January 42?

[unmerged(123225)]

Doesn't prove anything. They just played it to June 4th, 1942.

It would also go against the general philosophy of not having scenario start on the eve of critical "point" battles. The 1944 scenario doesn't start with D-Day (it does start with the Soviet summer offensive, but it's not a situation that could go either way). The only new scenario actually confirmed by Paradox, at any point, is the February 1943 post-Stalingrad one.

So they played an alpha game from 36' all the way to exactly 0:00 4 June 1942 with Europe conquered exactly as they were on June of 1942 and cancelled all production to show that spare IC of 216 is not being used so that they can confuse us with the impression that they are making a 1942 scenario? And they did the exact same for 1940 scenario? In EU3 most of the book marked dates were just before major wars. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the same for HoI3 even if it's major operations intead of wars.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

So there will be 1942 scenario ?

 

[unmerged(37697)]

So there will be 1942 scenario ?

Apparently so!

 

[Will Lucky]

If you watched that video from last Month when Johan was showing off a few features from the game you might have noticed on the Scenerio Selection Screen that there was a total of 9 Scenerios, of course it's unknown if any of them were battle scenerios.

 

[Alexander Seil]

Then mark my words - it's a TERRIBLE idea.

Paradox does not have the expertise or the resources to develop and test accurate scenario setups for even 5, let alone 9, full scenarios.

And don't forget the hundreds of threads that will whine about Midway ending with Japanese victory in 9 out of 10 cases because of some peculiarity in the combat engine (or simply plain luck and minute variations in how the battle occurs). Oh man.

 

[unmerged(54763)]

Apparently so!

I allready think this will be my favorite!
Alongside 1936 of course.

 

[unmerged(37697)]

Then mark my words - it's a TERRIBLE idea.

Paradox does not have the expertise or the resources to develop and test accurate scenario setups for even 5, let alone 9, full scenarios.

And don't forget the hundreds of threads that will whine about Midway ending with Japanese victory in 9 out of 10 cases because of some peculiarity in the combat engine (or simply plain luck and minute variations in how the battle occurs). Oh man.

Regrettably, I am inclined to agree, but so long as these things are fixed through consistent patching (and they don't give up on fixing database errors like they did with EU3) I don't think it will be too much of a problem.

More is not always better, clearly, butwith a '36 - '48 timeline I would probably have gone for '36, '39, '41 and '44 scenarios. These are the standard HoI2 scenarios IIRC, though they later added a (poor) '38 scenario supposedly for MP purposes.

I'm not too fussed about a '38 scenario myself - there's little major difference between that and the '36 one.

Still '43 and '45 would be awesome, and I think '43 was confirmed by a poll last year, so it's looking good. o

 

[unmerged(123225)]

Then mark my words - it's a TERRIBLE idea.

Paradox does not have the expertise or the resources to develop and test accurate scenario setups for even 5, let alone 9, full scenarios.

And don't forget the hundreds of threads that will whine about Midway ending with Japanese victory in 9 out of 10 cases because of some peculiarity in the combat engine (or simply plain luck and minute variations in how the battle occurs). Oh man.

I don't think the scenario will start BANG with the battle. Most likely will start with the opposing fleet just one province apart.

I for one is hopeful about the new scenarios even though 36' will be the most played one ofcourse.

 

[talt]

Then mark my words - it's a TERRIBLE idea.

Paradox does not have the expertise or the resources to develop and test accurate scenario setups for even 5, let alone 9, full scenarios.

And don't forget the hundreds of threads that will whine about Midway ending with Japanese victory in 9 out of 10 cases because of some peculiarity in the combat engine (or simply plain luck and minute variations in how the battle occurs). Oh man.

Japan only just lost Midway, the battle was decided by sheer chance, in that the Japanese were refueling their planes just as the US divebombers came down on them. If the divebombers had been a couple of minutes late, the carriers wouldn't have been wrecked and the battle could well have been the other way round (USA losing all carriers and Japan losing at most one or two).

In other news, I think a 1942 would be incredible, particuarly playing as the USA, Germany or the USSR, it's at the point when the war is starting to turn and Germany would have to work very hard to win...

 

[unmerged(112153)]

Here's a screenshot for proof:

June 4th is the begining of the battle of Midway right?

If you look closely at Leningrad you see the city isnt encircled, wich it was at that time, so i think this isnt a starting point but just a betatest.

Few months back we had a poll to vote for a starting date and the winner was feb 1943, just afther the German surrender at Stalingrad, people could also vote for nov 1942 but no words were given for any starting date in 1942.

So dont expect this is a starting date... for now.

 

[unmerged(37697)]

If you look closely at Leningrad you see the city isnt encircled, wich it was at that time, so i think this isnt a starting point but just a betatest.

Few months back we had a poll to vote for a starting date and the winner was feb 1943, just afther the German surrender at Stalingrad, people could also vote for nov 1942 but no words were given for any starting date in 1942.

So dont expect this is a starting date... for now.

Why the hell would they go to all that trouble for the purposes of a 'betatest' and not tweak it as a scenario?

You can't choose any date like in EU3, and the fact that the date is the 4th of June suggests that some thought has gone into this. Okay, Leningrad is a valid point but it could just be a relatively simple mistake made early on.

For my money, this is clearly going to be a scenario.