I look forward to how you improve on this. Personally I created the base of my maps before starting to write, I might still tweak them a bit.
That's a risky move. I'm intrigued as to what you invade next, if not France.
- 1
-
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.
I have given that a look and the operational codenames look properly German (i.e. giving away the entire point of the operation and defeating the entire point of using 'code'.)
The path itself... I can see my future contains a great deal of sighing in disappointment at the Allied AI. I say disappointment, more resignedly noting it has performed down to my low expectations.
- 1
The path itself... I can see my future contains a great deal of sighing in disappointment at the Allied AI. I say disappointment, more resignedly noting it has performed down to my low expectations.
Hey, now, the AI may yet surprise you. After all, there are no expectations so low that they may not still fail to be met!
- 1
I probably will going forward, as I'll have a better grasp on the operational movement with regards to where everyone is. That way, the text flows from the maps, etc.
The answer may shock you.
Yeah. I wanted titles that would "work" as far as instantly conveying where they were, but also could notionally be the operation name.
The path itself... I can see my future contains a great deal of sighing in disappointment at the Allied AI. I say disappointment, more resignedly noting it has performed down to my low expectations.
Unfortunately. I'm actually going to be building another computer because one of my laptops shit the bed and died (and a gaming laptop too... of course it was bloody old, but still), and I've installed a game on another old laptop... so maybe five computers? And if that works out, I'm going to be fighting myself, because at this point, I need some challenge... I'll probably have three on the Axis (Ger, Ita, Jap), and two on the Allies (GB and USA). I'll introduce some rules: port the militaries of the smaller powers (HUN, BUL, etc) to keep them from wandering off into doing stupid shit, leave their AIs running the nations themselves and some other bits. Introduce cycling rules about ships and aircraft... I'll have a whole post about it so that everyone can weigh in.
Hey, now, the AI may yet surprise you. After all, there are no expectations so low that they may not still fail to be met!
Oh dear god yes. Things get weird.
- 1
Spoilers... I haven't looked at that title page since I first read it, years ago.
- 1
I deliberately haven’t looked as I want to be surprised as I go
- 1
This is utterly insane and I sincerely applaud your gumption, sir. The only way this could possibly become an even more-tangled web would be as a multiplayer AAR. Which wouldn't be a bad idea, if we could get some forumites together, but for the sake of the present AAR we'd best not delve too deeply for now...
Called it.
I deliberately haven’t looked as I want to be surprised as I go
I'll spoil it for you: German paratroopers in New York, Italian Marines storming ashore at Vladivostok, Japanese CTFs bombing the Falklands, and radioactive frozen beverages pulling [redacted] out of their arses.
- 1
I deliberately haven’t looked as I want to be surprised as I go
Ah, well, then I apologize for dangling those spoilers in front of you. Notionally, however, we're approaching this from the standpoint of history having already occurred, and also as a "book" that one could have read the table of contents as one opened it. So chapter titles are similarly obvious, without hopefully giving too much away.
I would love to, but when I tried a MP game, it made things... wonky. If I knew of locals who would be willing to participate, I'd do it in a heart beat. Maybe next time...
Heh, yep!
I'll spoil it for you: German paratroopers in New York, Italian Marines storming ashore at Vladivostok, Japanese CTFs bombing the Falklands, and radioactive frozen beverages pulling [redacted] out of their arses.
The French went to Vladivostok, actually... but that was the point when I said to myself, "This is getting out of hand and too easy." I mean, it's still a bit "Man in the High Castle," but I'm working at making things "right."
- 1
I have fond memories of reading the old Carnage group AARs. Alas, those days are probably gone by. If we ever tried to do a community multiplayer game/AAR, it would just not work. The British player would insist on playing slower-than-real-time, the Turkish player would spend all his leadership sending spies into Italy for the movie rights, the Soviet player would spend half the time writing about female snipers in fast cars, and the entire Axis would be played by one man with far too much time on his hands!
Wait, what?! I eagerly await hearing how this happened!
- 1
Tres amusing! And no doubt right.I have fond memories of reading the old Carnage group AARs. Alas, those days are probably gone by. If we ever tried to do a community multiplayer game/AAR, it would just not work. The British player would insist on playing slower-than-real-time, the Turkish player would spend all his leadership sending spies into Italy for the movie rights, the Soviet player would spend half the time writing about female snipers in fast cars, and the entire Axis would be played by one man with far too much time on his hands!
- 1
I'm only half-way through the AAR so far, but I must say, the Germans built some incredibly ugly ships. Strange really, because if there was one thing the Nazis were good at, it was making themsevles and their possesions look good. Di they just run out of style points for their destroyers?
EDIT:
EDIT:
Last edited:
- 1
Well, the Germans didn't fund destroyer construction because they were focused on building a convoy raiding surface fleet, and so wanted long-legged escorts that could keep up with their battlecruisers. The Italians built a pile of destroyers this go around; their navy is such that everyone else wound up nursing on hind tit. I don't know where you're at specifically, so let me see what you're looking at!
- 1
Emden in China, 1931. Her design was nothing cutting edge, but she did serve as the first major
construction project since the end of the Great War, and a testbed for welding in order to save
weight.
The last group of the Navigatori-class destroyers after being
Placed in commission in 1937.
The light cruiser Albatross passing through the Kiel canal, 1937. A member
of the Leipzig-class light cruisers, she would be lost in 1942 at the hands of
HMS Suffolk.
Depends on what you like for ships of course, but the middle italian destroyer is just digusting. The light cruiser at the end is probbaly the nicest looking, but the mini bridge is weird.
- 1
Axis destroyers always look a bit weird - German Type 1936s are another example of this. I think it's the second funnel those design have. It is tricky to get destroyers to look good with two funnels, especially if they are widely spaced - it throws the proportions out. For the Navigatoris the stubby rear rangefinder doesn't help either.
- 1
That might be part of it, having two of everything and just sticking them out the top in such a blunt way. The square and flat sides don't help either. It's like looking at the boxes everyone was making in the early 1900s.
- 1
Top one was the Emden, bottom one you quoted was one of the "L"-class light cruisers built by the KM this go round, which is just either Leipzig or Nuremburg repackaged to be one of my expanded Kriegsmarine.
Yeah, come wartime, the Italian army is seriously lacking in strength and supporting arms. They didn't listen to their German counterparts who were pushing for some corps and army assets to stiffen up the corps command groups, and paid for it further down the line in the Crimea and Caucasus.
Furthermore, the Italians never generated a clean-sheet destroyer design until after the war. All of their destroyers look almost identical.
I think that the best destroyer designs came out of the States (but, I admit, I might be a bit biased).
Now there's a mental image for you all, right there.
Yeah, come wartime, the Italian army is seriously lacking in strength and supporting arms. They didn't listen to their German counterparts who were pushing for some corps and army assets to stiffen up the corps command groups, and paid for it further down the line in the Crimea and Caucasus.
Furthermore, the Italians never generated a clean-sheet destroyer design until after the war. All of their destroyers look almost identical.
I think that the best destroyer designs came out of the States (but, I admit, I might be a bit biased).
Last edited:
- 1
Maybe not biased but in need of an eye test? We can debate effectiveness (which is mostly, but not entirely, unrelated to appearance) but in terms of looks the US destroyers made the Italian ones look handsome;
USS Drayton, Mahan class destroyer. This is not a pretty ship. It has the too far apart funnel issue, that weird wedge under the 'B' turret (which itself is far too high), the rear section is just a mess, I could go on.
They were effective designs, had very good Dual-Purpose guns and cutting edge engines. But it does challenge the Axis for 'Most hideous looking destroyer'.
- 1
I'd direct you to take a gander then, at the Royal Navy's own A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I-class destroyers... all have the same wedge (designed to keep water off the gun deck) and they seem to all have these notoriously square superstructure designs! And I'd have to say that those British destroyers bear a marked similarity to the Italian destroyers (especially those built during the war).
Regardless, none can touch the oddness of the Japanese destroyers...
Regardless, none can touch the oddness of the Japanese destroyers...
- 1