Allied Grand campaign discussion thread

[nikivdd]

In the good tradition of interaction between Slitherine and the players, i would like to open a discussion thread about an Allied Grand Campaign. I believe that input can really contribute to the gaming experience.
Whatever you think and propose, always keep the current equipment file for the Allies in mind, the current version of the base game and what has been offered in Allied Corps.
Things to think about too:
In the Axis Grand Campaign, 'he main role is naturally for Germany. Here and there the Axis minors are present as well. For a potential Allied Grand Campaign there are also different possibilities to chose from as for example:
A UK campaign with here and there other Allied parties as auxiliaries, a USA campaign with here and there other Allied parties as auxiliaries, a combined UK/USA Grand Campaign although i think that is pretty covered in Allied Corps.
Where should a UK campaign kick off in your opinion? or USA campaign and so on and so on. Which scenarios would you like to see? Although strictly limited, like in Axis GC, should there be a what if scenario? What about capturables, amount of elite units,...

I'm looking forward to your replies.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

France 1940!

or even better,

Poland 1939!

I haven't really played Allied Corps beyond Crusader (that one murdered me and I'm too interested in the WWI stuff now to return), but I think that if we went somewhere other than the desert, it would make life more interesting (eg. a proper core - not just a pile of tanks!)

Also, the Allies spent a lot of time fighting at Narvik and I think Tromso as well (not far north of Narvik) - these could make some interesting fights.

If we want to do a whole DLC '45 thing - liberate Warsaw! How DARE the Soviets just suppress the Poles like that! (I'm playing HoI 3 as the Soviets currently, and I'm putting a lot of effort into making sure Poland gets liberated and free again)

- BNC

[Mark50]

An allied campaign (for the west) would be great. That said, I`ve never been a fan of the whole "auxiliaries" thing. I would really like a campaign where the other nations (apart from the UK and USA) really feature in the main core. In my opinion, Slitherine is screwing things up if it does make an allied Grand Campaign and neglects the factions that are not the main protagonists as it forces players from so many countries (Poland, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, France, Greeece etc.) to ignore their nation`s units. There were historically a lot of free ... something units that fought alongside the British (with British equipment so no problem adding a few more free units if the designers want to) and I think the player should be able to have these as part of the main core if he/she decides to. That way, a player from Poland, France etc. would be able to have their countries units in the main core. I think going this way would provide both another level of attachment to the game and also more replayability given by this variety of choices.

As for the main campaign protagonists... I would personally go with the UK as the nation you lead and I would really like to start as early as Norway if not even Poland since the later part of the war is so overdone in games generally and even in PzC. I think if you go to the trouble of creating an Allied Grand Campaign, you might as well add a new breath to it, rather then just more scenarios for the same period of the official Allied Corps.
There might not have been British troops in Poland, but the very popular Panzer General 2 also had some scenarios where the main protagonist was historically present mostly in an advisory role and the game developed nicely. The way to do it here in my opinion would be to have the player take the role of some British adviser working with the Poles, use only Polish units, lose the campaign even if he manages to win some of the scenarios, but depending on his performances he will have a larger portion of prestige that will come in handy later and maybe affect also the quantity and quality of free Polish forces he can take with him. You could also have prestige gaining special missions like ensuring the Polish treasure and leadership makes it past the border to Romania, as it happened historically. I think there are plenty of Polish players that would appreciate playing with their own troops and I also think that if you ignore Poland in the campaign you`re throwing away the effort you put into developing so many Polish units in game that are largely ignored in most of the existing campaigns, except in the Axis Grand campaign where you play against them and not with them.

Also, for what it`s worth, I would have liked to have a French campaign. Nobody does this. I suppose because France lost relatively early on and also because a win with France would end the war really fast. However, since the Grand campaign could follow the principle lose even if you win, you could involve the player in some very interesting scenarios (as early as Norway), then switch him to Africa to command the free French forces and then make it back to Europe to liberate France. Lots of cool units that one could finally be able to play with and not against.

[timek28]

Hey Niki nice to see you kicking off this thread

Well I think Allied Grand campaign should follow the same premise as Axis Grand campaign. That is to disect the otherwise big battle scenarios into several smaller ones. In this way allied units could reach their full potential experience wise and hero wise. In AC there was not enogh chance to develop 5 star units. The most I was able to get was 4 stars.

As far as particular scenarios are concerned I am no military historian and Slitherine should know better then me how to handle every and each battle (renting a historian who could pinpoint all imporatant and interesting battles). I believe there is enough of them. This is especially true for Europe from 44 on. Battles such as encounter with Michael Witmann Tiger that destroyed a dozen Allied tanks could be incorporated and similar interesting scenarios. Basically GC West in reverse First use of M26 for example is also an interesting scenario (Coloigne I believe?). Also I find a Battle of Britain air combat scenario quite important. This could be opportunity for an air battle only (for the first time in PC history).

Here there could be a what if scenario. If allies lost air battle there could be a German landing and so on...

I would also like British campaign to kick off with the British expedition forces in Belgium while US campaign would naturally kick off in Tunisia. US troops should have some initial experience in the Tunisia so they don't fall behind too much behind their British counterparts. This of course means that players should be able to form a core consisting of both British and US troops as in original AC.

As far as capturables go, well some German tanks would be nice

Amount of elite units should be proportional to the core size. Core size could be increased to 40 units as in GC East, albeit that doesn't mean that all core units should be allowed to be used all the time. For the above proposed specail scenarios some deployment restrictions (as in LoV) could prevent allies from having overwhelming superioirty.

That is all that comes to my mind right now

EDIT: I see that people are proposing smaller early like Norway, France even Poland. Well I have nothing against that but I don't see how player could win in any of those scenarios. Basically only stalling of Germans would be possible with a high cost to allied troops. But like I said I have nothigh against it. Also other nations are an OK concept, albeit not most important one IMO. Or at least not the game changing experience. Romanian and Hungarian units shurely didn't make a difference for Germans in GC East except in Stalingrad battle.

[Tarrak]

I personally think the UK campaign may be the best/longest without stretching history to much. It could start with the British Expeditionary Force in France 1940 (with some French units as auxiliary) from start of the German invasion in France to the evacuation in Dunkirk. After that, if the Allied GC allows for fictional "what if" scenarios, a defense of the invasion of Britain. This could be optional depending on the players performance in France. If he managed to delay the German enough it will be skipped ... i know usually you reward player for DVs with more not less scenarios but here it makes perfect sense. After this just skip to the African Theatre and follow the fights there to the invasion of Italy and then D-Day to Berlin. The US campaign would have to start a lot later simply because the US joined the WW 2 later but would be of course an option as well.

There is a problem i see tho if you focus on single nation. A lot of the fights was combined efforts between the British and the American so either you would have to focus on smaller front parts or use a lot of auxiliary units from the other nation.

I personally would like some "what if" scenarios. Capturable units, imho yes as long it's not so many of them that it allows you to field them almost exclusively. Considering the quality of some of the earlier British and US tanks players would field just the captured units in masses. The amount of elite units imho should be kept at around 10% players core. If your have a core size of 20 then two bonus units sound quite fine to me. I can live without them as well tho.

A personal plea would be to keep the core and scenario size limited. Your LoV mod for example is a great piece of work but for me the scenarios and the cores become way to big and thats put me off. What can i say i am a fan of more but smaller scenarios. Of course i understand the opinion of others on this topic may be totally different.

[Mark50]

EDIT: I see that people are proposing smaller early like Norway, France even Poland. Well I have nothing against that but I don't see how player could win in any of those scenarios.

It depends on what you mean. If by win you mean actually defeating the Germans in Poland, then that would not happen as it would just end the game as it begins. The point was the player just does its best, gains experience and prestige, develops tactics, but the overall campaign can`t be won by his skills alone, much like it happens in the existing Axis Grand campaigns in 1942, 1943 etc.

If you mean that the player should not be able to win any local battle, I think that`s wrong. First of all, the term wining can have limited significance. Like delaying the Germans long enough for some Polish troops to escape, protecting the Polish treasure and getting it safely across the border and so on. Since the PzC Grand Campaigns introduces relatively small locations and side battles, one could play well in one and still not change the course of the entire Polish (for example) campaign. One should not forget that the Poles are also eventually hit by the Russians so even if the fighting against the Germans goes a little better than it was historically, the outcome is still inevitable and the designers can use the mentioned event to signal an end to that campaign and move on to Norway.

Given the peculiarities of this case, I would not add as many Polish scenarios to an UK lead Allied Grand Campaigns as there were in the Axis/German campaign. Just a few well chosen ones that are interesting and also plausibly winnable (in the large sense of the word) to get a sense of this campaign too. I would also pack the few Polish Scenarios with the Norway scenarios in terms of the release pack.

Also other nations are an OK concept, albeit not most important one IMO. Or at least not the game changing experience. Romanian and Hungarian units shurely didn't make a difference for Germans in GC East except in Stalingrad battle.

If you mean my post regarding using other nation`s units as part of the core than I was not meaning that they should be overrepresented or forced on the player. Just that the player should be allowed to choose if he wants to have "free <nation>" units as part of his core and not part with the "auxiliaries" the minute the scenario ends. One could use them or not. The key here was respecting the player`s attachment to his country`s units and some variety, not changing the course of the game, the entire composition of the army or anything else that dramatic. For example one Belgium or Norwegian Spitfire unit in the core army could be fun, especially if you`re Belgian or Norwegian. Also, most of these units were historically pretty much under general British control so their presence and use makes even more sense than it made to have Axis units tag along in a German campaign.

[timek28]

@Mark50

Oh I see You are probably one of the allied nations that would like to be represented in battle? Well my nation fought too so Yugoslav partisans should be added as well Well yea maybe somehow Polish and other minor scenarios could be incorporated into GC.

But as you said it would be more a matter of national pride, and real representation of the things then a very imporatant battle factor. Infantry is infantry, Huricane is a Huricane and as we remember in GC East there where very little appereances of Bulgarian, Romanian and Hungarian units while we know that they appeared in Soviet battles more then they have been portrayed in the game.

[Mark50]

Yep, that was the idea. Buy a Pzl P.11 or whatever, then upgrade it to a Hurricane. It`s still a Hurricane with British markings (which already exists in game), but it fights under the free Polish flag and if you`re from Poland it gives you a little something extra.
It has been asked before(by other people then me too ):
viewtopic.php?p=385250#p385250
Rudankort even replied:

Yes, I can see how some people may like it.

so now`s the chance.

EDIT: btw, clearly one of the fun factors in the Axis grand campaign was the discovery of the captured units. I think in an Allied campaign one could adjust the feature to not only contain captured Axis units, but also liberated - sorta speak - units. For example a unit of Free French forces when you take some location in French North Africa or Middile East.

[nikivdd]

@Mark
With the current version and e-file of the game, the player would not be able to upgrade the Pzl fighter to a Hurricane. In fact, you would not be able to upgrade or buy anything at all for the Poles after Fall Weiss.
And that is just one of the nice features of the game: to do unit shopping and to be able to upgrade to whatever you like. Currently the only thing i could do is write ingame scripts in some scenarios allowing to upgrade Polish units to newer (British) stuff under the Free Poles' flag. I think a substantial patch and eventual enlargement of the e-file is required to create a campaign like this.
Don't get me wrong, an Allied campaign with the Poles in a main role would be very interesting but at this time, i think it would be a pitty that people cannot upgrade his Polish units to his own liking.

[Mark50]

To be honest, the faction slots that the Free French and Free Polish units use could have been better spent on something else and instead the developers could just have added the free french and free polish units to the rosters of France and Poland, available only from the historical date onwards. This would have made upgrading seamless. And something like this could still be implemented in the current equipment file. Of course, this is all departing from the main topic here.

Obviously, no upgrading possibilities kills the idea. I was hoping that a minor edition to the equipment file to add a few more free <nation> units based on the existing equivalents (for example using the stats and graphics of the British Hurricane to create a Norwegian Hurricane) could have been done easily, but if you`re restricted to the point of no edits to the equipment file than alot of possibilities do indeed die. The equipment file as it is was clearly designed for the German campaign and later only adjusted for a UK/USA campaign with no regard to the cursiveness of other nations. And I think it is a pity not to consider such possibilities when looking at such a monumental work that a Grand Campaign is. Later on nothing would be doable because of balancing issues. Anyway, please try not to do one of those really odd switches Kerensky did in lack of proper units (italians instead of romanians, romanians instead of hungarians, soviet equipment for the 1940 yugoslavs etc.).

[nikivdd]

To be honest, the faction slots that the Free French and Free Polish units use could have been better spent on something else and instead the developers could just have added the free french and free polish units to the rosters of France and Poland, available only from the historical date onwards. This would have made upgrading seamless. And something like this could still be implemented in the current equipment file. Of course, this is all departing from the main topic here.

Obviously, no upgrading possibilities kills the idea. I was hoping that a minor edition to the equipment file to add a few more free <nation> units based on the existing equivalents (for example using the stats and graphics of the British Hurricane to create a Norwegian Hurricane) could have been done easily, but if you`re restricted to the point of no edits to the equipment file than alot of possibilities do indeed die. The equipment file as it is was clearly designed for the German campaign and later only adjusted for a UK/USA campaign with no regard to the cursiveness of other nations. And I think it is a pity not to consider such possibilities when looking at such a monumental work that a Grand Campaign is. Later on nothing would be doable because of balancing issues. Anyway, please try not to do one of those really odd switches Kerensky did in lack of proper units (italians instead of romanians, romanians instead of hungarians, soviet equipment for the 1940 yugoslavs etc.).

I understand. I hope that either the e-file will get fatter if i may say so, or a patch that allows a PZL to be upgraded to a Hurricane while keeping the same flag. Let's cross our fingers.
Kerensky, on the other hand, had to do with whatever the e-file provided while creating the GC. In some ways he had to be creative. I would have also liked to see a Yug fighter, Romanian tanks or even captured L35's by the Greek but unfortunately, it was not possible.

[Mark50]

Well, some of the things I`ve mentioned could be worth adjusting via some relatively easy modding as long as nothing terrible is done in the official content (like the game starting with the Swedes invading Norway along the Germans ), but I think it would still be better if whoever is in charge now of PzC`s destiny gives you more content with which to work. The jokes aside, I was really looking forward to an Allied campaign of this sort and if you`ll be involved in making it I`ll be very happy. Best of luck in seeing this reach completion!

[hs1611]

If the e-file problem can be fixed the answer to minor allied nations is quite simple.
Make them non purchasable.
During the Polish scenarios give 2 or 3 (1 Inf, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter?) Polish CORE units to the player. All other units to be AUX.
In Norway give another 1 or 2 (maybe just 1 Inf) Norwegian CORE units to the player. Maybe a few French and let the player buy British CORE units, because they were both there.
Repeat in French Scenarios for French, Belgium, etc CORE units.
In Africa with Commomwealth CORE units.
They all have to be able to upgrade, but the only purchasable CORE units would be British, or British and US.

[nikivdd]

If the e-file problem can be fixed the answer to minor allied nations is quite simple.
Make them non purchasable.
During the Polish scenarios give 2 or 3 (1 Inf, 1 Tank, 1 Fighter?) Polish CORE units to the player. All other units to be AUX.
In Norway give another 1 or 2 (maybe just 1 Inf) Norwegian CORE units to the player. Maybe a few French and let the player buy British CORE units, because they were both there.
Repeat in French Scenarios for French, Belgium, etc CORE units.
In Africa with Commomwealth CORE units.
They all have to be able to upgrade, but the only purchasable CORE units would be British, or British and US.

What about this idea based on your proposal:
I could give the polish units a name for example 1st Pol Inf, 1st Pol Armour, 1st Pol Fighter with Polish flag, same for norwegian and eventual other Allied countries.
When the British appear, in Norway for example, i could change the flag of the polish core units to UK flag and then they are upgradeable from the next scenario and they wouldn't lose any experience they gained in Poland.
This is theory though, i would have to test it first.

[hs1611]

First of all, minor nations are not an issue to me.
I don't really care if they are represented as CORE, as AUX, or not at all. But a lot of other players do care.

With your solution, if a flag change between scenarios is possible, the players could keep the unit's names (1st Pol Inf, 1st Pol Armour, 1st Pol Fighter, etc...), therefore keeping those minor nation units in their CORES.
Since in real life minor nations units were supplied with british or american equipment that would also be realistic.
But then, you could simply buy british units and change their names, to 1st Free French Armour, for example.
I don't think that is what players who care want.
What they want are Polish (French, Belgian, etc...) units with British or american guns but with Polish uniforms, or at least under a Polish flag.

If you can't change the e-file to reflect that, I suggest you just forget about it.
Leave it to a MOD.

[Mark50]

What about this idea based on your proposal:
I could give the polish units a name for example 1st Pol Inf, 1st Pol Armour, 1st Pol Fighter with Polish flag, same for norwegian and eventual other Allied countries.
When the British appear, in Norway for example, i could change the flag of the polish core units to UK flag and then they are upgradeable from the next scenario and they wouldn't lose any experience they gained in Poland.
This is theory though, i would have to test it first.

That`s actually a good idea. It`s not ideal since the flag those units have would be British instead of Polish for example and that takes from the coolness of the idea, but without changing the equipment file it`s the closest one could get. As it was mentioned above, those "free" units were - in the large sense of the term - part of the British military so it`s not such a misrepresentation. Besides, my thinking is that if you include these units in the official campaign and the balancing of the game takes them into account then it would be very easy and straight forward to mod to make them have their proper flags too. You could yourself release a rather simple unofficial patch/add-on that complements the official content or leave it to someone else.

I`ll also suggest that you keep this simple and only add a few "free" units (as few as a single unit in the case of some nations), based ideally on what we know existed historically.

One question though. When would the conversion take place? Can it happen between scenarios or during the recruitment turn so as to avoid the possibility that a Polish PZL for example is used in Norway?

[captainjack]

There was a good mix of European nations fighting with the British - free Poles, at least some Czech airmen, free French - as well as all the Empire and former Empire troops. The simplest way would probably be to allow purchase of local troops into your core and assign captured units to the country that captured them - so if fighting in Poland you get one or two core Poles that can escape to fight in France if you meet some victory condition. Then in France you can take on board French units that can escape if Dunkirk is successful and so on. Then you have a mix of nations to add some colour, and without too much un-historical stuff. The extra nations are your reward for success.

The other way is probably better suited to modders, with either more detailed campaigns (Poland in more detail) or un-historic lines such as France organising better and lasting long enough to seize the initiative or the attack on Poland being blunted by British and French action elsewhere (and by better defensive strategy), to allow a Free Polish force to head to North Africa and then back to Europe later.

Either way there's plenty of opportunity for some creative approaches, and the role play aspect would be enhanced.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

EDIT: I see that people are proposing smaller early like Norway, France even Poland. Well I have nothing against that but I don't see how player could win in any of those scenarios.

[/quote]

OK, I'll explain my suggestion a bit. Basically I was thinking of a "Allied GC '39-'40" where you have a couple of scenarios in Poland (I would imagine Westerplatte, Bzura and Warsaw39) where you can collect some Polish units and especially HEROES (Free Polish aircraft that could ultimately be upgraded to Thunderbolts and awesome stuff like that), having a relatively small core force (similar to GC39 and the middle of '42 West)

Following, you would go to France (your core having escaped through Romania after Poland surrendered), where you cover the retreat to Dunkirk. This would allow for the counterattack at Arras and a few other skirmishes. Here your Poles are joined by French and British armies, and the Poles can be updgraded to the Cruiser tanks and Spitfires (guille1434 made an icon if we want a Polish Spitfire - I could upload it for this if requested)

The last part of France is at Dunkirk, before you go to Narvik and then the Battle of Britain.

Then, '41 is focussed on Greece (Thermopylae comes to mind), and the desert.
'42 -> Alamein
'43 -> Tunisia (joined by US), then Italy.
'44 -> CHOICE to go to Normandy or deal with the Gothic Line
'45 -> Bulge, Rhineland, v. the Soviets?

Also, if we were to have my previously suggested Polish scenarios, here are some example set-ups.

Westerplatte - Danzig, sept 1, 1939.

DV- Keep Polish ships alive and hold a few towns from German attacks.
MV- Towns only.

Note that this scenario could also be a naval-centric scenario, like my WWI mod's Jutland - though more land battles than Jutland, which was entirely naval (and now a minor air component)

Bzura - near Lodz, sept 8-18, 1939

DV + MV - obvious attacking setup.

The battle of the Bzura was actually very nearly a Polish victory, which could have delayed the Germans from Warsaw for months. While it would never be enough to stop them completely, it could make a major setback that allows your core to escape.

Warsaw - sept + oct, 1939.

Core starts in Warsaw, must move towards Romania to escape by the end, while keeping a toehold in Warsaw until the end.

- BNC

[timek28]

Cool examples BNC How come so many of you are found of Polish troops btw.? I'm from Serbia and surely Yugoslav partisans did have a word or two in the WW2 so why not throw them in there too?

Yeah some of those "minor battles" with smaller nations could be interesting. But extrapolating it into too much detail would be rather nitpicking. It has to be done carefully so that there is logical thread between scenarios and between campaign years. It all depends on how many scenario per year is to be made. GC East and West (I think) had pretty much the same number of scenarios per year. If that is the case now also, then larger opportunities would arise for Polish troops in 39. Also if say there are 14 scenarios per year as before, there where hardly 14 important battles in Poland in 39... So maybe there would be logic to zip 39-40 into one DLC with say 14 scenarios (Battle for Britain included or something). I don't know...

[Mark50]

Cool examples BNC How come so many of you are found of Polish troops btw.?

Because many people like to play the underdog and of the smaller nations, Poland has two attractive features:
- it actually fought bravely and alone (so game deveopers can`t just sideline the Polish units and replace them with units of the bigger nation involved as it happens so often with the Romanians on the eastern front for example). Other smaller nations with interesting army compositions like Czechoslovakia and Romania caved in to the territorial demands so you can only have what if scenarios there.
- Poland has a nice unit composition. From armoured cars to tanks to fighters and bombers it has something of everything and in relatively significant quantities. To top it, most of these designs are Polish so it gives you something different to play with.

Then there`s also the fact that there are apparently many Polish people interested in this chapter of their history and they`re likely present here too. If you look on wikipedia you`ll find the Polish language version has great details on things of this period not only directly relating to Poland. And also, because - as I`ve said above - game developers could not just ignore Poland it got a decent amount of units present and this made it worthwhile playing with it even if you`re not from Poland. Unlike nations such as Romania, Hungary, Yugoslavia and so on which in games like PzC lack not only their armour and aircraft, but even some of the more basic weapons that they did posses in reality. Some of the best playing experience I had in PG was actually wining with Poland (by defending successfully) in the two Polish scenarios.

Also, I agree with you, Yugoslavia should play a part in this project too.