Umeu wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:00 pm
Neutrality Violated is too strong. It's currently better to go for NV than to go for Schlieffen plan. NV gives a positional advantage AND a bonus attack on the first turn, while having no downside such as extra PP consumption. It has a minor disadvantage attached to the Netherlands, but it's hardly ever relevant. And Luxembourg gives bonus Diplo points, iirc.
But you're not guaranteed to draw this event. If you insist on reloading I can't help you.
Sacred Way seems unlockable too early, allowing France to leapfrog in the tech race quite hard. Perhaps it needs an additional condition, like can't be sent before a 1915 or something?
Sacred Way is unlocked as soon as Verdun is attacked, so don't do that, else on turn 10. Don't think that's too early. Agree on early tech unlocking though, so Steel Helmets only unlock in singleplayer vs Entente.
Early gas attacks might be too powerful, especially since they can't backfire like they historically did, at Loos for example..
Let's just make gas masks more effective for now.
Forcing the straits event takes a bit too long to appear in the event pool, it feels. I can't get it until after winter 1915 usually, and then it takes 3 turns for Gallipoli to happen.
There's a lot of events around at that time and FtS is only available if enough ships are concentrated around Anzak Koyu and during the summer period.
Scrap collecting is redundant compared to industrial production. I suggest it giving PP to all countries of an alliance rather than just to 1, or do something like permantly increase PP production by like 1 or 2 points.
It's meant to be.
Jihad attack bonus is probably a bit too strong. Could perhaps only be a defensive bonus, not an offensive one. As in, dealing more damage when attacked because more dogged defense, but not when Ottoman units are attacking themselves.
Again, you're not guaranteed to even draw it.
Russian Bonus attack seems way overtuned as well (atleast in MP), but I mentioned this already.#
Is this a general observation or is this impression coming from that game where you were Russia-Surprised?
Offensive in east bonus could end when warsaw + brest litovsk and maybe the forts (kovno, Libau, grodno) + vilna are taken. I know it's a requirement for the event to pop up in the pool, for Warsaw and Brest Litovsk not to be in CP hands, but once you have it, the bonus just stays the whole year.
Reduced duration to max. 6 turns or onset of winter.
Getting sweden to join war on CP side is too easy, it should be a 50/50 on surprise attack, and quite difficult to achieve otherwise. Now however, I can get sweden to join more often than not.
Of course, because you're probably heavily investing into it. But no problem, I'll gladly help you with your Swedish addiction.
Fires in desert aka senussi uprising is too strong at start, should have less units for MP player, but should have option to gain more arab garrison/cav over time just like Kuwaiti for Entente.
Yup if played later in the game the number could get out of hand. Reinforcements are already present but only if Jihad was played.
Suez canal is too easy to take with the home guards (though if Arab garrisons are now the norm, then this has been fixed already). Though, potentially it can be considered to increase entrenchment bonus of canals? Suez was historically quite a barrier.
If Britain DOW & Turkey neutral = home guards
if Britain neutral & Turkey DOW & Britain "surprised" (Sevastopol Shelling/Jihad) = Arabs
if Britain neutral & Turkey DOW & Britain "not surprised" = Reserve Corps & Cavalry
Ostmars is too strong for CP. Defeating Russia is a given. Historically, Russia was kinda weak (At least after the supply crisis) and they collapsed before Serbia did, which says a lot. You have to see the game in terms of Alliance vs Alliance, not individual countries. Imo, Russia failing 10/10 games, is totally acceptable, if Entente can win, let's say, 5/10 games. In that case, the Entente's goal in Russia is not to win the war and force the other to surrender, but to survive and stall for as long as possible, just as it is in Serbia. Nobody expect Serbia to realistically grind AH into dust and survive into 1916. You're happy not to die before end 1914. So, Russia's death I think kinda should be inevitable, but, if this brings USA into the war, then it might not actually weaken the Entente Alliance. Russian war effort should be tied to US war entry. If Russia is doing well, US war entry on Entente side should be greatly delayed. Wilson did not like the Tsar and didn't want to fight on his side. US joined the war a week after the Tsar abdicated. So basically, Tsar abdicate event or Russian revolution or Russia surrenders should greatly shift US alignment towards Entente. This means that quickly kicking russia out of the war or greatly destabilizing it, will come with a huge risk for Germany. They have to be able to win the war or do great damage to France or England before the US joins. (I'm aware that this somehow messes with the Wilson Election events you have in the game, but since Ostmars is kinda a fantasy scenario anyway, I think it's acceptable. And it's necessary for balance purposes I think. However, even in the historical version, it's still a game and I think something can be said for an earlier, let's say mid 1916 US war entry under the right circumstances)
Another way to make it fairer is to have the event France troops enter Belgium come into play faster, or also the option for Belgium to join the Entente to come into play a little bit faster. But not too fast, I kinda prefer the US threat more over the Belgian threat.
I get it but I doubt it will make any difference at this point. In any case I've added pro-Entente shifts for US in for every Russian Demonstration, February Revolution, Tsar resigns & Surrender events.
To balance things out a bit, Romania should probably not join Entente anymore if Russia surrenders before Romania joined Entente.
Yes!
Also, Russia kinda dying in the war should swing Romania back into CP again or at least stay neutral al war, even after Romanian King dies and Treaty of Bucharest
Yes for neutral.
Russian ammo production might need to be a bit higher at the start. But not a major problem.
In Tsarist Russia ammo is you! Let's just give them a big heap of near-expired ammo to blast away when they join but let the factory number remain as low as is.
Murmansk convoys should allow the player to send PP and ammo shipments from brittain to russia if there is naval capacity. (not sure if this is possible, might be hardcoded.)
That's a terrible amount of scripting for basically the same thing the event does.
Mome guard units should get access to anti-air upgrades (as this was historically one of their main purposes). This will also help neutralize bombers a bit more.
No way! Build a Reserve Corps where you need it you stingy lout. 
Under certain circumstances (for example, such as French troops entered belgium), British and French army command might not get along, and something akin to German and Austrian generals squabling could happen but for French and English generals
Awwww....no.
(...)
That lengthy bit about artillery & ammo limits for minors is interesting but will need a lot of work which which I'd like to postpone as my mind is still fixed on the AI crash issue.
When picking the scenario in the MP section, it would be helpful if the description included instructions on where to get mod and warning for people not to join if they don't have the mod. I've noticed some people joining who seem to be new to the game, and don't realize they can't play without the mod. It would also help attract new players who can then write pages upon pages to you, pestering you to make your mod even more awesome.
Good idea.
