Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

[Uhu]

Victory in ALL of the Mediterranian depends on, how strong Italian fleet can you maintain. Plus defending them and dealing with the British subs and capital ships, you need also (from '42) bombers and 1x Fw 190A and 1x Bf 109. With clever logistics, you can even use after the 2nd level fuel-crisis the 2 Battleships too.

Hi all,

Any hints/suggestions on how to break through at El Alamein? it seems impenetrable. Should I wait for the English to attack me?
thanks

[Slimak81]

Playing turn 35. completely overrun by brits bombers+fighters. My balance is around +400 each turn. That is only enough to heal battlefront ground units . Too many bombers from brits, this is not USSR they could not outproduct Germany air and ground unit's as did USSR. Ok i believe that USSR had 3.5 time more tanks and 2.5 more airplanes by begining of war but not brit's. Put around 2500 point's to heavy AA in France but that helps very little. Since turn 25 USSR also do have a considarable air , mig3s and laggs in masses + Pe2's . Why there is no German script for plane production ? I wanna Bf-109F each 10 turn

[McGuba]

Is it possible to make a mod so called allied eddition? as a USSR player with custom scripts for allies ?
playing turn 15, well spend half of a day having fun with Blitzkrieg, doing good in East and loosing Africa and almost all fleet on $$ convoy route area

It is very much possible, but it would take a lot of time. But first I was planning to make a multiplayer version of this mod. And even berfore that I plan to release v1.9. After that it might be possible to make an Allied version, but to be honest I am not sure if the AI would be able to play it out correctly in a map like this. And anyway, I have always found it more interesting to play alternative history than to just replay history.

Even than, a Soviet Great Patriotic war mod is under development by Intenso82 which has a great promise and I think that one will be amazing when finished. He kindly provided me some early access and I am really pleased with it so far.

Playing turn 35. completely overrun by brits bombers+fighters. My balance is around +400 each turn. That is only enough to heal battlefront ground units . Too many bombers from brits, this is not USSR they could not outproduct Germany air and ground unit's as did USSR.

Actually in WW2 Germany and its territories produced some 133,000 aircraft and the British Empire produced more than 177,000. So yes, even the British Empire could out produce Germany: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_ ... rld_War_II

And while the British could concentrate the majority of their air forces against Germany, the Luftwaffe had to split its available aircraft between the western, eastern and mediterranean fronts. Also, this number does not even include US production which was over 300,000! Then comes the 136.000 by the USSR which was only partially compensated by the 76,000 aircraft produced by Japan and 13,000 produced by Italy. That's why I wrote that the Allies outproduced the Axis by 3-4 to 1 or something like that. I think these numbers speak for themselves, it was only a matter or time that the Allies overwhelm the Axis in a protacted war.

Since turn 25 USSR also do have a considarable air , mig3s and laggs in masses + Pe2's .

As for German Luftwaffe vs. Red Air Force operational strength you can check these charts: http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.co.u ... e+strength
While the Luftwaffe had roughly 2,000-3,000 aircraft in the east for most of the war, the USSR had like 5,000 in 1942, 13,000 in 1943, 15,000 in 1944 and 18,000 in 1945 which is like ten times more than what the Germans had in the last year of the war. While the Soviets were able to gradually increase their air force, partially aided by the Land Lease, which provided over 10% of the Soviet aircraft, the Luftwaffe had to transfer more and more fighters to the West to face the also increasing Allied bombing campaign and to provide its minor axis allies with modern aircraft and engines who were unable to keep up with the rapid development of technology. The Luftwaffe was fighting a losing war despite achieving a favourable kill to loss ratio for most of the war.

The interesting thing is that even though the Soviets had more and more operational and generally better quality aircraft the Luftwaffe was able to maintain a favourable 3.5 kill-to-loss ratio on average for nearly all of the war in the east. But it was just not enough to overcome the disparity in production.

Why there is no German script for plane production ? I wanna Bf-109F each 10 turn

There are some German air units appearing in the mod as reinforcements, but certainly much less than what the Allies get. The main reason is that the AI is just not smart enough to take its damaged air units back to replenish or to organize massed attacks on the player's air units to fully destroy them. It is just part of the game mechanics which has to be compensated. But if you play historically, upgrade your air units constantly and take care of them, you should have the historical Axis vs. Allied air unit ratios for most of the time. I made the scirpts in a way that the Allies should not get more air units at any given time than they historically had. Then it is up to the player if he is able to preseve the historical number of German air units as well.

My general advise to do so is to take back any Axis air units to a friendly base if its strength falls to 7 or under and replenish it to full strength. Also, always try to weaken enemy air units with AA first and then mass attack with Axis fighters until it is fully destroyed. Additionally, always try to upgrade Axis fighters to the latest model. In the west try to upgrade all Axis fighters to Fw 190 as soon as possible as it superior to the Spitfire in 1942/43. By 1944 the war should be decided - either by a successful invasion of Britain or by defeating the USSR. If none of these are achieved by 1944 the Axis should go on the defense and hope for a draw as the Allies get immense reinforcements thanks to their economical superiortity.

[Slimak81]

I made an experiment : played allies side on default settings . Generally AI was quite good for the first 15 turns. Nice punch to Smolensk in center. Nice move towards Leningrad area, but total loss in Odessa, complete passiveness in Africa and nice naval battle in Malta : carrier + 2 battleships + escorts vs almost all Italian fleet)
But anyway the war for Germany has been lost by winter 1941 with no reinforcements it could not attack further. So i am convinced that some scripted PzIII's and airplanes production still neded. Just a repeated each 10-15 turn sript "Camera move to Berlin - msg New Panzer bla bla is ready "
btw by turn 15 allies have 6500 points and that was very very passive defence.
Now returning to my German campaign. Let see if i can hold the ground till 9 may 1945

[doctorwillow]

Hello McGuba, again me. I menaged to finish scenario with a draw(on General level). Lily Marlene was a really nice surprise for the end. In Russia, only Sevastopol left not conquered (I left it for later, and at the end, later was to late). In Africa I threw out Torch forces, in Middle East came to Basra, and in Europe I stoped D day forces west of Paris.
I had a great tima and will probably try to repeat it
And again, I have some more question and opinions…
1. At one moment, in the east, Germans lost their 2 recon planes for 1 new. Why 2 for 1? Why not 2 for 2?
2. As generally is pretty much easy to destroy an enemy plane with multiple attacks/fighters, even when it is adjecent to others planes of his side, why not for realism purpos make this harder (in real life, when there was more planes in formations in the sky, they were harder target, or they were more dangerous as attackers). Could you make with fighters same thing as with Wurzburg raders? When they are adjecent to each other, could they act as a initiative booster one for another. I know there is „escort service“ in game for bombers that are attacked and in the same time are adjecent to friendly fighter, but in this way you could simulate cooperation of fighters when they are together in formation / adjecent (same thing for attack and for defense)
3. Why forts are not repairable? Freya radars are.
4. When is possible to by new units in Barbarossa scenario? In one comment in thread I found that ideal moment is after withdrawal of hungarian units in first winter of Barbarossa because it liberates some core slots. I restarted scenario just for purpose of test and in first turn disbanded 100 germans units, but I was not able to buy at least one.
5. Is it possible to make 109s better than Focke Wolf against enemy bombers without ecorts (historically, while FWs were much powerfull then 109s on lower altitudes, the situations on higher altitudes was quitte opposite)?
6. I lost Tirpitz in one turn in Trondheim harbour. First I lost 8 steps from british mini subs (script I presume) and then it was followed by attack by a bomber who came from England, I suppose. Is that planed or am I a champion of bad luck (I had so much bad dice rolles in whole scenario…., that was the reason why I stopped to play vanilla GC when american infantry in Sicily almost destroyed my elite Panzer IV on open ground without suppression first from artillery or bomber planes )
7. In three prescenarios do I get more prestige for DV or it is better to do MV with all cities captured and plus all amount of prestige that I get each turn by default (some 50 PP I think), plus experience of course
8. Amount of Russian tank and plane reinforcements are determined by capturing caucasian oilfields not Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad?
9. If England is taken, will convoy lanes stay active?
10. Is it possible not to spend 1000 hard earned PP at the start for observation post in Gibraltar? I think that could be avoided by buying a bunch of units (before placing core units on the that) that I won't use on map, and to sell them when I need PP. But after first turn of the scenario it is not possible to buy new units (for some time or even to the end; my 4th question…) and protect PP int hat maner. Question, if I don't install observation post at the start, will it appear later with first oportunity when there is more than 1000 PP. And, I found another interesting „cheat“ in the mod. If partisans spawn deep behind your lines and take an airfield, enemy planes with low fuel some time go to that airfield. Before they reach their goal/newly captured airfield, you destroy the partisans, capture the airfield and enemy planes crash.
11. I really like historical realism, but sometimes it seems exaggerated. By some peoples comments, everything has to be 100% historical and you have to lose the war in 1945. Whay then to play the game at all? In my opinion at the start of the scenario everything has to be historical and the later development of story line depends on player and his choices. Of course, time line of weapons improvements and similar events has to be respected.
12. Just saw that there will be Panzer Corps 2. Hope that with new engine you will take your great mod to new monsterus level.
13. Thank you again for your great work, and also thanks to Uhu and GeneralWerner for their Tipps for playing the Battlefield Europe mod. Unfortunately, I read this „Tipps thread“ after finishing the scenario, but in next atemppt, I will surely use some of them.

[Uhu]

If you are really interested in this mod, I advise to take your time and read all of the comments in this topic. All of your answers were already answered. Plus there are AAR and a Tips and tricks topics too, where you can collect a lot of detailed information how to have a chance to win. I could make a DV on Rommel difficulty (half prestige) in 50 turns, so, achiving everything less as this is also possible.

Update: oh, I see, you already found them. Good luck than and take your time and patiance, because that are the two key resources, you need for it!

11. I really like historical realism, but sometimes it seems exaggerated. By some peoples comments, everything has to be 100% historical and you have to lose the war in 1945. Whay then to play the game at all? In my opinion at the start of the scenario everything has to be historical and the later development of story line depends on player and his choices. Of course, time line of weapons improvements and similar events has to be respected.

[Slimak81]

There is NO choiсe. 9 May 1945 fall of Berlin , end of war . Soviet troops are victories all other sucks )
Choiсes should be done before Poland and Barbarossa, once started there is no way back and save load

[McGuba]

I made an experiment : played allies side on default settings . Generally AI was quite good for the first 15 turns. Nice punch to Smolensk in center. Nice move towards Leningrad area, but total loss in Odessa, complete passiveness in Africa and nice naval battle in Malta : carrier + 2 battleships + escorts vs almost all Italian fleet)
But anyway the war for Germany has been lost by winter 1941 with no reinforcements it could not attack further. So i am convinced that some scripted PzIII's and airplanes production still neded. Just a repeated each 10-15 turn sript "Camera move to Berlin - msg New Panzer bla bla is ready "
btw by turn 15 allies have 6500 points and that was very very passive defence.
Now returning to my German campaign. Let see if i can hold the ground till 9 may 1945

Hm, that's interesting, I have never tried playing it from the allied side and players are not supposed to do so in this mod for a number of reasons. But thanks to the freedom provided by PzC it is possible, but only at your own risk. Like I wrote earlier I might attempt to port it to the allied side as well but it will only happen later if it ever happens.

I never claimed that it is an easy mod and I am sorry if some (or maybe many) players are unable to achieve a victory, after all everybody wants to win and you know in a war there can be only one winning side, the other has to lose. And history tells us the Axis had a very small chance for victory in a protracted war against the three major world powers who outproduced them in just about everything. But that's where the challenge comes in and players can experiment with many different strategies and the numerous AARs written by players shows that there are several winning strategies, and not just one.

Hello McGuba, again me. I menaged to finish scenario with a draw(on General level). Lily Marlene was a really nice surprise for the end. In Russia, only Sevastopol left not conquered (I left it for later, and at the end, later was to late). In Africa I threw out Torch forces, in Middle East came to Basra, and in Europe I stoped D day forces west of Paris.

Well, so yes, it is very much possible to defeat or at least nearly defeat at least one of the main enemies, Britain or the USSR, and it seems that you were quite close to a victory which is indeed a nice achievement, especially for a first time play through.

1. At one moment, in the east, Germans lost their 2 recon planes for 1 new. Why 2 for 1? Why not 2 for 2?

Why not?
But seriously, the data I found here (http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.co.u ... e+strength) shows that the Lufwaffe had 325 short range and 303 long range recon aircraft in June 1941, but this number had changed to only 90 short range and 350 long range recon aircraft by July 1942. While other sources have somewhat different numbers it seems clear that the number of short range recon aircraft had reduced significantly after the first year of war in the east. And we also know that the Hs 126 had been withdrawn from active frontline service by late 1942, as it became obsolete and also due to the high losses that this type suffered to enemy action. Its role was only partially taken over by the Fw 189, which was newer and had better survivability, but was less numerous. Life is not always fair but still we have to live with it. http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/we ... s_126.html

2. As generally is pretty much easy to destroy an enemy plane with multiple attacks/fighters, even when it is adjecent to others planes of his side, why not for realism purpos make this harder (in real life, when there was more planes in formations in the sky, they were harder target, or they were more dangerous as attackers). Could you make with fighters same thing as with Wurzburg raders? When they are adjecent to each other, could they act as a initiative booster one for another. I know there is „escort service“ in game for bombers that are attacked and in the same time are adjecent to friendly fighter, but in this way you could simulate cooperation of fighters when they are together in formation / adjecent (same thing for attack and for defense)

As far as I know the so called "mass attack" rule applies to air units as well, pretty much as you describe the situation. Quote from the PzC manual:

6.10. MASS ATTACK
Mass attack happens when an enemy unit is surrounded by more than one of your units able
to attack it. Such a situation is favourable for launching attacks on an enemy unit because it
is stretched along a wider front, and so part of its strength cannot react to your attacks in a
timely manner. The game models this fact by giving the defending unit an initiative penalty for
every enemy unit standing next to it.
In order to contribute to mass attack effect, your unit must be able to attack the enemy unit
and have unspent attack action. Also, ranged units like artillery are not counted.

With other words, the more units you have around and enemy unit with unspent attack action, the more initiative penalty it will get. But only before they make the first attack. So in order to maximize this effect, first you just have to move for example 3 air units next to the enemy air unit but without attacking with any of them and then in the first attack the enemy air unit will get -2 initiative penalty for the two other friendly air units standing near. And then in the second attack it will only get -1 penalty because the first air unit has made its attack and there is only one other friendly air unit waiting nearby to attack (or have the unspent attack action). In the third attack there will be no more penalty as the other two friendly air units have already spent their attack action (or made the attack).

3. Why forts are not repairable? Freya radars are.

Good question, but it is like that in the base game and I cannot modify hard coded game mechanics like this.

4. When is possible to by new units in Barbarossa scenario? In one comment in thread I found that ideal moment is after withdrawal of hungarian units in first winter of Barbarossa because it liberates some core slots. I restarted scenario just for purpose of test and in first turn disbanded 100 germans units, but I was not able to buy at least one.

When the number of Axis core units goes bellow 200. But only after the second turn. In turn 1 the number of core units is still set at 7 like in the previous scenarios. There is a message box appearing at the beginning of turn 2:

The number of maximum core units is now set at 200. Most likely there are more Axis core units on the map at the moment, so you have to disband / lose a few units before you can purchase new ones. However, it is not recommended to disband any units and you will get new units added to your army later.

So if you want to free up some slots you can do this from the beginning of turn 2, but it is not recommended because probably you would need to disband too many units to make it worth. It is generally better to wait and lose some units in battle as in that case they are not wasted for nothing.

5. Is it possible to make 109s better than Focke Wolf against enemy bombers without ecorts (historically, while FWs were much powerfull then 109s on lower altitudes, the situations on higher altitudes was quitte opposite)?

I am not sure that the Me 109 was more effective against unescorted bombers as it had lighter armament than the Fw 190, even though it had better performance at higher altitudes. But performance matters less when it comes to fighting heavy bombers as both fighters had much better performance (max speed, climb speed, maneuverability) than heavy bombers, only to a different degree. You rather need a heavy armament so that you can pump the heavy bomber with enough shells to bring it down as fast as possible. Performance at any given altitude matters more when they are facing enemy fighters who had similar stats and then even small differencies can be decisive. As far as I know more often than not Me 109s were used against enemy escort fighters and heavily armed Fw 190s were used against the bombers. Sometimes Me 109s were also equipped with extra armament (underwing cannons or undguided rockets) but this change radically reduced their performance and as a result they became easy prey to allied escort fighters. I was thinking to add such a subtype to the Me 109 earlier, but decided that it is not necessary as the Fw 190 and the numerous heavy fighters (Me 110G, Ju 88G) are also available in the mod.

Unfortunately Panzer Corps does not make a distinction between low flying and high flying aircraft. In the same way, AA can attack all aircraft as well, when in fact there should be a similar difference between light and heavy AA guns. High flying strategic bombers should be invulnareble to light AA fire and low flying tactical bombers should be less vulnerable to heavy AA guns. But it is not the case in Panzer Corps 1. Maybe in 2? Who knows, let's just hope for the best.

6. I lost Tirpitz in one turn in Trondheim harbour. First I lost 8 steps from british mini subs (script I presume) and then it was followed by attack by a bomber who came from England, I suppose. Is that planed or am I a champion of bad luck (I had so much bad dice rolles in whole scenario…., that was the reason why I stopped to play vanilla GC when american infantry in Sicily almost destroyed my elite Panzer IV on open ground without suppression first from artillery or bomber planes )

It is planned but can be avoided if you provide air cover to the Tirpitz. Or move it out of Trondheim (and thus risk a possible British invasion). Or just simply invade Britain and put an end to this threat.

7. In three prescenarios do I get more prestige for DV or it is better to do MV with all cities captured and plus all amount of prestige that I get each turn by default (some 50 PP I think), plus experience of course

It depends on the scenario, I have no idea, to be honest. But the early war scenarios does not have a deciding effect on the long one. It is possible to beat the big scenario without even playing the earlier scenarios and by starting in June 1941.

8. Amount of Russian tank and plane reinforcements are determined by capturing caucasian oilfields not Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad?

The capture of the Caucasus oil fields or Leningrad or Moscow reduces the number of Soviet reinforcements. If you can capture all three, the Soviets get about half the new units that they would get otherwise. The capture of Stalingrad currently does not affect Soviet reinforcements due to the lack of AI zones (game mechanics limitation).

9. If England is taken, will convoy lanes stay active?

No. Why would the US send aid to an Axis occupied England? That would be silly, wouldn't it?

10. Is it possible not to spend 1000 hard earned PP at the start for observation post in Gibraltar?

No. As I wrote earlier it is not possible to avoid it. It is there to forcibly reduce the available prestige in turn 1. But it is compensated by the steady flow of prestige generated by the new "important" city Trondheim in v1.8.

11. I really like historical realism, but sometimes it seems exaggerated. By some peoples comments, everything has to be 100% historical and you have to lose the war in 1945. Whay then to play the game at all? In my opinion at the start of the scenario everything has to be historical and the later development of story line depends on player and his choices. Of course, time line of weapons improvements and similar events has to be respected.

Only the circumstancies and some of the events like major Allied landings are historical. Then it is up to the player's tactical and strategic skills if he can overcome the Allied juggernaut. The so-called story line depends on the player's choices and performance. For example if England is successfully invaded there will be no Allied bombing campain or Normandy landings in 1944. But there will be no V-weapons either, as there will no one to strike back on. The V-weapon means vengance weapon so if there is no destructive Allied bombing campaign there is no need for vengance. Makes sense, I guess.

12. Just saw that there will be Panzer Corps 2. Hope that with new engine you will take your great mod to new monsterus level.

It is way too early for such speculation.

13. Thank you again for your great work, and also thanks to Uhu and GeneralWerner for their Tipps for playing the Battlefield Europe mod. Unfortunately, I read this „Tipps thread“ after finishing the scenario, but in next atemppt, I will surely use some of them.

Yeah, there are tons of information now for this mod, you just have to take the time read through it. Or maybe even better if you make your own story and experience it yourself.

There is NO choiсe. 9 May 1945 fall of Berlin , end of war . Soviet troops are victories all other sucks )
Choiсes should be done before Poland and Barbarossa, once started there is no way back and save load

Yes, there could be an endless number of choices. But this mod starts in June 1941 and attempts to find out if there was any chance to change the outcome of the war after that date. Most historians seem to agree that Germany had no chance to win after the launch of Barbarossa, but not everyone. Some claim that if Moscow was made the prime target of 1941 instead of an all out invasion, or even if instead of the encirclement of Kiev, the possible capture of the administrative center and transportation hub could have resulted in the collapse or at least the shaking of the Communist regime. It did not happen, so we will never know. What we know is that in 1941 Kuybyshev (today Samara) was chosen as an alternative capital of the USSR in case Moscow falls and even a bunker complex was constructed there for Stalin. So the Soviets were determined to continue the fight and that's why it is not enough to take Moscow in this mod. But the possible capture of Moscow could have been a major propaganda and prestige victory for Germany, and could have had a negative effect on Soviet production and supply, not to mention the loss of population who could not have put on the uniform and fight in the ranks of the Red Army. Anyway, the choices are quite numerous and it is interesting to think about the possible consequencies of an alternative history line.

[Uhu]

I would really like to play the Syrian Civil War campaing! Of course on Assad's side! I could really imagine it with the BE-style events and scripted actions. Maybe the world-dimplomatic would be a little hard to simulate + the events behind the curtain about we do not know... I'm ashamed, but I daily (sometimes) several times monitor the actual situation on Almasdarnews, Southfront.org and Syria Liveuamap, like it would be a strategic game - sadly, it isn't... )
So, McGuba...Do you take the challenge?

[Uhu]

But the possible capture of Moscow could have been a major propaganda and prestige victory for Germany, and could have had a negative effect on Soviet production and supply, not to mention the loss of population who could not have put on the uniform and fight in the ranks of the Red Army. Anyway, the choices are quite numerous and it is interesting to think about the possible consequencies of an alternative history line.

Of course it is the land of "what if"s, but I can also imagine, that with the shock of losing Moscow, a coup of destroying Stalin could have been happened. Or at least several uprisings, but at least the morale of the Red Army would have been strongly lowered. We have to take into the account, that Stalin's regime was extreme mad and really NOBODY was save. In that sense, it was even worser, than Hitler's regime, because, if you were not a dedicated enemy of the Reich, and you did not been active in the politics, you could survive (except the war circumstances). But under Stalin, everbody, from the peasant to the highest ranking party member, everybody could be, and was a victim. So, in that way, there is a chance, that maybe the people, or some leaders would take the possibility to get rid of Number One. But that's only a possibility, because the power of fear could have been also stronger to not do anything, just try to survive.

[Uhu]

1. At one moment, in the east, Germans lost their 2 recon planes for 1 new. Why 2 for 1? Why not 2 for 2?

Why not?

Actually, the player can live without the recon planes (as lived before v1.8 ) - they are really useful assets sometimes, but not critical. OK, if you play first-second time, they have more use. Sometimes, late in the game, when Soviet airforce got - or starts to be - brutal, it is useful to sacrifice a recon plane. The player needs more the experienced (?) fighters. Also, it is better, if the recon plane gets casualties, because it is easier to repair and do not effect experimence.

3. Why forts are not repairable? Freya radars are.

Good question, but it is like that in the base game and I cannot modify hard coded game mechanics like this.

I felt it about fair, because the building of such forts costed several years and a lot of resources. I do not think, it would not give back the value of the invested prestige.

4. When is possible to by new units in Barbarossa scenario? In one comment in thread I found that ideal moment is after withdrawal of hungarian units in first winter of Barbarossa because it liberates some core slots. I restarted scenario just for purpose of test and in first turn disbanded 100 germans units, but I was not able to buy at least one.

If you want to disband Axis units, you are already on the loosing path, because you are following a wrong strategy. BE is (also) about smart logistics - make the best from your exsisting situation: units, prestige, weather, geography, etc. OK, probably, if you play on the easiest level, it do not matters, but any other situation, you (will) do not have the luxury to throw out units and buy new ones. As I wrote in the tipps, every unit has a purpose, where he can do it's best.

Unfortunately Panzer Corps does not make a distinction between low flying and high flying aircraft. In the same way, AA can attack all aircraft as well, when in fact there should be a similar difference between light and heavy AA guns. High flying strategic bombers should be invulnareble to light AA fire and low flying tactical bombers should be less vulnerable to heavy AA guns. But it is not the case in Panzer Corps 1. Maybe in 2? Who knows, let's just hope for the best

In Order Of Battle, they managed to give different air values for heavy bombers and light bombers. It's a good direction, I think.

6. I lost Tirpitz in one turn in Trondheim harbour. First I lost 8 steps from british mini subs (script I presume) and then it was followed by attack by a bomber who came from England, I suppose. Is that planed or am I a champion of bad luck (I had so much bad dice rolles in whole scenario…., that was the reason why I stopped to play vanilla GC when american infantry in Sicily almost destroyed my elite Panzer IV on open ground without suppression first from artillery or bomber planes )

It is planned but can be avoided if you provide air cover to the Tirpitz. Or move it out of Trondheim (and thus risk a possible British invasion). Or just simply invade Britain and put an end to this threat.

Really??
I got only the message about an unsuccesful attempt. I thought, that's it, just some moody event. But they really can success...what an outrage!

7. In three prescenarios do I get more prestige for DV or it is better to do MV with all cities captured and plus all amount of prestige that I get each turn by default (some 50 PP I think), plus experience of course

It is better to make a DV AND capture all available cities. It is possible, try it! As the scenarios are not so long, you can try it several times. On Rommel difficulty, every Penny / prestige matters...

[doctorwillow]

6.10. MASS ATTACK
Mass attack happens when an enemy unit is surrounded by more than one of your units able
to attack it. Such a situation is favourable for launching attacks on an enemy unit because it
is stretched along a wider front, and so part of its strength cannot react to your attacks in a
timely manner. The game models this fact by giving the defending unit an initiative penalty for
every enemy unit standing next to it.
In order to contribute to mass attack effect, your unit must be able to attack the enemy unit
and have unspent attack action. Also, ranged units like artillery are not counted.

Now I feel little bit stupid. I'm playing PzC for years (with pauses) and didn't know for this feature. Anyway, thank you for patience to take your time and respond on my long questions. Very kind of you.

If you want to disband Axis units, you are already on the loosing path, because you are following a wrong strategy. BE is (also) about smart logistics - make the best from your exsisting situation: units, prestige, weather, geography, etc. OK, probably, if you play on the easiest level, it do not matters, but any other situation, you (will) do not have the luxury to throw out units and buy new ones. As I wrote in the tipps, every unit has a purpose, where he can do it's best.

This was only out of curiosity question…

It is better to make a DV AND capture all available cities.

[/quote]

Very good point. Why I didn't get to it???

[Uhu]

If you want to disband Axis units, you are already on the loosing path, because you are following a wrong strategy. BE is (also) about smart logistics - make the best from your exsisting situation: units, prestige, weather, geography, etc. OK, probably, if you play on the easiest level, it do not matters, but any other situation, you (will) do not have the luxury to throw out units and buy new ones. As I wrote in the tipps, every unit has a purpose, where he can do it's best.

This was only out of curiosity question…

Now you have the answer - do not dare even to think about it!!!

It is better to make a DV AND capture all available cities.

Very good point. Why I didn't get to it???

It's really not so easy. In Poland it is quite easy, I do it without the use of the communists, because I feel it unfair and unrealistic to take their aid.
In France it is more complex to capture all of the cities in the south, while also focusing on the timely capture of objectives.
In the Mediterranean only to take the city and airport east of Tobruk is hard, while taking timely Crete. Plus, it is also important, that you do not loos any strenght from your core force, because than the extra prestige earnings would gone. Maybe I will make a video about the replays of the early scenarios. I just get to learn to use one of the video capturing software...
Plus it is also important to focus on capturing as many units as possible, because it brings even more prestige! In France, there is a lot of possibility for that, before taking Dunkirk.

[hugh2711]

In 1.8 I just got a hero called "werner schwarzennegger"

[McGuba]

I would really like to play the Syrian Civil War campaing! Of course on Assad's side! I could really imagine it with the BE-style events and scripted actions. Maybe the world-dimplomatic would be a little hard to simulate + the events behind the curtain about we do not know... I'm ashamed, but I daily (sometimes) several times monitor the actual situation on Almasdarnews, Southfront.org and Syria Liveuamap, like it would be a strategic game - sadly, it isn't... )
So, McGuba...Do you take the challenge?

Well, I would rather play the Kurds, but that's just my personal preference. The main problem with simulating the Syrian war in PzC is that there are many opposing sides, not just two. But it would be interesing, indeed. Maybe our whole life is just a simulation, who knows?

Now I feel little bit stupid. I'm playing PzC for years (with pauses) and didn't know for this feature. Anyway, thank you for patience to take your time and respond on my long questions. Very kind of you.

No need to feel stupid, I am also still unfamiliar with some of the rules. Mainly with the new ones like reform unit of soft cap - those things that I never used and were introduced later and not really interested in.

In 1.8 I just got a hero called "werner schwarzennegger"

Hm, thats interesting. Hope he will have long career, mabe he will even make it to the film making business after the war. There is another Werner here, a General, who makes lots of interesting AARs for this mod. And my current real life boss is called Werner too, just not Schwarzenegger. Also he is not German, but Dutch. Do you think it means something? I think it means I should play less PzC. Or maybe I should declare war on my neighbours - they are always driving me crazy with their silly loud music.

[Yrfin]

Can we will seen Battlefield: Europe MOD 2 in PzC 2 ?

[Uhu]

Well, I would rather play the Kurds, but that's just my personal preference. The main problem with simulating the Syrian war in PzC is that there are many opposing sides, not just two. But it would be interesing, indeed. Maybe our whole life is just a simulation, who knows?

Right, the Kurds would be also an interesting side to choose. Although they would be more complex to handle, as the Kurds in the several countries are also not united, a few years ago there was also a Kurds civil war. And yes, there are so many sides, besides the "big ones". Probably a Civ, or a Hearts of Iron with deeper dimplomacy would be more suited to simulate the chaos in Syria and neighbourhoods.

[McGuba]

Can we will seen Battlefield: Europe MOD 2 in PzC 2 ?

Sure, I have nearly finished with it, and soon I will start to work on BE MOD 3 for the coming PzC 3.

[terminator]

The coming PzC 3 should be in VR (Virtual Reality)

[Slimak81]

Oh come on ! How do i suppose to stop this : February 29, 1943. Not a Prohorovka battle yet)