British surrender: As stated before, there's an error in the initial trigger event for the dissolution of the British Empire, always requiring to get ENG down to below 5 VP, which is nearly equivalent to total occupation. My intention was to allow for a british surrender if its mainland and colonial keypoints are lost, thus balking any hopes for salvation by the USA or even SOV. Call it the highest plausible stakes from a historical point of view. But as Rommel already mentioned, we also have to take the gaming perspective into account. One shall simply not be able to take out all of the Western Allies in another Blitzkrieg in 1940 (= taking the British Isles + sinking the Home Fleet), thereby eliminating any possible threat (+ several events...) and being able to care about an isolated SOV. Yeah, it is possible against the AI, and it's even a rather easy job if you go for that plan from the very beginning, but please keep in mind what i already wrote two pages ago:
On the other hand, naval AI in general is rather inaccessible. Aside from defining high priority seazones, there's not much one could do to improve either fleet composition or mission selection. AFAIK, even the AI settings for fleet type numbers are ignored and replaced by hardcoded values for each nation. That's why the overwhelming allied naval superiority in numbers doesn't translate into results on the battlefield. Their fleets are numerous, but way too small, and so they are defeated easily. Moreover, there seems to be no preference for escorting transport ships or for covering invasions.
All in all, the Allies terribly suffer from this AI weakness, especially against human players. One well-balanced human fleet + several dock time replacement ships will (over time) be able to deal with a ridiculous amount of enemy ships.
We're hoping for future versions of DH to improve AI behavior and modability.
Under human control, the Royal Navy would prevent an invasion with ease, even against 200 subs. That's the situation in MP games and that's what we're balancing the unit values on. We could impose terrible sanctions on a human player here or add even more coastal garrisons for the british AI to make up for the deficiencies in AI fleet management, but that's something nobody would really enjoy. We rather hope for future options to improve AI behavior so that even thinking about an early Sealion would seem as ludicrous as it did back then in 1940.
US surrender: There already is a distinction in the surrender event. You have to control US territory to unlock the option for setting up a puppet state. If you just drop nuclear bombs from far away, you may just take their colonies and make peace. I agree that partitioning the country and setting up a military administration would have been a more viable and plausible option, but that's where i decided in favor of the gaming perspective: As soon as you've reached US surrender in-game,
there most likely isn't anything left to do anymore and the game is over. ENG, FRA, SOV, USA, most british minors...all of them are occupied, partitioned or even allied.
I prefered to reward the player and tell him "OK, it's over, you're king of the world!" by giving him this precious prey over setting up another story about US partitioning to deal with possible uprisings and stuff.
Serbia: a) claims instead of national provinces - intended b) stationary units - not intended, maybe an AI issue or just stemming from the fact that the serbian AI prefers garrison builds
)
