Sudden Patriotic Carnage

[Beagá]

You know, with the latest map in the latest patch; there is a tonne of rivers in the Low Countries. That makes that region far easier to defend over vanilla. Anyone else notice this? German AI might get bogged down there vs. French AI but in player vs. player perhaps it makes the difference.

Two front war really means Germany is screwed. Cpt. showed us that with his extremely aggressive onslaught into Poland as he figured attack is his greatest defence.

What's next? Costa del Carnage (Nat Spain)? Kentucky Fried Carnage (USA)? Chicken Chow Carnage (Nat China)? Or Á Cote de Carnage (France)? Maybe there should be a house rule that encourages the Comitern/Allies to compete for victory conditions. Force Comitern/Allies to Puppet Germany (customise a decision to release the approx cores of modern Germany)? It's very interesting how that would go. I think everyone here wants to see the fall of a player country. No disrespect to the player but the collapse would be a spectacular thing to behold.

Keep us updated.

Yeah with proper defense it can be very tough, specially because many simple people insist on cookie cutter 3 INF and ART divisions. Dunno if this is the case, did anyone build engineers here?

Also, since it´s a World War 2 game, there is nothing wrong with Germany and Axis being defeated. The problem is if it happens in one year as was the case here. And I really doubt if SU wouldn´t bog down in the lower countries even worse than Germany, considering their low tech and leadership and the fact they don´t have the Blitzkrieg and Destiny magic bullets to use. It would be a stalemated and boring game, probably. Soviets have no real navy or transports and therefore can´t do anything crazy and attack UK, for example.

 

[unmerged(174081)]

There is also the issue of the severly nerfed airpower in FtM compared to SF.
In the early war SF played into the germans hand by them having a large and efficient airforce.

I was not aware of the real effect of the airpower in SF until I started reading "Rank and File, a clerks war" by Uriah. When he started to post the losses from land and air it made for stunning reading.

Personally I found FtM to be less interesting due to the less bang for buck of the airforce. The varied weather in seasons made it quite important to time offensives in SF, but in FtM less so. There is less importance in the air than SF.

I beleive that in Sudden Patriotic Carnage Germany would have fared better with a "SF airforce"

 

[Beagá]

Properly used airforces are still very potent. But 1938 airforces without either doctrines and tech are rather weak. Nothing wrong with that, IMO.

Also it was suggested before and I do hope that Paradox implements a system to have the option to block air missions if weather is bad. It´s idiotic to see airforces doing missions even in stormy weather, specially if it´s CAGs.

 

[Lamahorse]

Main balancing feature that we need in MP, is a Nat China to resist Japan. Seriously, I really would like to see Nat China hold out until the USA joins. This would both divide the US from Europe and Japan's attention from the Middle East.

 

[DrakenPL]

CptEasy as China that would be awesome.

 

[Baltasar]

Main balancing feature that we need in MP, is a Nat China to resist Japan. Seriously, I really would like to see Nat China hold out until the USA joins. This would both divide the US from Europe and Japan's attention from the Middle East.

Nope. It would mean that Japan is doomed to begin with. Japan must concentrate on both China and the Pacific, the USA is free to choose her are of operation. Japan can not hurt the US, so they can as well send everything and the kitchen sink to Europe or the Pacific at their leisure. Japan has so little IC etc that without Chinese conquests, it'll fall quickly.

And Japan not threatening British posessions only means that the British have all the more reason to pull back all their forces from there to the home isles.

 

[Sachaztan]

Nope. It would mean that Japan is doomed to begin with. Japan must concentrate on both China and the Pacific, the USA is free to choose her are of operation. Japan can not hurt the US, so they can as well send everything and the kitchen sink to Europe or the Pacific at their leisure. Japan has so little IC etc that without Chinese conquests, it'll fall quickly.

And Japan not threatening British posessions only means that the British have all the more reason to pull back all their forces from there to the home isles.

If Japan can't defeat China until 41/42 then they deserve to lose the game anyway.

Surely you can see the benefits to the game of at least prolonging the war in China?

 

[Baltasar]

If Japan can't defeat China until 41/42 then they deserve to lose the game anyway.

Surely you can see the benefits to the game of at least prolonging the war in China?

Not really. Japan does need to conquer China to be able to fight the Allies. They do not have to stay out of the war until '41 and in fact they shouldn't. That campaign has to be finished within a certain timeframe or Japan will not be able to invest sufficient resources into her fleet and air arms to put up a decent fight. The Carnage games already start in '38, that's a few months lost for Japan already. The shorter the prewar period, the more it benefits the Allies / Commies.

 

[Sachaztan]

Not really. Japan does need to conquer China to be able to fight the Allies. They do not have to stay out of the war until '41 and in fact they shouldn't. That campaign has to be finished within a certain timeframe or Japan will not be able to invest sufficient resources into her fleet and air arms to put up a decent fight. The Carnage games already start in '38, that's a few months lost for Japan already. The shorter the prewar period, the more it benefits the Allies / Commies.

Wait aren't you the guy that complains about historical plausibility all the time? Japan rampaging across Asia doesn't sound very historical.

 

[Baltasar]

Wait aren't you the guy that complains about historical plausibility all the time? Japan rampaging across Asia doesn't sound very historical.

If you want to mix things which aren't connected here into a discussion, it'd be better to drop it right here and now.

If you want to discuss a set of rules which make an unbalanced game more balanced, you're welcome.

And as I said earlier, Japan can not take anything from the UK which the latter can not life without.

 

[darkvision]

If you want to mix things which aren't connected here into a discussion, it'd be better to drop it right here and now.

If you want to discuss a set of rules which make an unbalanced game more balanced, you're welcome.

And as I said earlier, Japan can not take anything from the UK which the latter can not life without.

And still, you're continuously talking about changing the house rules in favor of the AXIS, but you miss the point that the ALLIES almost always lose (not counting the last game). If you play a social game, you want a fair game. Meaning both parties have equal change. Futher you don't want to change to much outside game logic (with handmade rules).

In a MP game starting in 38 there isn't enough time to prepare for the COM and ALLIES. This means the AXIS have free reign, if they are careful and coordinate. In all their games so far, the SOV was attacked relatively early on from west and east and lacked the endurance to survive long enough.
In "el dente" the only reason the AXIS lost was because Italy failed. AXIS wanted to secure the Med and Italy focused on NAVY. But a chain of unluckyevents made Italy very weak early on. That weak spot was the key ingredient to get a successful Flying Circus, and that Flying Circus was the only thing that kept the SOV in the game for so long. And even then it was a marginal victory, with enough opportunity to come out the other way.

That's why not the AXIS but the ALLIES need more support. The best way to do that is to hamper Japan, releasing valuable resources for the UK and USSR. It isn't a big change, but i think this is enough to make it 50/50.

This will hold until the players of this group develop new tactics which break the balance again. There are some strategies which i haven't seen them use, but are very potent and within their house rules.

 

[loki100]

Time to stop this debate. If you can't discuss it politely, don't discuss it. We have issued a number of warnings around the behaviour of some commentators in the Carnage AARs. We have no desire to affect CptEasy and his group so it is worth reminding everyone that we can, and will, issue thread specific bans to individuals to stop any more hi-jacking and/or interminable debate in these AARs.

 

[Daffius]

And still, you're continuously talking about changing the house rules in favor of the AXIS, but you miss the point that the ALLIES almost always lose (not counting the last game).

No they don't. It's 3-3 overall!!

I do agree with Baltasar, in terms of balancing, a prolonged Japanese war will reduce the axis chances of Victory to close to nil. Think about it for a second.
- Japan cannot attack USSR
- US can focus solely (!) on Germany
- Britain does not need to focus on several fronts only Germany

If we want historical route, then fine... but then we also need to accept that Germany should always loose.

@Loki: I recon the debate can stay as it is related to this particular game, as long as its kept civil.

BTW: Just read the new DD on TFFH, that will be a massive (!) boost to the allies with lend lease.

 

[Lord Curlyton]

What if the Carnage series featured one in which there is a Nat.China player and instead of taking on China, Nat.China is allowed to reunite its cores (I know if they use the beta some are in Japanese/Manchuko hands so that isn't a good idea), at which point it joins the Axis? That way Japan can focus on Air and Navy from Day 1 and China can focus on Land and some Air. Would be interesting to see a China vs Soviet land war while they try and hold off Germany and Germany is trying to keep the Allies from storming the beaches.
In the end, though, the Carnage HRs are their HRs; if they bother someone too much there is no need to keep reading this excellent series of AARs. I know I'd personally HR differently but it doesn't bother me; I'll still be here reading.

 

[jju_57]

Playing is also a social event for us. I am not sure how fun it would be to sit in front of a computer screen without communication for hours.

You can talk socially but would have to be on the honor system not to coordinate daily plans with each other (Allies and SU that is).

 

[robw963]

I see I'm unfashionably late...again! I'll confess i don't have benefit of an overview of the entire Carnage series to date (looks like I'm going to need to go back and check the others out) but from what I'm gathering these look like amazing glimpses into epic multiplayer play. I've never tried multiplayer before and this makes me curious to try that sometime. From an AAR perspective, it must be hard to capture/communicate the thinking of each player. Are you guys all in the same building/house via LAN when you're playing? Or is this done through a server? very cool CptEasy...I'm glad I poked in here.

 

[Holy.Death]

The main problem is that it's the Axis against the Allies. The Comintern isn't acting on its own but always acts as a supporter for the Allies (or either way, you get the point). You could add more Comintern players - this should give the Far East a boost and generate another theatre for players who'd seek control over Asia, forcing all major parties to support their minor allies in a way (you can also make a house rule that you can always support an attacked ally against the attacker). As it is now the game is mostly for Europe and Asia is largely forgotten which is a mistake on strategic level to me. It's a suggestion only. I like to see your games but I want to enjoy global scale strategy.

 

[Sachaztan]

The main problem is that it's the Axis against the Allies. The Comintern isn't acting on its own but always acts as a supporter for the Allies (or either way, you get the point). You could add more Comintern players - this should give the Far East a boost and generate another theatre for players who'd seek control over Asia, forcing all major parties to support their minor allies in a way (you can also make a house rule that you can always support an attacked ally against the attacker). As it is now the game is mostly for Europe and Asia is largely forgotten which is a mistake on strategic level to me. It's a suggestion only. I like to see your games but I want to enjoy global scale strategy.

In most paradox games, this one included, Asia is very poorly reflected and implemented. Asia just doesn't matter as much as it should.