I notice that as yet there's no specific British ai, just the default one: which means that Britain sees no reason to defend its borders against neutral, non-aligned countries like Turkey.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
We could have the British AI place enormous importance on Jerusalem, Sinai and Kuwait - this could help a bit.
Also, Allenby says El Arish (Sinai) should have infra of zero which only gets boosted up via the Sinai pipeline event.
Sinai has infra 34 - if it had infra 0 the Turks wouldnt be so keen to storm into Egypt.
Also, Allenby says El Arish (Sinai) should have infra of zero which only gets boosted up via the Sinai pipeline event.
Sinai has infra 34 - if it had infra 0 the Turks wouldnt be so keen to storm into Egypt.
A few comments after my last play
Hullo Chaps,
Was playing as Italy and here's what I noted:
Economic 'meltdown' early on in the game. Unless this is 'intentional' it should be corrected.
If we have overseas territories please warn us and have the convoys running at game start. PLEASE especially for mondo big empires like Britain. It's too easy to 'miss' a territory and have forces there starve to death.
France blitzes clear through Germany w/c can't get past the Belgian defenses. Britain never sends an expeditionary force to the continent and prefers to land in the Baltic (any way this can reflect a divergent strategy? After all there really was a British Baltic strategy)
The Turks blitzed through the Middle East and Egypt and the Brits never cared enough to defend their oil sources or the Suez canal.
Best regards,
Richmond
Hullo Chaps,
Was playing as Italy and here's what I noted:
Economic 'meltdown' early on in the game. Unless this is 'intentional' it should be corrected.
If we have overseas territories please warn us and have the convoys running at game start. PLEASE especially for mondo big empires like Britain. It's too easy to 'miss' a territory and have forces there starve to death.
France blitzes clear through Germany w/c can't get past the Belgian defenses. Britain never sends an expeditionary force to the continent and prefers to land in the Baltic (any way this can reflect a divergent strategy? After all there really was a British Baltic strategy)
The Turks blitzed through the Middle East and Egypt and the Brits never cared enough to defend their oil sources or the Suez canal.
Best regards,
Richmond
I have changed the DI ratings of every nation in the country.inc files to -30 at the beginning of the game. This should disable diplomacy for approximately 15 months, and should prevent aberrations of history, such as the Germans asking for military access through Belgium in January 1914, or the French managing to attack Germany via Switzerland.
Could you elaborate on what happened exactly?
Richmond516 said:
Could you elaborate on what happened exactly?
What usually happens is the divisions on far away stations being destroyed by lack of supplies, or lack of enough raw materials for the industry to work. And, because there are no trades set, countries can't start trading to cover their shortages.
I'd say it might be better to start the game with convoys and trades set. I was always a bit annoyed with games that just make you assume that "whoever was running the country before you was a complete idiot" because you have to start by setting up the most basic things.
I don't propose that we create a very fine-tuned setup, but having everything somewhat functional at start would be good. Especially for the countries with lots of colonies, and they're quite a few in TGW.
I'd say it might be better to start the game with convoys and trades set. I was always a bit annoyed with games that just make you assume that "whoever was running the country before you was a complete idiot" because you have to start by setting up the most basic things.
I don't propose that we create a very fine-tuned setup, but having everything somewhat functional at start would be good. Especially for the countries with lots of colonies, and they're quite a few in TGW.
Shanghai should be Chinese, not British.
The city was divided into many foreign legations, and although British presence was important, rule of the city was still in Chinese hands. Chiang Kai Shek obtained the support of many upperclass, westernised types when he captured the city in the mid 1920s. Britain holding the city adds nothing to gameplay and is ahistorical - therefore we should give the city to China, not Britain.
Only Hong Kong, Qingdao, Dalian, Zhanjiang, and Macau should be ruled by Europeans.
The city was divided into many foreign legations, and although British presence was important, rule of the city was still in Chinese hands. Chiang Kai Shek obtained the support of many upperclass, westernised types when he captured the city in the mid 1920s. Britain holding the city adds nothing to gameplay and is ahistorical - therefore we should give the city to China, not Britain.
Only Hong Kong, Qingdao, Dalian, Zhanjiang, and Macau should be ruled by Europeans.
I came up with a way to rectify the Comintern problem. Stephen rightly asks "What if Rev Mex loses the war"?
We'll have both Mexicos as neutrals.
Pick an Aleutian island. Make it the same colour as the USA. Remove the beach and any ports. Make it the leader of the Comintern.
When Sov appears, it will ally with this island country. Once this event fires, USA will inherit the realm of this glorious nation.....
We'll have both Mexicos as neutrals.
Pick an Aleutian island. Make it the same colour as the USA. Remove the beach and any ports. Make it the leader of the Comintern.
When Sov appears, it will ally with this island country. Once this event fires, USA will inherit the realm of this glorious nation.....
Amchitka (1880) looks good; and my vote for name of the country would be "The International Communist Conspiracy" 
(assuming that's not too many characters for a name). Remove not only the beach and ports, but its IC, and there's really no reason to give the island back to the USA. They don't need it... (perhaps increase Kiska's IC by 1 to compensate).
As for leaders and ministers, I suggest Captain Nemo as Navy Minister, Fu Manchu as Foreign Minister and Professor Moriarty as Minister of Security.
(assuming that's not too many characters for a name). Remove not only the beach and ports, but its IC, and there's really no reason to give the island back to the USA. They don't need it... (perhaps increase Kiska's IC by 1 to compensate).As for leaders and ministers, I suggest Captain Nemo as Navy Minister, Fu Manchu as Foreign Minister and Professor Moriarty as Minister of Security.
Actually, I tested the idea a while ago (but abandoned it as Rev Mexico seemed better), except I took the small, small, tiny, itsy, bitsy island west of Chile, so small it can almost not be seen at any zoom than the closest one and the idea seems to work.
/Johan
and the idea seems to work. /Johan
Well the reason I initially suggested an Aleutian island and same colour as USA is because that would make it inconspicuous.......we wouldnt want people clicking on the Soviets and see "in an alliance with the International Communist Conspiracy".
I also thought of making that island near Kamchatka this special state, being the same colour as Russia, but its a bit too big, and only an Aleutian island could pull off the trick...........
Or shall we make it blatantly clear it's there for comic relief?
I also thought of making that island near Kamchatka this special state, being the same colour as Russia, but its a bit too big, and only an Aleutian island could pull off the trick...........
Or shall we make it blatantly clear it's there for comic relief?
I think an Aleutian island may be too obvious....I suggest somewhere less conspicuous like Paris or Berlin....
In fact, 1863 Attu is better than 1880 Amchitka, because the latter has 2 islands, the former only 1.
Johan's island is even smaller - 376 Porto Juan Fernandez.......maybe that would be even less obvious, since an American player would scroll across Alaska, but few people look at the coast of Chile.
But if we opt for the Aleutian option, we could have an American annexation event that says "Mr President, we've discovered the base of the international communist conspiracy! They've existed since time immemorial! Thank God we foxed them out before they destroyed the free world!"
name = "Thank the heavens!"
command = { type = dissent value = -1 }
command = { type = inherit which = Attu }
Johan's island is even smaller - 376 Porto Juan Fernandez.......maybe that would be even less obvious, since an American player would scroll across Alaska, but few people look at the coast of Chile.
But if we opt for the Aleutian option, we could have an American annexation event that says "Mr President, we've discovered the base of the international communist conspiracy! They've existed since time immemorial! Thank God we foxed them out before they destroyed the free world!"
name = "Thank the heavens!"
command = { type = dissent value = -1 }
command = { type = inherit which = Attu }
The problem is that whatever we do is going to be unhistorical - purely a game device. Personally, I think we should accept that, tell the players in the FAQ why we've done it, and then maybe have some fun with it.
Assuming we use tag U19 for the newly created country, we've got to call it something - so which would people prefer to see in a report?
1) Soviet Russia has allied with ___User Defined
2) Soviet Russia has allied with U19
3) Soviet Russia has allied with Amchitka
4) Soviet Russia has allied with The International Communist Conspiracy
Vote!!
As for the island to use, I suggested Amchitka because the USA has three island provinces in that area, so they can lose one of them without much effect on the game. Russia, on the other hand, only has one up there, so there's an ever-so-slight, vague possibility that giving it to another country might affect the strategic balance of the game. Chile has two islands, but as a really small country losing one province would have a proportionately greater effect on it.
[Edit]Plus, most WW2 scholars will have heard of Attu and Kiska because of the Japanese occupation, but I doubt that anyone but a native Aleut or really good pub quiz contestant will have heard of Amchitka before.
Assuming we use tag U19 for the newly created country, we've got to call it something - so which would people prefer to see in a report?
1) Soviet Russia has allied with ___User Defined
2) Soviet Russia has allied with U19
3) Soviet Russia has allied with Amchitka
4) Soviet Russia has allied with The International Communist Conspiracy
Vote!!
As for the island to use, I suggested Amchitka because the USA has three island provinces in that area, so they can lose one of them without much effect on the game. Russia, on the other hand, only has one up there, so there's an ever-so-slight, vague possibility that giving it to another country might affect the strategic balance of the game.
Chile has two islands, but as a really small country losing one province would have a proportionately greater effect on it.[Edit]Plus, most WW2 scholars will have heard of Attu and Kiska because of the Japanese occupation, but I doubt that anyone but a native Aleut or really good pub quiz contestant will have heard of Amchitka before.
I much prefer 'The International Communist Conspiracy' in Amchitka
Personally, I don't believe that we should put this in the FAQ, but leave it to the player to find out and be presently surprised (or not) to find an island of die-hard communists living in the North Pacific
In fact, this should be kept so secret that these posts will have to be deleted by SykoNurse and the information stored away in a massive safe, with each of us only knowing parts of the combination so that one of us can't get kidnapped and interrogated for the answer....
Personally, I don't believe that we should put this in the FAQ, but leave it to the player to find out and be presently surprised (or not) to find an island of die-hard communists living in the North Pacific
In fact, this should be kept so secret that these posts will have to be deleted by SykoNurse and the information stored away in a massive safe, with each of us only knowing parts of the combination so that one of us can't get kidnapped and interrogated for the answer....
Alright then, I'll go with Stephen's plan.
We'll need a flag for them! And a country description!!!
In the off chance a player might want to play that country for a truly exciting and rewarding experience.
Shall we bother with the troop flags? Even though they cant built troops, other than by typing in the code for a mobilisation event........
We'll need a flag for them! And a country description!!!
In the off chance a player might want to play that country for a truly exciting and rewarding experience.
Shall we bother with the troop flags? Even though they cant built troops, other than by typing in the code for a mobilisation event........
They can just have the flag you have as your avatar....it displays the hammer and sickle, which would be most appropriate for an International Communist Conspiracy.
Re the flag, my thoughts exactly... (although maybe edit out the star?)
As for a country description, how about:
Putting that disclaimer in the country description rather than the FAQ means that people will only notice it if they take the trouble to right-click on the country selection flags, scroll through, notice the ICC flag and select it.
As for a country description, how about:
Putting that disclaimer in the country description rather than the FAQ means that people will only notice it if they take the trouble to right-click on the country selection flags, scroll through, notice the ICC flag and select it.
Rotate the hammer and sickle 90 degrees to the left - so it looks right as a shield.
My country description would have a different footnote to it:
Please note: For an exciting game of living in peace and working in a great commune, pick this country.
My country description would have a different footnote to it:
Please note: For an exciting game of living in peace and working in a great commune, pick this country.
But calling it a "Conspiracy" is a bit negative on the pacifist people of the nation. They do not wish to conspire, their objectives are there for all to see.