Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

[Lindsey]

Hi, can't wait to play this mod !!!
Just installed with generic mod manager, the main mod plus the wavy flags and the panzer corps 1.31
Start the game but not getting that screen shown at top of this thread. Any help appreciated thanks.

[Ostrava]

If you have the game on Steam, disconnect Steam before launching the game via PanzerCorps.exe in your folder.

[Lindsey]

Thanks !
Well, don't get that initial screen but it seems to work. Have been playing one of the campaigns but after Poland and Norway, once in the France campaign I've reached a point where game crashes with C++ runtime error.

[Uhu]

I think, that is a common issue. I many times encountered this, regardless of the mod, or patch version. Interesting though, that not so many players encounter this. Case unknown. My solution was, that I made many-many saves, even in the given turn. I think, the bug occurs mostly before Dunkirk is done. So, when the issue came, I tried to reload one of the saves from the last turn. Many were not good, as the crash still happened, but somewhere, which I reloaded and tried to do things slightly different (nut sure of this, I remember so), and than I could avoid the crash.

Thanks !
Well, don't get that initial screen but it seems to work. Have been playing one of the campaigns but after Poland and Norway, once in the France campaign I've reached a point where game crashes with C++ runtime error.

[Lindsey]

Thanks, I did reaload older saves but also got crash at the same point as before, so have had to stop playing this mod unfortunately.

[empedocles]

Hi again. Mcguba thanks again for the creating the most addictive game in my life. It’s becoming an issue as I keep dreaming about conquering Stalingrad and sneaking out of bed at 5AM to play some turns before wife wakes up.

Some questions:
1- In my current play I decided to do a “Great Britain” first approach. So far so good, but I got the Kursk salient message about turn 44 and I was wondering what were the in game consequences of not suppressing the salient. Will more units appear if I don’t do it? (it’s virtually impossible as my focus is somewhere else).
2- Considering it’s mid 1943 right now, will the conquering of certain key cities in Russia (Moscow, Leningrad or Kiev) trigger the same level of reinforcements as if it were 1941? I’m talking about the quantity and the quality (I imagine that a 1941 T-34 will not be a good reinforcement if it reaches the frontline in 1944.

Goodbye!

[empedocles]

Another question!! (the more I play, the more questions I have)

3-Regarding the Tirpitz ship in Norway. If I conquer Britain, am I free to use it as I like? It's a shame leaving it there.

[McGuba]

@ McGuba. Excellent work, congratulations.
A humble request, it could be possible to create a version to play grand campaign.
Thank you.

It is a recurring request and I might do it later, at some point. My main problem is I do not really see the point in playing an unhistorical campaing with a historical set of units. They might not be compatible with each other.

Thanks, I did reaload older saves but also got crash at the same point as before, so have had to stop playing this mod unfortunately.

I would really like to have one or more of these erroneous saves so that I can check if I can recreate this issue, with a possiblility to solve it somehow. I never really had this so I have no idea what causes it and why only for some players.

Thus it would be nice if you or Uhu could upload one or more of these saves to somewhere or send me via e-mail.

By the way, one can also start with the big 1941 Barbarossa scenario, skipping the earlier scenarios. That main scenario seems to be stable.

Hi again. Mcguba thanks again for the creating the most addictive game in my life. It’s becoming an issue as I keep dreaming about conquering Stalingrad and sneaking out of bed at 5AM to play some turns before wife wakes up.

Haha, yes, probably the biggest drawback of this mod is that it can be very addictive. That's why I also try to take a break sometimes.

Some questions:
1- In my current play I decided to do a “Great Britain” first approach. So far so good, but I got the Kursk salient message about turn 44 and I was wondering what were the in game consequences of not suppressing the salient. Will more units appear if I don’t do it? (it’s virtually impossible as my focus is somewhere else).

Soviet units will start an offensive starting from the Kursk area some time later, wheter or not they are being "suppressed" by the player. But the Soviets will not get more units if the player ignores this force concentration. It is just the thing that they will have more units gathering there undisturbed and they will attack en masse.

2- Considering it’s mid 1943 right now, will the conquering of certain key cities in Russia (Moscow, Leningrad or Kiev) trigger the same level of reinforcements as if it were 1941? I’m talking about the quantity and the quality (I imagine that a 1941 T-34 will not be a good reinforcement if it reaches the frontline in 1944.

The later you conquer these main objectives the less Soviet reinforcement units will be affected. Normally, obsolete units like T-34/41 do not appear after their historical timeframe, but there can be several such units already on the map which appeared earlier and only wait for their time to attack, for example around Moscow (if the player have not captured it by then). But the new reinforcement units appearing after 1943 will be all up to date.

3-Regarding the Tirpitz ship in Norway. If I conquer Britain, am I free to use it as I like? It's a shame leaving it there.

The Tirpitz can be moved out of Trondheim safely if at least one English main victory objective city is captured in Britain by the Axis. If the Axis makes a strong foothold in Britain the British are concentrating on the defense of their island and not on invading Norway or France.

[Lindsey]

Sorry I had already deleted the old saves. Will send you next time I try the mod.

[JimmyC]

...Cyprus, you mean.

Well done, I always found this option scary as it means putting lots of transports in the water before air/naval spremacy is achieved. How big is your Syria Korps? I suppose you hunt down the subs aggressively from the get-go?

Sorry for the slow response, but I went away over Christmas/NY.

Yes, I meant Cyprus.

With the oilfield force and assuming you aren’t going to reload saves, I would recommend 3 armoured units, 2 artillery (at least 1 self propelled) and about 4 or 5 infantry (all in transports). I also like to bring along one of the Italian tactical bombers (as they have great range) and the long range scout plane. These will help to spot and bloody the enemy, but aren’t essential.

I find the Euphrates relatively easy to cross, but the Tigris is much better defended. A Pioniere is useful or otherwise barrage the heavily entrenched infantry with artillery and then directly assault with infantry. I use the Brandenburgers and Fallschirmjäger (if still alive) to help take out the artillery or at least maul it so that you can directly attack the cities.

Just remember that it is slow going crossing the desert, so you want everything to be in tracked transports (wheeled transports are only slightly better than foot when crossing dunes).

[JimmyC]

Am up to around turn 22 of my current playthrough in which i am doing Sealion (the invasion of Britain). It was very frustrating as the Allies just move units next to wherever your landing craft are, preventing the troops from landing. Sure you can then bombard the enemy, but they just reinforce them or move them away and move another unit there instead. It took me a while to realise that the way to do it is to reduce a bunker or radar tower to 1 strength, then move your transport next to it. In your next turn, destroy the bunker/radar and land your troop. If you destroy it and then give the Allies their turn before landing, they will just move a unit there and block the landing.

I am surprised by the reaction of the Allies following the invasion, especially the surface fleet, but also the enemy air forces. They are behaving in ways i didnt expect. I won't post any spoilers here about it, but will likely write up a short AAR when i have the time.

[hugh2711]

I found one of the differences between version 1.8. and 1.9 was in 1.8 and previous you could invade via the east coast but in 1.9 I had the same problem you described and had to go via the south coast instead.

[JimmyC]

What are people’s thoughts on the A-8? You trade 2 less initiative for 2 additional air attack. I generally skip the upgrade and keep the A-5 but am not sure if this is the best move or not? It seems to me that when playing as the Axis, it is all about survivability over hitting power (which is why, for example, the Marder series is deficient compared to Stug’s). The same is true (although less pronounced) for the A-8 v A-5. You are trading survivability for extra hitting power. So for me it appears sub-optimal.

Am interested to hear others thoughts.

[JimmyC]

#SPOILER#

I love the Irish uprising that occurs when you capture London. And also that it is very quickly crushed. And then the speech by King George where you replicate his stutter! Little things like this make the game so cool.

[empedocles]

#SPOILER#

I love the Irish uprising that occurs when you capture London. And also that it is very quickly crushed. And then the speech by King George where you replicate his stutter! Little things like this make the game so cool.

Indeed, the more of these little things, the merrier.

Sumnmary of my latest game where I was finally able to claim a DV on freaking turn 99!

General Strategy: I moved quickly to seize Britain and Afrika first. I destroyed the soviet air fleet but didn't advance a step east except for a landing in the caucasus with the intention of catpuring the first Oil field.

In Afrika I landed units near Aleppo and used them to clear part of Israel, repel the brittish counter attack and dig in waiting for Monty. I didn't try to conquer Tobruk but moved east to seize Egypt. Monty did as planned and attacked my units in Syria unit by unit. It was easier to defeat this way. Then I moved east and finished the conquering of Baghdad and the other oil field.

Invaded GB by the south (The only possible way?) and managed to criple the brittish navy with bombers. Slowly moved north while maintaining air supremacy (which was lost in the east)

East frot:
After blocking the sovite advance near Konisberg in late 1941 all things where quite. The fun began in Jan 1943 when I started moving east while at the same waiting for the main onslaught in the south.
This took me longer than anticipated and the tide started to turn when I finally got the Panther A version. I used it (and all available artillery) to conquer Leningrad by Sep 1943.

Next, the best part of the campaign happened in early 1944. A huge, and I mean huge, quantity of soviet units trying to push their way through Army Group centre near Smolensk. No matter what I threwe at them, they just kept coming and I started to loose ground, barely holding at Minsk.
Same thing around Kursk.

It was in late 1944 that I realized that I was not going to win this game if I kept trying to pass through that army, so I changed my strategy and shifted some units north in order to attack Moscow from the Leningrad area. This tactic worked like a charm!
In the south, after conquering Baku and with the influx of the units from the Middle East I slowly moved north to Stalingrad from Askhatran. This tactic is better as you attack the city from the east and then moving north to conquer Stalin's bunker is easier. Just when I was about to blow that thing up, I received the visit of 2-3 IS-3 tanks which were almost unstoppable. I wish I had a King tiger II here. Maybe the player could get one in Feb-1945 no matter the war situation???
From Moscow I moved west and north to conquer the following cities but at this point of the game my biggest enemy was time. Luckily the Panther G is a hell of a tank with long range so I managed to conquer the last soviet city in Turn 99 giving me the first DV after countless hours of frustration.
Mcguba, again, thank you so much for this mod.

[JimmyC]

Sounds like a great playthrough empedocles. You should write up a more detailed AAR with some pics. As part of your Caucus landing, did you disband some units so that you could recruit more? I’m currently around 1/3 of the way into my current playthrough which is taking a somewhat similar approach as you, however I’m not heading for the Caucuses and will instead just aim to isolate that region. How did you defeat Torch?

[empedocles]

I HAD to disband units. Specifically by 1942 when you get tons of ligh units in the form of romanian, hungarian infantry. I think I disbanded 3 or 4 of the weaker ones in order to make room for 2 arts in the caucasus and 1 PZ IV G. This helped me a lot when soviets tried to retake Grozny.

Regarding Torch, I prepared in advance and sent some of the best italian mountain infantry, artillery, a 7.5cm AT and the tiger to Afrika, along with a PZ III that by Dec 1942 I was able to withdraw from England and move south to Tunis.
Same happened on the air. By that time England was almost finished so I could move a couple of fighters to defend Tunis. italian navy was also key to sink the allied navy units coming in from Gibraltar.
I only defended the inmediate area close to Tunis. Americans bypassed it and even conquered Argelia, but after Torch was defeated (and the PZII upgraded to a Panther) it was really easy to reconquer Algeria and take Tobruk.

[McGuba]

Sorry I had already deleted the old saves. Will send you next time I try the mod.

OK. Maybe Uhu or someone else has such a save? (The one just before a possible game crash in the France 1940 scenario.)

I am surprised by the reaction of the Allies following the invasion, especially the surface fleet, but also the enemy air forces. They are behaving in ways i didnt expect. I won't post any spoilers here about it, but will likely write up a short AAR when i have the time.

It would be nice to know what you mean by that.

I found one of the differences between version 1.8. and 1.9 was in 1.8 and previous you could invade via the east coast but in 1.9 I had the same problem you described and had to go via the south coast instead.

I think there are still several options here, General Werner even invaded England via Northern Ireland in his latest AAR, if I am right.

What are people’s thoughts on the A-8? You trade 2 less initiative for 2 additional air attack. I generally skip the upgrade and keep the A-5 but am not sure if this is the best move or not? It seems to me that when playing as the Axis, it is all about survivability over hitting power (which is why, for example, the Marder series is deficient compared to Stug’s). The same is true (although less pronounced) for the A-8 v A-5. You are trading survivability for extra hitting power. So for me it appears sub-optimal.

Am interested to hear others thoughts.

I think it depends on the general situation. If the player has air superiority the A-8 might be a better option to kill the bombers. Or, both could be used simultaneously.

#SPOILER#

I love the Irish uprising that occurs when you capture London. And also that it is very quickly crushed. And then the speech by King George where you replicate his stutter! Little things like this make the game so cool.

Sure, I tried to make it in a way that in each replay players can run into different events, depending on the course of the war.

Sumnmary of my latest game where I was finally able to claim a DV on freaking turn 99!

Thanks, it is indeed a nice summary, looks like a hell of a fight!

Just when I was about to blow that thing up, I received the visit of 2-3 IS-3 tanks which were almost unstoppable. I wish I had a King tiger II here. Maybe the player could get one in Feb-1945 no matter the war situation???

Yes, it is of course possible, but most of those late war wonder weapons only appear if the player is on the losing path to help to even the odds. Players on the winning side should have enough prestige to purchase or upgrade to other assets like more effective tactical bombers or tank hunters.

[JimmyC]

I am surprised by the reaction of the Allies following the invasion, especially the surface fleet, but also the enemy air forces. They are behaving in ways i didnt expect. I won't post any spoilers here about it, but will likely write up a short AAR when i have the time.

It would be nice to know what you mean by that.

Not going to write an AAR anytime soon, so will just explain here *WARNING SPOILERS*. Although i landed on the south coast and attacked towards London, the British fleet never tried to come down the channel and interdict my vessels or attack my troops. They just stayed off the northeast coast. Admittedly I was surprised by some capital ships and destroyers coming from the west, which was pretty cool, but these were not too many (max 2 at any one time) and were therefore able to be dealt with.

Now i captured London and even advanced past Manchester, but still this huge fleet (and there are heaps of vessels) just sits northeast of the British coast. I've attacked some of them with Ju 88's, but as they are just passively sitting there i mostly just ignore them.

Regarding enemy air, there is much less of it than i was expecting. Perhaps its because i invaded in early '42, but i was really expecting a tough fight. As it is, i have almost total air supremacy, although at the cost of losing about 200 prestige each turn from Allied bombers over Germany. I just expected something more challenging. FYI, i had 3 Fw190's, 5 Bf 109's, 2 Ju 88's and 1 Bf 110. A Fw and Bf 109 were destroyed, mostly due to sloppy play on my part and effects of full random dice, but it has been a relatively easy fight for me in the air.

[hugh2711]

My understanding is that the fleet is triggered by over a certin amount of units on the mainland or in proximity in ships/transports to england. Did you do your invasion with very few units at one time?