DAW - Der andere Weg - The other way

[ptje63]

St Etienne: de French counter attack in turn 14.
I have no problem with units emerging from off map left or right. But getting caught off guard with units SPAWNING at locations next to my units and then surprise attacking is a bit too much. Lost 2 units and 2 heavily damaged.

[eskuche]

St Etienne: de French counter attack in turn 14.
I have no problem with units emerging from off map left or right. But getting caught off guard with units SPAWNING at locations next to my units and then surprise attacking is a bit too much. Lost 2 units and 2 heavily damaged.

Yep, this happened to me too in my very first playthrough. I just cheated myself out of it.

[Sonja89_1]

Greetings! I have considered a DAW replay for my next project. I don't quite like +5 Manstein or -5 turns, as those heavily reward map pre-knowledge, especially air waves, so I have settled on the following rules...

That’s an interesting approach you’ve taken there. However, +3 strength points in the 4th campaign (44–46) is quite ambitious. A ‘one-unit rule’ also leads to a more diverse composition, which can even strengthen your forces at times if applied skilfully. In certain areas where there were few high-performance variants for extended periods, such as with the fighter units (Focke-Wulf), this can still lead to very problematic bottlenecks. You must bear in mind that I have assigned the opposing side in the missions a strength that is balanced against a specific strength of your own forces. If, later on, instead of, say, 5 Focke-Wulf fighter units, only 2 (standard + elite) + a few older Bf-109s are available, this can lead to frequent losses of core fighter units during massive enemy air strikes. Alternatively, you could limit yourself to 2 fighter units per mission and try to deal with the rest using anti-aircraft guns. However, this would result in time losses and increase the number of turns.

As for the evacuation zones, they only appear in very exceptional cases in the first two campaigns (36–37) and (39–41). You wouldn’t get very far with a 0% prestige setting. From the 3rd campaign (3rd scenario) onwards, however, these fields are present throughout, which allows you to remove the Aux units from the field at the end of the scenario and either sell them or deploy them again and again as additional support. This is particularly feasible with anti-aircraft, artillery and air forces. I originally introduced the evacuation fields primarily because I was bothered by disparaging remarks about Aux units from various players, such as ‘they’re not my units’. Of course, Aux units are part of your own forces, even if only for a single mission. To regard them as worthless and to waste them at will speaks volumes about a person’s character. You wouldn’t want such people as your stepmother or stepfather. That is why I was motivated to indirectly increase the value of Aux units, at least in DAW.

I think it’s great that you’ve found your own way to make the game and this mod a challenge again. There are plenty of ways for every player to discover and implement their own individual game variant, even without extra modifications. It would be nice if you could give us the occasional update on how your campaign is going.

[Sonja89_1]

St Etienne: de French counter attack in turn 14.
I have no problem with units emerging from off map left or right. But getting caught off guard with units SPAWNING at locations next to my units and then surprise attacking is a bit too much. Lost 2 units and 2 heavily damaged.

Here is the briefing text for the ‘St. Etienne’ scenario you mentioned:

„We have taken and secured Lyon. The Luftwaffe has already begun to develop the captured airfields into a central base for Air Fleet 2. The morale of the troops has also reached a new high thanks to the very successful last two months.
Our next mission is to advance further downstream along the Rhone. The defending enemy forces of the French 5th Army must be overcome as quickly as possible. Speed is of considerable importance for our overall success. We must not give the enemy the opportunity for extensive counter-manoeuvres.
In fact, another enemy army (12th) has appeared on our long western flank. A flank attack is to be feared while we attack to the south. We only have local garrison troops to protect us. However, our reconnaissance assures us that the enemy attack will take some time (not before turn 14). Be ready in time to parry the counterattack. Under no circumstances should you allow parts of Lyon to be lost (each loss of a city square or the Lyon airfield costs you 400 prestige points!).”

StEtienne.jpg (281.14 KiB) Viewed 218 times

On top of that, there’s the map attached to the briefing, which clearly shows the enemy’s line of attack. How on earth could you have let yourself be caught off guard like that? You don’t need any cheats or prior experience of this mission; all it takes is something as simple as paying attention and dodging in time.

Anyone who skips through the dark forest like Little Red Riding Hood shouldn’t be surprised if they get eaten by the wolf. If the losses are too painful – just try again.

For a more detailed description of the scenario, see also here: viewtopic.php?t=107412&start=175

[BeADriver]

I have a question regarding the unit selection:

I know that this mod features unique units and that its unit roster and technology tree are based on the Amulet Mod, but I found both to be largely similar to those of other Germany-centered mods and campaigns based on the actual historical timeline.

I want to ask if this choice was due to time constraints—as I know that creating all of these scenarios and building a plausible alternate history timeline is already incredibly time- and resource-intensive—or if it was a deliberate design choice based on the idea that the German arms industry wouldn't have drastically changed, even with a different regime in charge and different geopolitical realities.

Either way, it represents a nice change of pace to be able to enjoy contemporary German technological marvels, such as the Karl-Gerät, without the historical baggage usually attached to them, which I know was part of your motivation behind this mod.

[Sonja89_1]

...
I want to ask if this choice was due to time constraints—as I know that creating all of these scenarios and building a plausible alternate history timeline is already incredibly time- and resource-intensive—or if it was a deliberate design choice based on the idea that the German arms industry wouldn't have drastically changed, even with a different regime in charge and different geopolitical realities.
...

Actually, both. You’ve already laid this out clearly in your question and have, in a sense, answered it yourself. The divergence in history begins in 1934. A series of decisions had already been made that would have led to similar outcomes in terms of individual armaments developments. Of course, not everything would have unfolded exactly the same way; it remains, after all, a work of fiction.

Incidentally, today I wouldn’t include some parts of the Amulet mod in this form. Not because it’s bad or flawed – it’s excellent. But the advantages provided by the camouflaged anti-tank units and all the elite units simply make the German side so strong that I had to significantly bolster the opposing side in some of the scenarios to maintain a sufficient balance. This, in turn, meant that less experienced players reached their limits in many missions. That’s why, in my current project UW2, I’ve drawn on the unit roster from DAW, but without the camouflaged German anti-tank units and without all the elite units. However, the many conversion options for anti-aircraft guns and artillery are still included. This will then allow you, for example, to play through the official Grand Campaign in a more balanced way.

Ultimately, it’s always a matter of weighing up what’s important to you, and as we all know, that’s slightly different for everyone.

[BeADriver]

...
I want to ask if this choice was due to time constraints—as I know that creating all of these scenarios and building a plausible alternate history timeline is already incredibly time- and resource-intensive—or if it was a deliberate design choice based on the idea that the German arms industry wouldn't have drastically changed, even with a different regime in charge and different geopolitical realities.
...

Actually, both. You’ve already laid this out clearly in your question and have, in a sense, answered it yourself. The divergence in history begins in 1934. A series of decisions had already been made that would have led to similar outcomes in terms of individual armaments developments. Of course, not everything would have unfolded exactly the same way; it remains, after all, a work of fiction.

Incidentally, today I wouldn’t include some parts of the Amulet mod in this form. Not because it’s bad or flawed – it’s excellent. But the advantages provided by the camouflaged anti-tank units and all the elite units simply make the German side so strong that I had to significantly bolster the opposing side in some of the scenarios to maintain a sufficient balance. This, in turn, meant that less experienced players reached their limits in many missions. That’s why, in my current project UW2, I’ve drawn on the unit roster from DAW, but without the camouflaged German anti-tank units and without all the elite units. However, the many conversion options for anti-aircraft guns and artillery are still included. This will then allow you, for example, to play through the official Grand Campaign in a more balanced way.

Ultimately, it’s always a matter of weighing up what’s important to you, and as we all know, that’s slightly different for everyone.

Thank you for your response. I suppose the inherent imbalance caused by the elite Amulet units also explains why you added the attrition/Naturereignis Grim Reaper unit/mechanic, which only harms the player and not the opponent. I'm still not a fan of how it's implemented, but I understand that something had to be done to address the balance issues resulting from that Amulet integration.

[Sonja89_1]

Thank you for your response. I suppose the inherent imbalance caused by the elite Amulet units also explains why you added the attrition/Naturereignis Grim Reaper unit/mechanic, which only harms the player and not the opponent. I'm still not a fan of how it's implemented, but I understand that something had to be done to address the balance issues resulting from that Amulet integration.

From ancient times to the present day, disease, food shortages, heat, cold and other natural phenomena have claimed more lives during wars than direct combat involving the use of weapons. That was the main reason why I included this character in the game. My aim was to make players, who usually focus on weapon technology, more aware of this. Nature is far more capable of wiping out life than we humans are.

In my subsequent projects (D2R + UW2), however, I didn’t include it anymore. I try to experiment with other aspects in every project. Some players find this more enjoyable, others less so.

[BeADriver]

I would like to clarify my stance a bit more after our previous correspondence regarding this mechanic:

If your motivation was to prove that natural events are an all-powerful, non-partisan force capable of wiping out life, it makes next to no logical sense to represent them as a heat-seeking missile aimed solely at the player's formations while treating the AI like it is wearing invisible Hazmat suits. I don't know if other players of this mod feel the same or have done the same, but it incentivizes awkward and ahistorical artillery sniping because that is the only way to rid yourself of the Grim Reaper safely.

I brought up the Total War contrast in my original post because attrition is tied to the territory and the season in the TW titles that feature this mechanic. Ergo, the engine applies the rules of nature equally to the geography, not to a specific player's color scheme. The counterargument that not all Red Army units were Siberian misses the point because the Brest-Litovsk area features a temperate continental climate, which means that winters, while harsh, are a far cry from the sub-zero extremes of Deep Siberia or the Urals. The idea that Soviet servicemen born in modern-day Ukraine, Belarus, or Western Russia would instantly collapse from "cold attrition" in Brest while the opposing Polish forces are entirely unfazed by it is absurd. Even if we entertain the idea that the Soviet troops were ill-prepared, it would not explain why the Polish forces should be completely immune to non-combat casualties—especially since they are fighting in the exact same mud and under the exact same freezing sky, all while fighting a two-front war in the DAW alternate history timeline, which places an immense strain on their supply lines.

Anyway, I feel it is best to agree to disagree over the mechanic's implementation, and your last paragraph conceded exactly that. If a modder wants to simulate neutral, global factors like weather or disease, they should ideally be baked into environmental triggers or status effects that impact both armies—if that is even possible within PC's engine, which is rigidly built around a two-sided framework (Human Player vs. AI).