THIRD REICH AoD MOD

unmerged(45491) · Jul 9, 2010

I can also confirm, after completing the two rocket interceptor techs my planes upgraded (but first to rocket interceptors, then turbojet).

The problem with this method is that it hamstrings countries that use interceptors, as many of them do not research rockets, and thus fall far far behind the countries that use fighters.

DarkSoul1984 · Jul 9, 2010

Well, it hamstrings them yes and no. Those two rocket models are superior to the 1943 fighter models and are hella awesome, even though the first model can't make it much past the runway with its horrible range.

unmerged(45491) · Jul 9, 2010

but most of them dont even research the techs, thus ending with adv interceptors and never passing that.

Gringoesteban · Jul 9, 2010

I figured out an easy workaround that I can incorporate into the next release. Unfortunately, to make it work I will need to disable the rocket interceptor techs, meaning that you will not be able to research/build Me163 Komet or Me263 improved rocket interceptor. I have this solution working in my current 0.72 game.

The option 2 approach from my earlier post should be an easy fix for your current games. That approach is to edit your save game file to add model 5 and 6 to both the interceptor model known and obsolete lists. By the way, to be fair, you should also edit ENG and SOV once they know turbojet interceptor. The USA ignores interceptors and focuses exclusively on fighters so this is not an issue for them.

I can't believe that after several years and hundreds of hours playing HOI2DD and AoD that I never noticed this.....

unmerged(52751) · Jul 11, 2010

Hi,

Disabling the rocket interceptor techs is not a very good solution. I think they add a lot of historical flavour to the game. It's not worth sacrificing that for player convenience.

Gringoesteban · Jul 11, 2010

kilolima said:
Disabling the techs is not a very good solution. I think (rocket interceptors) add a lot of historical flavour to the game.

Yeah, it would be nice to leave the Me163 Komet in the Scenario (although according to Wikipedia the Komets only shot down nine Allied aircraft during the entire war, and neither the Allies nor the Soviets fielded a rocket aircraft during WW2). The Me263 never flew in combat and only three prototypes were built, so I don't see that particular model as adding much flavor.

So maybe kind of a compromise solution is in order. What if we have only one rocket interceptor tech in the Third Reich Mod secret weapon tech tree. It would be a 1943 tech that requires both rocketry and 1943 interceptor. As far as I know, the Me163 Komet's first combat operations did not occur until 1944, so eliminating the 1941 rocket interceptor tech from the tech tree might actually improve rather than reduce flavor.

The interceptor upgrade path would become:
1937 int ==> 1940 int ==> 1943 int ==> 1943 rocket interceptor ==> 1944 turbojet interceptor

This still leaves us with the issue of the model numbers messing up the upgrade path, however. But the following might work....

Discovering the 1943 rocket interceptor tech would yield both interceptor model 5 AND interceptor model 6. It would also obsolete both models 4 (1943 interceptor) AND model 5. This will then put all level 4 interceptors in line to be upgraded through level 5 to level 6.

I would make the units stats for both model 5 and model 6 the same as what is currently in the units/division/interceptor for model 6 (what vanilla AoD shows as the 1943 improved rocket interceptor Me263). In other words, model 5 would be the same as model 6. I would halve the upgrade cost so that upgrading to level 5 and then to level 6 would cost the same IC-days as doing one normal upgrade (even though you would be upgrading two model number). Changing all the pictures and text would be quite a pain, so model 5 would still be Me163 Komet and model 6 would remain as Me263. But like I mentioned above, the stats/performance/range/etc of the two models would be identical.

I would need to redo quite a few AI files so that the AI researches rocketry and rocket interceptor.

unmerged(52751) · Jul 11, 2010

Hi Gringoesteban,

It does seem like it would be a lot of work to change this, but again, it's not really important game-wise when it's really only a player inconvenience. Better the energy spent to add some other features or fixes to your already great mod.

Here's a few additions I made to your mod in my last game :

Map addition to adj-defs.csv, it enables traffic to be blocked on the Suez Canal if an enemy holds the Port Said side :

2453;2454;Canal;901;Suez Canal

While it's great to run into the lvl 10 fort road block in Suez, it does seem quite silly that Allied shipping can still pass through the hundred ft wide canal for the duration of the siege... which in my last game went on for years and years.

I'm still annoyed that it's impossible to get the Afrika corps to N Africa as there's no way to place transports in the Med, so I added a province connection between Palermo and Tripoli. For some added gameplay, it could pass through Malta.

525;932;Sea;2440;Palermo-Tripoli

Then, unlike Armageddon 1.3b, resources from puppets are blocked if there is no port or German province connection. So I added connections between the puppet capitals and Berlin. These are impassable but the resources still go through (I think):

382;300;Impassable;0;Zagreb-Berlin
386;300;Impassable;0;Sarajevo-Berlin
453;300;Impassable;0;Belgrade-Berlin
401;300;Impassable;0;Athens-Berlin

And then to improve combat against France, I added a connection between Dunkirk and Dover :

20;43;Sea;2395;Dunkirk-Dover

This enabled the UK to send a 20 div BEF to France. Which was destroyed!

I would also like to make the canal connection between Mouth of Thames and Eastern English Channel controlled by forces in Calais as well as Dover, but it appears to only work one way; whichever is the latest connection defined in adj-defs.csv. The Germans had massive coastal batteries in Calais that also could control access to the Channel.

Gringoesteban · Jul 11, 2010

kilolima said:
It does seem like it would be a lot of work to change this, but again, it's not really important game-wise when it's really only a player inconvenience. Better the energy spent to add some other features .

One of the things that concerns me is that if we make no changes then the interceptors of USA, ENG, JAP, and ITA (among others) will max out at the 1943 model. The existing AI switch files do not instruct the AI nations to research rocket interceptors. I'll have to think about this a little and try to figure out a reasonable fix.

kilolima said:
While it's great to run into the lvl 10 fort road block in Suez, it does seem quite silly that Allied shipping can still pass through the hundred ft wide canal for the duration of the siege... which in my last game went on for years and years..

Good point. How about fixing this by making the Suez Canal-North Red Sea connection impassible. However, we would add a canal from Suez Canal through Port Said to North Red Sea. (That is similar to the way that I blocked the English Channel at Dover). With this change, a country could move fleets between the Med Sea and the Red Sea only if it controlled both Suez and Port Said. The minor downside I see here is one of visual elegance -- the land province Port Said does not actually touch the sea province North Red Sea -- but I suppose the Player could use a little imagination.

kilolima said:
I would also like to make the canal connection between Mouth of Thames and Eastern English Channel controlled by forces in Calais as well as Dover, but it appears to only work one way; whichever is the latest connection defined in adj-defs.csv. The Germans had massive coastal batteries in Calais that also could control access to the Channel.

We could do a similar solution here, like maybe making the Eastern English Channel-Western English Channel impassible but put a canal through Calais. That way unless someone controlled both Dover and Calais then the English Channel would be impassible.

Gringoesteban · Jul 11, 2010

kilolima said:
unlike Armageddon 1.3b, resources from puppets are blocked if there is no port or German province connection.

I don't remember seeing this raised on the forums, but maybe I missed it or else I just forgot. Is there a thread about the issue on the forums, or is it listed on the official bug thread? I can certainly try to create a workaround, perhaps with impassible land conx like you suggested, but I would need to understand the underlying issue first.

unmerged(52751) · Jul 11, 2010

OK, here are a few other changes I tried :

in misc.txt :

Code:

# _CV_SUPPLY_DISTANCE_SEVERITY_, the amount supply distance affects combat
	1.75 # gringo was 0.25
# _CV_SUPPLY_BASE_, the base ESE value
	75.0

This makes armored rushes into Russia very difficult because your ESE drops to about 15% after 2 or 3 provinces. But it's still possible if there is no appreciable resistance after the first breakthrough. I thought this would be easier than manually lowering infrastructure values. It may also be a good idea to lower infrastructure build times/cost and make them build-able in allied provinces to make up for this.

I also added several persistent events (based on the convoys events) so the AI can build infrastructure. Here's an example, there's one event for each major AI country (UK,ITA,JAP,SOV,FRA), with the higher IC countries receiving more infrastructure :

Code:

#########################################################################
#  ENG Builds Infrastructure
#########################################################################
event = {
	id = 89995
	random = no
	persistent = yes
	country = ENG

	trigger = {
		exists = ENG
	}

	name = "Build Infrastructure"
	desc = "Increase our nation's infrastructure"
	style = 0
	picture = "factory"

	date = { day = 15 month = january year = 1936 }
	offset = 300
	deathdate = { day = 30 month = december year = 1999 }

	action_a = {
		name = "Roads, railways, and canals!" 
		ai_chance = 80 
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 30 }
		
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		command = { type = construct which = infrastructure where = -1 value = 10 }
		
		command = { type = metalpool value = -4400 }
		command = { type = energypool value = -6000 }
		command = { type = rarematerialspool value = -3000 }
	}
	action_b = {
		name = "We prefer the mud" # Not this time
		ai_chance = 20
		command = { }
	}
}

Finally, some other changes to adj-devs.csv :

Code:

2440;2442;Impassable;0;Fortress Malta
2440;2442;Canal;31;Gulf 0f Gabes-Gulf of Sidra
2441;2443;Impassable;0;Straits of Messina 
2441;2443;Canal;524;Gulf of Salerno-Gulf of Taranto
2448;2463;Impassable;0;Fortress Crete
2448;2463;Canal;396;Ionian Sea-Sea of Crete

makes Malta actually an objective useful to be captured by the player as it now controls east/west access in the Med. There was a quote I read somewhere by Mussolini saying as much. And also for the Straits of Messina, which are really quite narrow. And for Crete. In the game it can also be safely ignored by the player, this change helps protect the Aegean.

I've played around a bit more with impassable connections between puppet capitals and Berlin and it does send resources home, and the connections are not misused for unit supply. This is a HUGE bug in AoD, it was fixed in 1.3b beta patch for Armageddon but it seems that AoD was built on 1.2. I did make a note of it in the bug forum some time ago.

Gringoesteban · Jul 11, 2010

kilolima said:
in misc.txt :

Code:

# _CV_SUPPLY_DISTANCE_SEVERITY_, the amount supply distance affects combat 1.75 # gringo was 0.25 # _CV_SUPPLY_BASE_, the base ESE value 75.0

This makes armored rushes into Russia very difficult because your ESE drops to about 15% after 2 or 3 provinces.

In my current v0.72 game, the USA broke through my defenses at Athens in late 1944 and sent 11 armored and mechanized divisions charging straight to Kiev as fast as they could drive, blowing through everything I tried to put in their way. Would the values you mention prevent that? An armored breakthrough is one thing, but sending 11 divisions that need fuel and ammunition and food on a 2,000 mile rampage through enemy territory is quite another....

In the misc file line above I am assuming that "CV" does not refer to an aircraft carrier?

How did you choose the specific values 1.75 and 75.0?

kilolima said:
I also added several persistent events (based on the convoys events) so the AI can build infrastructure. Here's an example, there's one event for each major AI country (UK,ITA,JAP,SOV,FRA), with the higher IC countries receiving more infrastructure.

I'm not sure this is necessary, since the enemy AI already gets extra units and resources and IC. Adding more infrastructure seems redundant.

kilolima said:
Finally, some other changes to adj-devs.csv :
2440;2442;Impassable;0;Fortress Malta

Excellent idea, although rather than being impassible I will make it a canal through Malta so whoever controls the island can decide who travels between gulf of sidra and gulf of gabes.

kilolima said:
2441;2443;Canal;524;Gulf of Salerno-Gulf of Taranto

I will make this change with the canal going through Palermo. That way if someone holds both Malta and Palermo they essentially cut the Med Sea in half.

kilolima said:
I've played around a bit more with impassable connections between puppet capitals and Berlin and it does send resources home, and the connections are not misused for unit supply. This is a HUGE bug in AoD, it was fixed in 1.3b beta patch for Armageddon but it seems that AoD was built on 1.2. I did make a note of it in the bug forum some time ago.

So if I understand correctly, unless a puppet nation's capital province touches a German province, or has a port, then it cannot send resources to its puppet master? So like Croatia is okay as-is because its capital province borders a German controlled province, and if someone puppeted say Norway that would be no problem because its capital Oslo has a port. Please confirm.

unmerged(52751) · Jul 12, 2010

In the misc file line above I am assuming that "CV" does not refer to an aircraft carrier?

How did you choose the specific values 1.75 and 75.0?

guessed? Now I'm trying 1.00 for _CV_SUPPLY_DISTANCE_SEVERITY_... these values will take some fiddling, but for an example. My armored rush north of Persia faltered after 3 provinces.. these are all 10 or 20% infrastructure provinces and after several battles the panzer columns had to stop and wait to refuel...

I'm not sure this is necessary, since the enemy AI already gets extra units and resources and IC. Adding more infrastructure seems redundant.

It helps the AI with defensive and offensive ESE, especially with the changes made above. And addresses the major bug that the AI cannot currently build infrastructure itself.

Code:

2440;2442;Impassable;0;Fortress Malta
2440;2442;Canal;31;Gulf 0f Gabes-Gulf of Sidra

Excellent idea, although rather than being impassible I will make it a canal through Malta so whoever controls the island can decide who travels between gulf of sidra and gulf of gabes.

I copied your existing lines for the English Channel block, but I don't know if the first impassable line is even necessary.

So if I understand correctly, unless a puppet nation's capital province touches a German province, or has a port, then it cannot send resources to its puppet master? So like Croatia is okay as-is because its capital province borders a German controlled province, and if someone puppeted say Norway that would be no problem because its capital Oslo has a port. Please confirm.

Confirmed. Puppets that are surrounded by other puppets with no direct German-occupied province connection to a German province or a Port do not give resources. This was long-standing vanilla HoI2/Armageddon bug first fixed in 1.3b. I tried to find the Armageddon 1.3b post changelog but here is a post from the Armageddon forum with the same problem :

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=484774

EDIT : hmm, can't find it in the changelog, I thought this had been fixed, but you might find this interesting :

Code:

- Fixed "delete_unit" command, it now works with -2 & -3 for Sea and Air units.

Why didn't the AoD team include the 1.3b patch?!

Gringoesteban · Jul 12, 2010

kilolima said:
guessed? Now I'm trying 1.00 for _CV_SUPPLY_DISTANCE_SEVERITY_... these values will take some fiddling, but for an example. My armored rush north of Persia faltered after 3 provinces.. these are all 10 or 20% infrastructure provinces and after several battles the panzer columns had to stop and wait to refuel...

That sounds a lot more realistic than 11 US units driving from Greece deep into Ukraine without so much as a pause.... Let me know what numbers seem to work best so I can update the misc file.

kilolima said:
It (extra infrastructure) helps the AI with defensive and offensive ESE, especially with the changes made above. And addresses the major bug that the AI cannot currently build infrastructure itself.?!

If I remember right, Suez and Gibraltar already get 100 infra by event at the beginning of the Scenario, but that gets reduced substantially if those provinces fall to the Axis. Leningrad, Stalingrad, and the other important Soviet provinces also have higher infrastructure than the surrounding countryside.

kilolima said:
Code:

2440;2442;Impassable;0;Fortress Malta 2440;2442;Canal;31;Gulf 0f Gabes-Gulf of Sidra

I copied your existing lines for the English Channel block, but I don't know if the first impassable line is even necessary. ?!

Oh, sorry, I guess I didn't see the second line, what you coded will work perfectly and I will copy it into adj-def for the next release. As far as I know the impassible line is indeed necessary, but I have never actually tested it to be sure.

kilolima said:
[

Code:

- Fixed "delete_unit" command, it now works with -2 & -3 for Sea and Air units.

Why didn't the AoD team include the 1.3b patch?!

I can confirm that this fix did NOT make it into AoD. I wish it had, because it seems ridiculous that when Germany conquers ENG and then England joins the Axis, the entire RAF and Royal Navy suddenly switch sides and start fighting on the side of the Germans. SMEP had them all get scuttled/destroyed using the delete -2 -3 command.

As far as I know, AoD is based on Arma 1.2. I think Arma 1.3b came out after the developers had bought the license rights and begun developing AoD.

Gringoesteban · Jul 14, 2010

I am working on the next release, which I am hoping will be the last update for a while. Does anyone have any comments, suggestions, ideas, recommendations, etc. that have not already been discussed on this thread?
If so, please let me know.

unmerged(45491) · Jul 14, 2010

More soviet tanks!

I will copy a post i made in another thread, please ignore the tone as I was responding to someone else on a different topic (please also forgive me if you addressed this already!:

Soviet and German GDP were actually relatively even throughout the war years with a large dip in 1942 for the SOV's. German GDP steadily rose from 1939 and peaked in 44. Soviet GDP after falling only recovered to 1938/39 levels in 1944 and were consistently outproduced by the germans in terms of GDP from 1941 onwards.

Generally speaking the game replicates this relatively well, with German IC reaching relative parity with the SU and gaining an edge as the germans drive deeper into russia, however the game does not reflect well is actual production.

As stated the Russians were much better suited for total war and produced more than the germans consistantly, at least until the end years, when the germans actually began to take the lead.

The soviets outproduced the Germans in most Key areas, tanks, fighters, bombers, artillery pieces, machine guns, mortars, self propelled guns.

Biggest year for production of *total* german tanks was 1944, with near 19,000, previous biggest year was 1943 with 13.500

Soviets produced 14,500 tanks in 1944 with an additional 12,000 sp guns, but produced roughly the same numbers in 1942 as they did in 1944, while the germans only produced 5500 total for all of 1942.

I almost think we need a historical SP game and a 'balanced' mp game, but a blend of the two causes a lot of problems.

In game the Germans get a lot of big bonus and reductions to ARM, LARM and SPART,

1937 (1) - LARM -2.0 IC

1937 (2) - LARM -1.0 IC, LA (light armour brigade) -0.3 IC, ARM -1.9!! IC

1939 - LARM -1.0 IC AG -0.4 IC and ARM -1.9!! IC

1941 - SP AT -0.4 IC

1943 Techs, 1 does SP ART -0.7 IC and SP AT -0.8 IC

Germans Receive total discounts:

LARM: -4.0 IC,
LA Brigade: -0.3 IC
SP ART: -0.7 IC
SP AT: -1.2 IC
ARM: -3.8 IC

Sov Discounts all come in 1943 (this date makes no sense, perhaps germans should recieve discounts in 1943 and soviets receive earlier??)

1943 (1) SP R ART -0.3 IC and ARM -0.9 IC

1943 (2) SP R ART -0.3 IC and ARM -0.9 IC

Soviet Total Discount

SP R ART -0.6 IC
ARM: -1.8 IC

Does not make sense to me.

Other than I still felt that the battle for the SUEZ was the most difficult one I had to do, far more difficult than any of the big 3 russian cities. Never did gibraltar but it may be even harder than the Suez due to the terrain. While I can understand why gibraltar would be horrible to take, I still cant get my head around the Suez!

Also an event to allow the germans to send men/divisions/materials to africa. I like other players had to cheat a abit to bring the afrika corps into play, but due to house rules the usual way via greece is unavailable.

an operation tracer event could be very interesting should the germans succeed in beating the british at gribaltar!

Love this mod, one of my favorites in quite some time, though I don't usually play as germany anymore this mod made it fun!

Gringoesteban · Jul 14, 2010

Syntax said:
More soviet tanks! As stated the Russians were much better suited for total war and produced more than the germans consistantly....

For the next release I have added an event where the Player must choose whether to (a) play the regular Third Reich AoD Mod from v0.72 or (b) fight an even harder campaign against Russia. The harder campaign will give the Soviets extra IC, more manpower, and another 70 free divisions. This should address your concerns.

Syntax said:
Other than I still felt that the battle for the SUEZ was the most difficult one I had to do, far more difficult than any of the big 3 russian cities.

My approach is to completely ignore Africa until after Bitter Peace with Russia. I then attack Suez by sending a massive army across Iraq and Palestine to take Suez from the rear. It would be difficult to capture Suez before attacking Russia unless you delay your Barbarossa Campaign, and delaying Barbarossa is probably not a good idea....

Syntax said:
Never did gibraltar but it may be even harder than the Suez due to the terrain. While I can understand why gibraltar would be horrible to take

England surrenders if you take London, Glasgow, Suez, Delhi, and either (Singapore or Gibraltar). Therefore, if you or the Japanese take Singapore away from the British, then you never need to attack Gibraltar. In my latest v0.72 game, I actually sent a fleet all the way around Africa and rebased them in India so that I could do an amphibious attack on Singapore. That was a lot easier than taking The Rock.

Syntax said:
Also an event to allow the germans to send men/divisions/materials to africa. I like other players had to cheat a abit to bring the afrika corps into play, but due to house rules the usual way via greece is unavailable.

I updated the House Rules to say that only capital ships and submarines must be placed in German national ports, and I clarified that it is okay to deploy screens and troop transport ships to the Mediterranean Sea. I am debating whether or not to add a new German event that places 3 "free" DD and 3 "free" TP in Athens after Greece surrenders.

Syntax said:
an operation tracer event could be very interesting should the germans succeed in beating the british at gribaltar!.

What do you have in mind?

unmerged(45491) · Jul 14, 2010

Perhaps something along the lines of the effectiveness of the Japanese Surprise attack events, with perhaps a random chance of discovering the spy team afterwards, event chain and effects could, in theory, last for up to a year. Also in line with that perhaps and event to attempt to meet spain's ridiculous demands for entry into war, but i'm not sure if that would make the game to easy or not.

unmerged(52751) · Jul 15, 2010

Perhaps something along the lines of the effectiveness of the Japanese Surprise attack events, with perhaps a random chance of discovering the spy team afterwards, event chain and effects could, in theory, last for up to a year. Also in line with that perhaps and event to attempt to meet spain's ridiculous demands for entry into war, but i'm not sure if that would make the game to easy or not.

I just finished a biography of Canaris, who did so much to keep Spain out of the war through his personal friendship with Franco, so an event should also kill or remove Canaris from the cabinet if Spain joins the Axis.

My approach is to completely ignore Africa until after Bitter Peace with Russia. I then attack Suez by sending a massive army across Iraq and Palestine to take Suez from the rear. It would be difficult to capture Suez before attacking Russia unless you delay your Barbarossa Campaign, and delaying Barbarossa is probably not a good idea....

While this is probably necessary to take Suez, I generally find that after Bitter Peace there's not much point in playing any longer as victory is not really in doubt. And from the experience of my last game, I think I now agree that Suez is over-fortified... It's fun to fight the UK in N Africa early in the war when each division matters... but by 1943/4 the massive scale of armies on the Eastern Front really makes any other front seem 'quaint'... my last strategy of taking Suez was massive allied stacks, like 50 divs, who just wore them down. But by this point, again, there is really nothing else to do with all these divisions anyway.

Gringoesteban · Jul 15, 2010

I reduced the coastal fort and land fort in Suez from 10 to 4 and the provincial AA batteries from 10 to 6. Suez is not as critical now anyway, because an alliance needs to hold both Suez AND Port Said to pass through the Suez Canal.

I added an event to whack Canaris. It triggers if Nationalist Spain joins the Axis or if Germany captures Gibraltar.

kilolima said:
I generally find that after Bitter Peace there's not much point in playing any longer as victory is not really in doubt

Yes and no. It really depends on how the USA AI decides to behave in that particular game. If it is aggressive, then winning can be difficult even after Bitter Peace and after the UK Surrender Event. If the US gets a foothold in Italy or southern Europe or France and pours hundreds of divisions into it, supported by piles of aircraft, then things can become quite challenging. But if the USA just sits at home and does nothing, the game can become quite boring quite fast.

Gringoesteban · Jul 15, 2010

I also added an event to put 3 destroyers and 3 troop transport ships in Athens, and to place the "free" 5th Light Panzer Afrika division in Tripoli.

THIRD REICH AoD MOD

First Lieutenant

Lt. General

First Lieutenant

Major

Captain

Major

Captain

Major

Major

Captain

Major

Captain

Major

Major

First Lieutenant

Major

First Lieutenant

Captain

Major

Major