The Noble Carnage

[CptEasy]

Dear Forumers,

As you may know, the good ol’ captain has been out on some unspecified website adventures during Panzer Carnage. Well, adventures are good to widen your view but in this case it is now over.

But with adventures and wider views comes new ideas and knowledge. As the Carnagegroup sets out on a new bloody multiplayer clash I have chosen a new way to capture it and to tell the story. I dare say this AAR will be the first of its kind.

It is a little bit more time-taking than I thought but the result is… well… different. It is up to you to cheer me on or to politely inform me that it is the first of its kind because it’s a bloody stupid idea . In any case, as I am still in a “trial mode” I am happy for all kinds of feedback.

Version: TFH Carnage Mod
Starting date: 1938

Pacts and players
Allies/Commies: Alexander_Brunius, Cpt Easy, Maxyboy, Sir Henry
Axis: Daphne, Gamla Stan, Thelamon, Zid

 

[CptEasy]

Index

1938
Chapter I - September and onwards...

1939
Chapter II - July 1939
Chapter III - August 1939
Chapter IV - September 1939
Chapter V - October 1939
Chapter VI - November 1939

 

[CptEasy]

House Rules
(There are some minor changes I have not yet inserted in the text. And as usual, the Mods tends to get angry if you discuss these on the AAR forum. Pls PM me if its anything specific)

• Axis players can play all Axis countries and neutral Hungary. Allied/Commie players can play all Allied/Commie countries and neutral Nat China, Canada and Poland. Allied/Commie players are allowed to play USA in 1941 (if other house rules have not activated this already).

• Game starts Sept -38 on speed 3 until 1939. Then on speed 2 until “Danzig or war” when we go to speed 1. Alternatively, GER player can lower to speed 1 after May 1st, 1939. No pausing is allowed except for technical or rl-problems.

• No country is allowed to “guarantee” another.

• It is not allowed to puppet any state, other than on event or if selected by the played scenario (like Japan’s puppeting of China).

• Germany must follow the event that lead to war, including “Danzig or War”. Poland must oppose “Danzig or War”. Axis must activate “Danzig or War” before September 1st, 1939.

• No unholy Alliance

• Mol-Rib pact is voluntary

• After “Danzig of War”, if the Mol-Rib pact with USSR is active, Axis may not start wars with Finland or the Baltic states.

• With the MR-pact active, Soviet cannot DoW European countries (including Turkey but not Persia) – or against Germany as regulated by the NAP mechanisms. With MR-pact inactive, Soviet has no regulation on DoWs. Soviet is not allowed to attack anybody except on event, as long as Allies is not at war with Axis. (and USSR must go for historic option in Finland)

• USSR has special trade rules until 1941 (or war with any other major). They must accept all Axis deals if the deal doesn’t put USSR on a negative balance for that commodity. Axis-nations are bound by honor to not suggest deals that are “impossible or unlikely” to be accepted. Allies may not set any trades up with USSR until October -38, so Axis will have a chance to set up their trade.

• Japan and Italy can only declare limited war on USSR. GER must declare war by themselves but may declare a “full” war.

• The country declaring war must partake with more than 50% of the attacking land forces. This does not apply when an Axis country with less threat on USA than the declarer is partaking (All kind of illogic “threat-spread” should be avoided).

• Players must declare wars themselves. “Call to arms” only to AI.

• If UK DoW neutral Italy and Japan – the group will balance whatever neutrality decrease on US this action activates (although we are not entirely sure how this might work).

• Germany must have “Drang nach Osten” as its sole war goal against Soviet. Soviet must accept this. “Fight to the Bitter End” is not allowed.

• Japan may not rebase any air forces to land bases in the west before Barbarossa or July 1941. The opposite goes for European Axis.

• If Japan attacks Allies before USA’s entry, USA lose neutrality according to this formula: -0.18 monthly (modded).

• Axis has fleet restrictions until US joins. Japan and GER/ITA can only rebase to each other’s ports if they can reach it with a “move” order. This includes minors connected to either side. If Axis, Africa and the Arabic peninsula is considered “Europe” while Persia and everything eastwards is considered as Japan. American Axis is excluded.

• Japan must break all their trade deals with USA when they DoW Allies (and not offer/accept new one if US is AI run).

• USA lose 1 neutrality if Axis DoW on Spain (this is modded into the game if it happens).

• Allies may put a player on USA when Japan DoWs Allies (or when USA are accepted into Allies due to Axis threat (not due to Commie threat)).

• USA may not move troops, navy or planes in the pacific until they join Allies. This does not include their mainland west coast. This rule is cancelled 1942 even if Axis has not DoWed them – as long as it will not be in conflict with other HRs on US-movements.

• USA may not place troops in Allied provinces before they become Allies. USA may not in any way lend or give troops to the Allies before USA enter the war.

• Allies may not “allow debt” to other human played Allies – but to AI run minors is ok. USA may always “allow debt” to whomever. Axis may “allow debt” to whomever.

• Players are only allowed to build 7 of any fort in any province

• Radars may only be built through the provinces. It is not allowed to build them “freely” in the production queue and then stack in provinces. Radar Cap on 5.

• Minors are allowed to “license build”. Majors can only have 12 IC of “license build” active at any time. They are however, always entitled 1 unit being built at any time, regardless of the cost (meaning that it’s ok to build 1 bomber even if it costs more than 12 IC. 1 brigade, however, is considered 1 unit).

• Players are not allowed to build units as reserves.

• Convoys must be on for periods of time as the game allows a newly opened convoy to immediately retrieve everything that’s been piling up (Bug!). Players are “bound by honor” to not blip them on and off. A newly started resource convoy must be on for at least 3 weeks before it can be turned off (but if all convoys are sunk before that they don’t need to add extras of course)

• The game ends in mid 1945. Allies/Commies must have 2/3 of the VPs to win (Hoping to prolongue a game where Axis-advance has stopped).

• Lend Lease – Maximum 10% of shareable ICs (this is modded)

• Log strikes with rockets are banned.

• Soviet must choose “Finland – settle for what we came for” or whatever it is called. Also, they are not allowed to re-attack as long as they have the RM-pact with Germany (as an attack on Finland will break it).

• No tech-stealing missions on countries you are allied with.

• Exp Forces:
 Countries may give unlimited amount of exp forces as long as they never fight against a country which they are not in war with. Only land units and transports are allowed.
 Majors can give to majors, and majors can give to minors. Minors cannot give to majors (we don’t want majors to strip mine minors), more than 2 divisions.
 If the country giving the exp forces is defeated – only two of these divisions may stay in service. The rest must be disbanded.

• HR of max 6 wings per stack. Lt.General is the highest rank allowed (and modded so). If air-battle attracts several stacks it can’t be helped. Higher penalties for stacking modded.

• HR of max 18 ships per stack. Max 2 allied stacks in each province or game is paused and excess planes deleted. Stray subs do not count. Admirals has been modded down to 18 ships). Higher penalties for stacking modded.

• Some mods on ships. CAGs slightly less efficient. Modern BBs faster versus older CVs. Some other anti-doomstacking mods.

• HARM: Cost increase 25% and terrain modifiers increased +50%

. NAV: Slightly cheaper

• Mod on spy mission effectiveness:
Raise NU 0.04
Lower NU 0.02
This means 30 vs 10 spies (as in USSR) leads to effective -2.4% NU / year, which is painful but not game-breaking. This change also encourages the defender to go active spy-hunting rather than using the passive, NU-increasing, defence.

China buff:
China has 100% unity
1. Starts when 40% of national provinces are conquered
+15% territorial pride
+15% org regain
+5% land organisation

2. At 55% of national provinces conquered
+15% industrial efficency
+15% org regain
+5% land organisation

3. At 70% of national provinces conquered
+15% territorial pride
+15% industrial efficiency
+15% org regain

New Strategic event – Pacific Energizer
If Japan holds Honolulu – Naval org +20%, Supplies +20%
If US holds Iwo Jima – Land org +10%
For Japan it will show as
* Is Japan
* Japan controls Honolulu
For US it is
* Is USA
* USA controls Iwo Jima

 

[Hawke0]

Sounds interesting. The China buff in particular should replicate the actual war effectively.

 

[jacobsighs]

I can't wait to read it!

 

[Rastrigin]

Time to play some Soviet Union

 

[CptEasy]

Time to play some Soviet Union

SU is very interesting but not optimal for AAR writing as the first few years is pretty unintresting and the actual war in some cases is short. But if the war turns out to be long... well then it will become awesome.

 

[Jagdpnzr]

I reckon I can adjust back to this and also come to terms with Capt playing as an Ally

 

[CptEasy]

Chapter I

Europe is a brewing soup of activities and preparations. Watch how the table is set - and get an introduction to the new style of the Carnage AAR. So lean back, turn the volume up a bit and let the story come to you! Enjoy!

Cpt Easy
Over and Out

 

[oskar-kar]

It's definitely something new and interesting, but I must say that I still prefer good old AAR than Let's Play, but your idea of making a hybrid of Let's Play and AAR is something new. Nevertheless I'm still following this.

My personal sugestion is that you should add more in-game material (screenshots + commentary or gameplay + commentary) about what you are doing in-game (production, technology, diplomacy etc., because I am assuming that Medium Armor, Anti-Tank and anti-submarine equipment wasn't the only things you did during half of year or was it?). But it will of course look different in time of war, so you can aswell wait with the changes till war.

 

[CptEasy]

It's definitely something new and interesting, but I must say that I still prefer good old AAR than Let's Play, but your idea of making a hybrid of Let's Play and AAR is something new. Nevertheless I'm still following this.

My personal sugestion is that you should add more in-game material (screenshots + commentary or gameplay + commentary) about what you are doing in-game (production, technology, diplomacy etc., because I am assuming that Medium Armor, Anti-Tank and anti-submarine equipment wasn't the only things you did during half of year or was it?). But it will of course look different in time of war, so you can aswell wait with the changes till war.

Heh, well I quite agree myself. I think pure Let's Play is quite lame for games such as HoI, if they are not in a "go through" style or focussed on something very specific. Much more fitting for fast action packed games. But as I have been writing quite a few classic AARs now, I got to find a new way - for good or for worse - or degenerate. Thanks for your suggestion. The ballance between the different parts is really the trick and I'm not there yet. And as the first 9 chapters is already made I can say it will vary. Just as you already has anticipated, the in game stuff will increase when the war actually get started. In any case, I make a note in my feedback book that Oskar-kar wants more in game stuff

 

[Avindian]

Eager to see how this turns out!

 

[Rastrigin]

SU is very interesting but not optimal for AAR writing as the first few years is pretty unintresting and the actual war in some cases is short. But if the war turns out to be long... well then it will become awesome.

I really enjoyed your defensive warfare during blitz carnage. It doesn't happen often to see you playing defensively (when forces are even enough not to be hopeless). I think on Soviet Union you'd produce some awesome stuff!

 

[CptEasy]

I really enjoyed your defensive warfare during blitz carnage. It doesn't happen often to see you playing defensively (when forces are even enough not to be hopeless). I think on Soviet Union you'd produce some awesome stuff!

I was quite disapointed that the only time I have been playing SU it became an extremely short game with Germany being crushed in 1939 or something. So, SU is definately a possible candidate for my next country of choice. But it will hopefully take some time before we get through this one. I am actually eager to see how Alex_Brunius manages SU during Barbarossa since he is fairly new to the Carnage Group and his strengths and weakneses are not known to us yet.... if we will have a classic Barbarossa at all. It would not surprise me if Zid and Thelamon (on Germany) finds a completely new angle.

 

[Jagdpnzr]

It would not surprise me if Zid and Thelamon (on Germany) finds a completely new angle.

The amphibious assault during Barbarossa of Panzer Carnage seemed to open things up well. Zid being a jack of all trades, but an Ace when it comes to amphibious assaults, I also am interested to see which angle(s) he uses.

 

[Daffius]

I've been following all carnage games til now and this new style is definately interesting. However I prefered the old written AAR style more, especially your writing style in the last couple of games. Perhaps its me, but I'm not such a fan of 'individual' commentary on characters. I do acknowledge the effort put into this and I'll continue following none the less

 

[Cybvep]

I know that some people adore all this narrative stuff and sometimes I enjoy it, too, but TBH, I think that it's unnecessary in a MP AAR. MP games are highly competitive and I'm mostly interested in the meat, i.e. the gameplay. I love when the players describe their actions in detail and present their reasoning for choosing a particular course of action. I think that you are very good at doing this, Cpt, as the popularity of your AARs shows.
Another important thing in a MP AAR for me is the presentation. While I think that the presentation quality in the Carnage AARs is quite good, I read AARs which were better in that regard. IMO Paglia is the master here. I especially like the way he turns screenshots into maps. Strategy nerds usually like maps in general, since they are both informative and remind us of the things we see in historical books.
Speaking about historical books, you know what I can never get enough of? Statistics. Charts. Tables. I think that they can greatly enhance the presentation and they are not that hard to make, either.

IMO you should focus on the above, but I know that some people like to experiment from time to time, so feel free to do whatever brings you pleasure. I'm an old-time fan and I will follow your AARs no matter what .

As for the website, while I had no problem with it, I think that it's good that you abandoned it. Too much time investment for too little gain, I guess.

 

[CptEasy]

The amphibious assault during Barbarossa of Panzer Carnage seemed to open things up well. Zid being a jack of all trades, but an Ace when it comes to amphibious assaults, I also am interested to see which angle(s) he uses.

And you will Amphibs can sometimes be a little bit gamey in MP HoI, but they can be extremely interesting as well and open up to completely new things. And I think the new amphib rules in TFH makes things one step more realistic even if there's plenty more to do to HoI4... hopefully.

I've been following all carnage games til now and this new style is definately interesting. However I prefered the old written AAR style more, especially your writing style in the last couple of games. Perhaps its me, but I'm not such a fan of 'individual' commentary on characters. I do acknowledge the effort put into this and I'll continue following none the less

I know that some people adore all this narrative stuff and sometimes I enjoy it, too, but TBH, I think that it's unnecessary in a MP AAR. MP games are highly competitive and I'm mostly interested in the meat, i.e. the gameplay. I love when the players describe their actions in detail and present their reasoning for choosing a particular course of action. I think that you are very good at doing this, Cpt, as the popularity of your AARs shows.
Another important thing in a MP AAR for me is the presentation. While I think that the presentation quality in the Carnage AARs is quite good, I read AARs which were better in that regard. IMO Paglia is the master here. I especially like the way he turns screenshots into maps. Strategy nerds usually like maps in general, since they are both informative and remind us of the things we see in historical books.
Speaking about historical books, you know what I can never get enough of? Statistics. Charts. Tables. I think that they can greatly enhance the presentation and they are not that hard to make, either.

IMO you should focus on the above, but I know that some people like to experiment from time to time, so feel free to do whatever brings you pleasure. I'm an old-time fan and I will follow your AARs no matter what .

As for the website, while I had no problem with it, I think that it's good that you abandoned it. Too much time investment for too little gain, I guess.

Thanks guys. Yeah, I know the narrative stuff if not the preferred style on the Forum. But I'm trying to get all kinds of styles into the same package. I agree the first chapter got a little too much of the narrative. It will be somewhat less in general. And you'll get some of your stats, Cybe, although I am always a little catious to hamper the flow of the story by too thick stuff. Yeah, Paglia's stuff is awesome. I'll check in on him to get some inspiration.

 

[Forster]

I will follow this, CPT. I'm not too sure I like this new way, but I may change. Whatever you guys do, I am sure it will be interesting.

 

[CptEasy]

I will follow this, CPT. I'm not too sure I like this new way, but I may change. Whatever you guys do, I am sure it will be interesting.

Please do. I am still in an explorative phase and need comments to help improve. In the pre-war parts, for example, there's a lot of narrative but it is decreasing somewhat by time as I felt it slowed down the pace too much. And there's a lot of other stuff to tinker with.