Long Campaign edit?

[Martock]

I'd like to know if it's possible to edit the long campaign to that I can play from '39 to '46 or longer. While I can just generate a simple campaign, that only allows me to select 3 opponents that's dull. I'd like to play a 'what if' scenario that has WWII ending in late 46 or even in '49. Is this possible?

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Martock

I'd like to know if it's possible to edit the long campaign to that I can play from '39 to '46 or longer. While I can just generate a simple campaign, that only allows me to select 3 opponents that's dull. I'd like to play a 'what if' scenario that has WWII ending in late 46 or even in '49. Is this possible?

The WW2 Long Campaign is based on the historical events of WW2. Therefore some sort of "what-if" is quite naturally entirely impossible in any form of scripted format, since it did not happen in the first place. I cannot write the hundreds of lines of C++ for the script of some alt-WW2 that has no documented time-line.

The game ends in 1946 - so there is no way to play to 49.

Andy

[Martock]

Oh well that stinks. Thanks for letting me know.

[gila]

To tell the truth i've never finished a campaign against the AI.
After 10 or so battles units become elite and there is less challenge.
The AI stays the same and no experince gain between battles but puts more units in play to compensate and soon it's much like a turkey shoot and that gets somewhat old.
Some of the hardest and fun battles IMO are the first few ones.

[Imp]

Originally Posted by gila

To tell the truth i've never finished a campaign against the AI.
After 10 or so battles units become elite and there is less challenge.
The AI stays the same and no experince gain between battles but puts more units in play to compensate and soon it's much like a turkey shoot and that gets somewhat old.
Some of the hardest and fun battles IMO are the first few ones.

Yes the experiece gets so good it becomes silly, the thing to do is sell them off. After half a dozen battles just replace them. I do with everything though used to keep my FOOs but you never get one with 0.4 call time in a regular battle so why would you in a campaign. If you want to make things a bit easier keep your Company Cos so rallying is better across the board to represent a battle hardened force.

[Zinegata]

Originally Posted by Imp

Yes the experiece gets so good it becomes silly, the thing to do is sell them off. After half a dozen battles just replace them. I do with everything though used to keep my FOOs but you never get one with 0.4 call time in a regular battle so why would you in a campaign. If you want to make things a bit easier keep your Company Cos so rallying is better across the board to represent a battle hardened force.

Or you can do an "Iron Man" campaign where you don't save/load whenever a unit is killed. Even elite units will get killed eventually by a lucky shot or two, and you'd need to train new replacements

My original Polish Long Campaign (1939-1945) featured two tank crews out of five that managed to survived from Sep 1939 (!), fought all the way through Norway, North Africa, and finally the Falaise gap. Both had several tanks shot out from under them, and had a pretty godly level of armor skill (Over 100 I think) and over a hundred kills apiece. It was kinda neat seeing those two survive the whole war, although the top tank ace in the platoon (147 kills I think) was a tanker who joined my force in Norway.

Squads tend to die less often though. Of my 12 or so rifle squads, 9 of the originals survived. Two were wiped out during the Polish Campaign, while the third died leading the company in an epic (and successful!) bayonet charge against an entire Italian battalion sometime in 1941.

[Imp]

What is it with this fascination for extending the war, seems to appeal to a lot of people & I cant realy see why as it becomes lopsided. Simplifying things & forgeting things like oil & the A-bomb Germany does not stand a chance.
At the start of the war they had superior tactics compared to there opponents. By the end this was gone even the USA with its late entry learnt fast as they did in the Pacific. On the whole Germany had better or equal equipment for the fist half of the war but again the Allies caught up & by the end were on a reasonably even footing. So if it contines Germany is fighting a tacticaly equal opponent greatly outnumbered & they are going to face having inferior equipment to boot as the Allies continue producing better stuff. The vehcles available in MBT would just have appeared in some form earlier driven by the continued war effort & the heavies that were made would have been more prolific if there was a need for them. As in something to shoot at other than infantry which Shermans & the like did well enough. The only reason I can see for wanting it extended is to give the Allies an easy ride in any theatre unless you rewrote the war from 1/3rd in which now makes most of the stuff in the game what ifs.

[Martock]

Originally Posted by Imp

What is it with this fascination for extending the war, seems to appeal to a lot of people & I cant realy see why as it becomes lopsided.

I'll give the answer that helps sustain may closely held beliefs and religions the world over.
.
.
.
Just cuz.

[Martock]

I don't imagine I'll end up finishing a long campaign either but maybe I will. I've done it in the past quite often, though that was years ago. Still I had hopes it was just a simple file change as opposed to many lines of programming.

[Martock]

I thought that if a unit was wounded enough that it's experience levels would suffer? That would make sense given new recruits would be brought in to replace lost ones. Is that even modeled in this game?