alexander seil
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:22 pm

Bukhara/Khiva as a sub-faction?

Tue Jan 04, 2011 7:15 pm

It's a bit odd that these are considered to be a part of Siberian Whites (considering that Komuch is not). It's more of an aesthetics issue, but shouldn't these be assigned to their own sub-faction? There's a Turkestan flag in the game files, just put them under that...plus I don't think the Khans' horse guard should be drawing from the same replacement pool as Siberian cossacks :w00t:

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:28 pm

alexander seil wrote:It's a bit odd that these are considered to be a part of Siberian Whites (considering that Komuch is not). It's more of an aesthetics issue, but shouldn't these be assigned to their own sub-faction? There's a Turkestan flag in the game files, just put them under that...plus I don't think the Khans' horse guard should be drawing from the same replacement pool as Siberian cossacks :w00t:


Yes it would be much realistic if they had a different faction :( . As city has a history of thousand years, from Cengiz han to Mogol raiders or rich literature of 'çağatay'.
Horasan also should be very unique cultural city but no distinction between siberian whites and turkic nations. Maybe game is addressing european players so database generalised, but I will be very happy if there will be some changes in the future about the central asia theatre
, given the fact there is a faction for Komuch..

User avatar
TheDoctorKing
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:13 am

As a general thing, it would be good if all of the national entities were separate factions. In my current game, I am kicking butt on the Latvian/Estonian/Lithuanian/German volunteer forces because "their" national morale is in the mid-20s. The reason it is so low is because Denikin and the Don Cossacks and Admiral Kolchak's boys are getting crushed.

Maybe the non-Russian national entities could be considered "Greens"? If it would complicate the engine excessively to have eight new factions?
Stewart King

"There is no substitute for victory"

Depends on how you define victory.

[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

alexander seil
Posts: 167
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 11:22 pm

Wed Jan 05, 2011 3:21 am

TheDoctorKing wrote:As a general thing, it would be good if all of the national entities were separate factions. In my current game, I am kicking butt on the Latvian/Estonian/Lithuanian/German volunteer forces because "their" national morale is in the mid-20s. The reason it is so low is because Denikin and the Don Cossacks and Admiral Kolchak's boys are getting crushed.

Maybe the non-Russian national entities could be considered "Greens"? If it would complicate the engine excessively to have eight new factions?


I don't see that as much of a problem. If the white commanders who dragged said sub-factions into a war are getting crushed, I'm not sure why their national morale would stay high.

My concern here is more aesthetics and flavor (although it would be nice to separate the reinforcement pools; not that these forces would consume much). I'm not suggesting a separate faction, but a sub-faction; practically every other entity in the game is treated similarly, so not treating the Khanates the same (as a Turkestan faction) seems like an oversight.

User avatar
TheDoctorKing
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Portland Oregon

Wed Jan 05, 2011 6:36 am

Actually, bringing the Baltic states into the war was my call. As soon as I got rid of the White forces around Pskov, I sent my Northern Front into Latvia. They turned out to have a heck of a lot of troops but by scraping up some reinforcements I was able to overcome them. This was greatly facilitated by their miserable NM - that they did not do anything to earn!

I wonder if the Poles will start their war with a 25 NM?
Stewart King



"There is no substitute for victory"



Depends on how you define victory.



[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1945
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:36 am

I think for the balance of the campaign is to make sure AI doesnt fall below critical NM threshold on early or mid stages in the game. If it falls short, then alliances or war declarations wont have intended effect on gameplay. I didnt play on PBEM to see NM changes in campaign . But Clovis preparing and testing some game balances on NM and AI for GP. But as RCW about Whites and Red power struggle, NM for only 3 factions are realistic. But for more realism, it can be very good to include some sub-factions to east theatre which are stated early in the post.

User avatar
Narwhal
Posts: 792
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:13 pm
Location: Paris

Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:50 pm

Two separate problems here :

- "Turkish" nations are considered "White Russian" and thus have the same replacement pool as the Cossaqs, which historically makes little sense. An easy fix would be to create a new "sub faction".

- All "sub-factions" of the Whites have the same National Morale. While this makes sense for Komuch and Sib. White, or makes sense for Northern, NorthWestern and Southern Whites, this makes little sense for "nationalist "whites"". The best fix, but not easy, would be to create a complete separate faction for them. After all :
x They never fought each other (maybe a couple skirmish between Latvian and Lituanian, at worse
x They helped each other (Finns in Estonia, Estonian in Latvia)
x The impact of the defeat of one "Baltic nationalist" would surely crush the hopes of the others.

Return to “Help to improve RUS”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests