Possible Upgrade for any future patch

[vypuero]

The areas it could possibly be adjusted - and actually you can do this yourself - is on the manpower costs of air and naval units, but I don't think these are too unreasonable. In the end the Germans suffered far more from manpower than the UK ever did, mostly because of the Eastern Front.

Note on move and fire later - PG II has this feature and it is a game I played very, very extensively. However, this game is not the same, and not having this feature forces certain limits on attacks that add to the game strategy. I think it should not be added.

[ancient]

I based the manpower on the 1939 population figures for each nation.

Understandable, but in practice it shouldn't work like that.

I calculated a portion of the commonwealth units added to the UK.

What portion? You gave the UK as much manpower as Germany.

[ancient]

In the end the Germans suffered far more from manpower than the UK ever did, mostly because of the Eastern Front.

That the Germans suffered more doesn't mean that the UK, and the USSR for that matter, didn't suffer significantly themselves.

[davetheroad]

I based the manpower on the 1939 population figures for each nation. I calculated a portion of the commonwealth units added to the UK. The USA was lower because of the fight in the Pacific. I added a small amount to Germany to account for recruiting foreign nationals.

What about german allies, did you add their populations as well? Rumania and Hungary lost entire units and replaced them plus the Finns put up a tough fight. In the game german manpower has to be used to replace them and you get no chance of a new unit build.

The commonwealth contribution was a few divisions for Canada and a division for New Zealand and 2or 3 Indian Divisions. Probably enough to field 2 corps maximum?

It would be interesting to check the proportion of available manpower that was actually used in a countries armed forces, what was used in industry etc etc.

[firepowerjohan]

The size of the manpower pool is vital, in a v human game i am playing the german manpower drain is enormous and the UK has already built more armies than WW1, lost them and built some more.

The default game balance settings are not designed for head to head play and in my next game as the axis they will get a hefty bias bonus.

The problem with the uk manpower is not helped by air and naval units being so cheap in terms of men , historically the RAF and RN absorbed vast amounts of manpower, this had to be as if the navy was starved the battle of the atlantic would have been lost and if the RAF was starved of manpower germanies war production would have been much much higher in 44.

By late 44 the UK was having to disband units to provide infantry replacements.

UK and German casualties also include the minor countries so if Poland suffer losses then those will be recorded as UK losses. I do not know if this was the reason why you thought UK have a too high casualty number.

[syagrius]

I based the manpower on the 1939 population figures for each nation. I calculated a portion of the commonwealth units added to the UK. The USA was lower because of the fight in the Pacific. I added a small amount to Germany to account for recruiting foreign nationals.

What about german allies, did you add their populations as well? Rumania and Hungary lost entire units and replaced them plus the Finns put up a tough fight. In the game german manpower has to be used to replace them and you get no chance of a new unit build.

The commonwealth contribution was a few divisions for Canada and a division for New Zealand and 2or 3 Indian Divisions. Probably enough to field 2 corps maximum?

It would be interesting to check the proportion of available manpower that was actually used in a countries armed forces, what was used in industry etc etc.

As for Canadian troops we had the Ist Canadian Army in France and divisions in Italy. So I think it was more than fielding just "2 corps" with the Aussies. We had 1 million men under armes in 1914-1918 and more in WW2.

For the Axis minors, they seems to have seperate manpower, they share only production with Germany.

[sagji]

Two things I saw in my first game played:

Why is there no Kiel Canal?

Also why can't subs pass the Straights of Gibralta

[Enigma]

They are too shallow for subs.

[sagji]

They are too shallow for subs.

Historically axis subs went in and out of the Med.
IIRC getting out was a little difficult as the subs needed to be on the surface because of the current, but it wasn't a major problem - just a matter of timing it for a moonless, or overcast, night.

[vypuero]

I don't think it is that significant an issue. You can buy more subs for Italy if you need subs, or capture the Suez canal, which is probably easier to do than it was historically.