemy action frequently forced the USAAF into "carpet bombing"—saturating a large area with bombs—to ensure destruction of a target.

Comparison
Effectiveness: Evidence suggests the US strategy of targeting infrastructure (oil and transportation) was more effective at directly damaging Germany's war machine, whereas RAF area bombing caused more massive damage to civilian infrastructure.
Development: RAF Bomber Command, as explained by Imperial War Museums, started with limited capacity, while the US became increasingly effective at gaining air superiority.
Morale/Casualties: Both campaigns produced massive destruction, with millions of civilians made homeless.

Since Panzer Corps has only one currency: prestige, in my opinion it has to represent both industrial capacity and civilian morale in this mod (and pretty much everything else like finances, raw materials, available workforce, diplomatic influence, etc. etc.). So I just do not see the point in making such a distinction. If there was another resource in the game, like morale, then yes, probably British bombers should do more damage to that, but since there is no such a thing...

Other than that, from a gameplay perspective, I also do not think it is a good idea to make British bombers do less prestige damage as it would result it players prioritizing the US bombers to minimize the potential prestige loss, when in reality it seems like there was no such a thing. Great emphasis was put on the build up of the night fighter force as well as on that of the daylight fighters.

Ah, and did I mention that "Masters of the Air" is a great series to watch? 8)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXFvdvG1JJs


EDIT:

And if we are here, I also made a new "P-51C" unit, by combining the canopy of the existing P-51B with the "silver" P-51D. Another enemy to worry about:

P-51C.jpg
P-51C.jpg (609.03 KiB) Viewed 424 times
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
tactical22
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:39 am

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by tactical22 »

Dear McGuba, when are you going to release the new version 2.5 of the mod? When are you going to end this agony? We're suffering!! :wink:
Locarnus
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 932
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2011 8:14 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by Locarnus »

McGuba wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 7:05 pm [...]
Speaking of that suppression number, I also wanted to change the font color. Dark blue on dark grey is such a terrible choice for readability. Especially when that is the only place where that number is displayed.
I think having a red color works well. After all, if a unit is heavily or fully suppressed, the strength number under the unit icon also turns red to indicate that, so I guess it would even make more sense than the default dark blue (which is indeed somewhat hard to read):

sample001.jpg
Great!
Agreed, full red (FF0000) works well for the suppression number.

Looking forward to all the changes, especially the German vs Soviet arty rebalancing and the increased defense for British Strat bombers.

I also tried giving both the UK and US strat bombers a ground defense buff (mostly +2 ground defense).
But that was only driven by the PzC engine allowing AA units to shoot after moving, which leads to the habit of "hunting" enemy aircraft with AA units. Which is ok-ish over actual frontlines, but really hurt that special theater in BE when AA can even stack overstrength without risk of losing it, like the fighters.

After Eskuche provided feedback, I dialed that buff back to only roughly +1 ground defense (for both UK & US).
Perhaps +1 (or +0 ?) ground defense for the US strat bombers and +2 for the British ones (considering their night attack doctrine you mentioned)?

I try to play with the house rule of not "hunting" (shooting after moving) enemy aircraft over Germany with the AA units stationed there, but that is of course an impossible rule for multiplayer (and annoying for singleplayer).

Perhaps the problem would be smaller if AA units were not practically free to operate (and even overstrength)? Though unfortunately I have not found a reasonable way to change that.

Anyway, very interested to see all your improvements!
longer, alternative "PG" like Campaign new version 0.34 from 2011.08.02 (another bugfix & now in zip format)
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

tactical22 wrote: Tue Apr 14, 2026 1:38 pm Dear McGuba, when are you going to release the new version 2.5 of the mod? When are you going to end this agony? We're suffering!! :wink:
I still have a short list of things-to-do (ideas for smaller fixes and improvements that emerged during my final play test) and I want to go through that before the release. But it should not take too long.

Locarnus wrote: Thu Apr 16, 2026 2:08 pm Perhaps +1 (or +0 ?) ground defense for the US strat bombers and +2 for the British ones (considering their night attack doctrine you mentioned)?
This time I did not change the defense values of US strat bombers, I think. Currently US and British late war heavies have about the same ground defense value, with some variation between the types, and I am happy with that change. As I understand, US heavy bombers had more structural strength and more armour but British bombers were harder to see and hit since they were mainly flying at night, which probably compensated for the former. There were of course search lights and radars, but those had limited effectiveness, and radars were even prone to jamming.
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

Railway changes


When I first created the map of this mod back in early 2014 :shock: I did not really pay a lot of attention to the actual layout of the railway lines: in most cases I just connected the cities with railways, wherever it seemed rational. But in reality, planners are not always rational. So for every new release of the mod I made corrections by using WW2-era railway maps as reference, and over time it has become more and more precise.

But, for example, who would have thought that there was (is?) no direct railway connection between Odessa and Nikolayev? Even though these cities are quite close to each other with both having a significant sea port on the northern coast of the Black Sea? But it looks like that was exactly the case: if somebody wanted to travel by railway between these two cities, he had to deviate far to the north, almost all the way to Kremenchuk (purple lines show existing railways in 1941):

railway1.jpg
railway1.jpg (164.92 KiB) Viewed 137 times

So yes, this release again comes with some more revision of the railway system, mainly in the east, including the above, but for the first time it also adds railway lines to North Africa and the Middle East.

In fact, there were a lot more railway lines in reality than what is depicted in the mod, but I think the more important ones are now there, with many of the "missing" and half-finished connections also corrected, as in the above mentioned example.

What's more important is for the first time this release comes with several railway lines which are being completed during the scenario. These are of course being completed automatically, no player interaction is needed.

In some cases it was hard to find out the exact date of completion since some of the maps show them being there, while on other, post-war maps some of these are still missing or being shown as under construction. So it required some more research, but that's where fun is.


Notable new railway lines worth mentioning (not in particular order):


- Brenner railway connecting München with Verona through the Alps

- Extended railways in Finland, with connection in the north with the Soviet White Sea line. Note that Finnish units are still unable to embark rail transports to prevent them from being used in distant theaters. However, other Axis and Soviet forces can make use of these. (Historically Finland was not fully Axis, just co-belligerent nation.)

- Saratov - Astrakhan direct line behind the Volga. With a new small embarking - disembarking station at Vladimirovka, just east of Stalingrad. Vladimirovka would be connected directly with Stalingrad as well in late 1941, just as historically. It is mainly important in multiplayer, allowing the Allied player to transfer units to Stalingrad, even if the Axis has reached that city from the west.

- Astrakhan - Grozny line: under construction in turn 1, would be finished in August 1942, just as historically. This was built at great difficulties crossing the dry and hot Kalmyk steppe, just in time to play an important part in the supply of the battles for the Caucasus. According to a source, a German recon unit managed to reach it and destroyed a train before retreating, but for some reason no further effort was made to cut this vital railway line. Which was most likely a huge missed opportunity, given that there was no real frontline in this area at that time, only small recon units chasing each other.

- Baku - Poti - Batumi line, with a connection to Tabriz down south.

- Berlin - Istanbul - Baghdad - Basra line: started in 1903 and completed in 1940, just in time for the war, it is not really useful since a good part of it goes through neutral Turkey. But if the Axis reaches Iraq, the Mosul - Basra line might be useful.

- Abadan - Tehran - Zanjan (Iran): again, not really useful, it could have been more useful if it was connected with the Soviet railway lines, but the relatively short Zanjan - Tabriz line was only completed in 1959.

- Railways in Syria - Palestine, ending at the Suez Canal

- Suez Canal railway bridge: it would be finished in mid 1942, as historically, until then units can still cross the canal, just have to stop for a turn, waiting for a ferry:
"The first El Ferdan Railway Bridge over the Suez Canal was completed in April 1918 for the Sinai Military Railway. It was considered a hindrance to shipping so after the First World War it was removed. A steel swing bridge was built in 1942 (during the Second World War), but this was damaged by a steamship and removed in 1947."
wikipedia


- Western Desert Railway Extension: it was built mostly by the British between Mersa Matruh and Tobruk in 1941-1942. However, following the German capture of Tobruk after the battle of Gazala, the last 15 miles of the line at Tobruk were finished by the Germans themselves in a rare example of "cooperation" between German and British forces in WW2. Thereafter the Axis were more than happy to use this new railway line to support their army standing at Alamein. They even captured and used a British locomotive for that and shipped some more to Tobruk by sea. The retreating British damaged the railways, likewise the retreating Germans after the El-Alamein defeat, but in both cases the damage was repaired fairly quickly.

So that's why I thought that it would be interesting to add this as all these fits very nicely in the context of the mod: it does not matter who is finishing the construction of an unfinished railway line (whoever has control of the area - same as historically), so it can be built automatically by a script in the background. In addition, it looks like the damage done to the railway lines could be fixed relatively fast (in 2-4 weeks which is only like 1-2 turns) by whoever is capturing it so basically it can be used immediately in the time scale of the mod.

railway2.jpg
railway2.jpg (557.79 KiB) Viewed 137 times
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
McGuba
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1590
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by McGuba »

Other visual improvements


I have changed the "Mediterranean" style city and port tiles to be used in Italy, Greece and elsewhere. Because until now these changed colors during the winter and thus I had to use the "African" style city and port tiles for these, but that was not very accurate. So besides the African ports and cities now these also do not change color during the winter, unlike the "Continental" style cities and ports:

cities.jpg
cities.jpg (642.07 KiB) Viewed 126 times

New small town map tiles added:

Several towns which were rather small (typically with less than 50 thousand residents in mid 1941) now have a new graphical representation. Examples include: Velykiye Luki (111,28), Mozhaysk (121,29) or Belomorsk (115,5). These are only in the map because of their strategic or historical significance and not because of their size so I wanted to highlight this difference somehow. Other than that these are exactly the same as any other "normal" city, it is just a cosmetic thing really:

towns.jpg
towns.jpg (706.72 KiB) Viewed 126 times


And there are some other modified tiles like a new salt marsh (basically a swamp) to be used in Africa and elsewhere:

salt.jpg
salt.jpg (545.08 KiB) Viewed 126 times
ImageImage
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=47985
slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=36969
Uhu
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1471
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:16 pm
Location: Hungary

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by Uhu »

I want just thank you in the names of all who likes both BE and railways! :D

McGuba wrote: Thu Apr 16, 2026 5:26 pm Railway changes

Image
Image
bondjamesbond
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Major-General - Elite Tiger I
Posts: 2731
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:10 pm

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by bondjamesbond »

Image

Railways are great – not only can you use them to move your convoys of military equipment, but also armoured trains.

Image
:lol:
https://etoretro.ru/pic82117.htm
https://fishki.net/1571779-samye-malenk ... oezda.html
Attachments
Screenshot_2026-04-17-11-10-08-397_org.telegram.messenger-1.jpg
Screenshot_2026-04-17-11-10-08-397_org.telegram.messenger-1.jpg (97.02 KiB) Viewed 21 times
Last edited by bondjamesbond on Fri Apr 17, 2026 6:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
https://mynickname.com/id73473
Image
JimmyC
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 650
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:31 am

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by JimmyC »

PeteMitchell wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2026 9:13 am Also, when playing through the pre-scenarios, do people prefer to come out with:

1. 3 tanks and 2 fighters OR
2. 2 tanks and 3 fighters OR
3. any other compositions?
I have always gone with option 1 as you are given 3 tanks in the earlier scenarios, so it feels a waste to disband 1 of them. Note that i always disband the Junker and get an extra fighter after Poland.

But thinking about how punishing the air war will be in this upcoming version i would probably go with 3 fighters, 2 tanks.
JimmyC
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 650
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 10:31 am

Re: Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

Post by JimmyC »

@McGuba - fantastic changes and like many here i cant wait for the release.
In my last playthrough of v2.4 which i am now in turn 95, I went a very heavy AA defence of the Reich (particularly for the D-Day landings). But even with multiple layers of AA, the allied air still causes much grief to my troops as they just suppress the AA and then bomb everything around it. The enemy air is often overstrength too, so i wonder that by nerfing the AA it will make it mostly useless? Even my 2 star 11 strength 3.7cm flak usually takes just 1 strength off enemy strat bombers in clear weather in current v2.4. So v2.5 will make defending France a nightmare (maybe this is true to history).
Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps : Scenario Design”