Supremacy Logo

1939 World Map Outlines

Lots of talk has been put on the table about a WW2-era World Map, but it's finally time to put speculation to rest and have a civilised discussion about it. This will be made much easier with the 1939 globe I recently got for Christmas.

First off, the playable countries.

  1. British Empire (!)
  2. French Empire (!)
  3. Germany (!)
  4. Italy (!)
  5. Spain
  6. Portugal
  7. Union of South Africa and Southwest Africa
  8. Arabia
  9. Persia
  10. Nationalist China
  11. Japan (!)
  12. United States of America (!)
  13. Canada
  14. Australia
  15. Dutch Empire
  16. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (!)
  17. Brazil
  18. Argentina
  19. Tibet
  20. Sinkian
  21. Belgium
  22. Finland
  23. Sweden
  24. Columbia
  25. New Zealand
  26. Greece
  27. Yugoslavia
  28. Rumania
  29. Siam (Thailand)
  30. Mongolia
The only real problem is balancing. I thought long and hard about how to balance the game so, say, the UK has as great a chance of winning as Belgium. One way is to give everyone 10 cities and give the people with large overseas empires (France or Britain) or possibly the USSR's large territory just ginormous provinces in some places and small ones in others. Take the UK for example: the 10 cities could be Cairo, New Delhi, London, Bombay (India), Plymouth, Manchester, Glasgow, Singapore, Lagos (Nigeria), and Nairobi (Kenya). In contrast to Portugal, who had a measly empire compared to that of Great Britain at the time, their cities could be Lisbon, Macau, Luanda, Cabinda, Porto, Maputo, Moçambique, Mumbai, Faro, and Combria.

But then I thought about the most simple solution: don't balance it. It could be just like the Blitzkrieg 1939 Europe map, but much larger. This would be a bad solution, I think, for why would someone play as, say, Greece when they could play as the much stronger British Empire? And this would also mean that Germany is much less powerful than in any WW2 scenario ever.

Third, colonies complicate things: at least, things like Manchukuo and the Philippine Islands do. Manchukuo was a Japanese "colony" which was really just a puppet state under the control of the Japanese Empire. The Philippines were an American colony under control of the United States (General Douglas MacArthur), so the question is: do we allow them to be part of their respective ruling countries, or do we let the have their independence? I think they should belong to their historic rulers in 1939. This goes for French, Dutch, and British Guyana, and all other colonies as well.

What do you think? Make suggestions! (By the way, this took me a long time to put together)

6 Replies

8 Jan 2016, 02:15

No-one has even seen this post! Come on, guys.

8 Jan 2016, 21:32

*bump*

"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
8 Jan 2016, 21:46

I like it more historical than balanced, personally. I don't see imbalance as a problem in terms of wanting to play. Who would want to play as France? A country who, if Germany really really wanted to, could kill in a heartbeat (speaking from experience). Who would play as Spain or Turkey? There is an advantage to not being a far flung empire or having a low profile, and with the targeting colonies are going to get while Germany is kicking them in at home is enough to balance out British Empire

"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
14 Jan 2016, 03:13 (edited)

Thanks for the post pizza,

I would imagine that this is a HUGE endeavor that CoW can not undertake just now. There are so many factors to it in order to make a good 1939 game.

BUT it is possible.

Some thoughts:

- Put some carriers in the game for Pete's sake. There is no WW2 in the Pacific without carriers. I heard that CoW once had them. If they're overpowered... they were super important in WW2. A world game without them is just a WW1 game.

- Make it a team game. This is a real possibility. Yes, people would have to work together as the U.S.A., USSR, etc. But wasn't it difficult to coral the U.S. congress for action, or for old Joe Stalin to dominate and gain ultimate control of the Russia. It could happen and be yet semi-historic. The games now are just Risk-type games :S

- Make it accurate. Sweden... Bolivia... Uganda... etc. are not functioning countries, per se in WW2. This is a WW2 game isn't it? The set-up could be stated something like it is now that all countries are not the same/ have historic units & research options, etc.

- If you wanted CoW staff, you could set up some 'responsible' potentially admin type players to lead these countries. That would help keep it from getting to quirky, and help players play with their historical groups.

I bet there are plenty of people that would enjoy CoW played on this setting, but just await the mod.

Again, I realize the immense work that it would entail CoW- good luck with getting it done. Until then lotza players are just sitting around talking about the options drooling on their keyboards... :ploed:

This is possible and I believe would be wildly popular and yes, making CoW lots of $ to boot.

14 Jan 2016, 10:10

James Hartmund wrote:

Thanks for the post pizza,

I would imagine that this is a HUGE endeavor that CoW can not undertake just now. There are so many factors to it in order to make a good 1939 game.

BUT it is possible.

Some thoughts:

- Put some carriers in the game for Pete's sake. There is no WW2 in the Pacific without carriers. I heard that CoW once had them. If they're overpowered... they were super important in WW2. A world game without them is just a WW1 game.

- Make it a team game. This is a real possibility. Yes, people would have to work together as the U.S.A., USSR, etc. But wasn't it difficult to coral the U.S. congress for action, or for old Joe Stalin to dominate and gain ultimate control of the Russia. It could happen and be yet semi-historic. The games now are just Risk-type games :S

- Make it accurate. Sweden... Bolivia... Uganda... etc. are not functioning countries, per se in WW2. This is a WW2 game isn't it? The set-up could be stated something like it is now that all countries are not the same/ have historic units & research options, etc.

- If you wanted CoW staff, you could set up some 'responsible' potentially admin type players to lead these countries. That would help keep it from getting to quirky, and help players play with their historical groups.

I bet there are plenty of people that would enjoy CoW played on this setting, but just await the mod.

Again, I realize the immense work that it would entail CoW- good luck with getting it done. Until then lotza players are just sitting around talking about the options drooling on their keyboards... :ploed:

This is possible and I believe would be wildly popular and yes, making CoW lots of $ to boot.

1. Lol, carriers weren't taken out for balancing, they were literally broken, as in, they could not funtion. Devs are trying their damnedest at it though

2. Some people play this game for simply the mechanics and gameplay, not for historical purposes. While I do find RP very entertaining, a majority of the player base prefers the system of people creating their own alliances and such without having to correlate with history, I find doing this as well as strict RPing keeps both fresh

3. In his 2nd paragraph Pizza says doing this would most likely be an alternative

"A knight cannot save the world. They call certain methods of fighting good and others evil, acting as if there were some nobility to the battlefield."
"Honor? Glory? There's no point in speaking to a killer who indulges in such nonsense."
"It's a crime we call victory, paid for by the pain of the defeated"
23 Jan 2016, 17:18

aDudeWhoDoesThings wrote:

James Hartmund wrote:

Thanks for the post pizza,

I would imagine that this is a HUGE endeavor that CoW can not undertake just now. There are so many factors to it in order to make a good 1939 game.

BUT it is possible.

Some thoughts:

- Put some carriers in the game for Pete's sake. There is no WW2 in the Pacific without carriers. I heard that CoW once had them. If they're overpowered... they were super important in WW2. A world game without them is just a WW1 game.

- Make it a team game. This is a real possibility. Yes, people would have to work together as the U.S.A., USSR, etc. But wasn't it difficult to coral the U.S. congress for action, or for old Joe Stalin to dominate and gain ultimate control of the Russia. It could happen and be yet semi-historic. The games now are just Risk-type games :S

- Make it accurate. Sweden... Bolivia... Uganda... etc. are not functioning countries, per se in WW2. This is a WW2 game isn't it? The set-up could be stated something like it is now that all countries are not the same/ have historic units & research options, etc.

- If you wanted CoW staff, you could set up some 'responsible' potentially admin type players to lead these countries. That would help keep it from getting to quirky, and help players play with their historical groups.

I bet there are plenty of people that would enjoy CoW played on this setting, but just await the mod.

Again, I realize the immense work that it would entail CoW- good luck with getting it done. Until then lotza players are just sitting around talking about the options drooling on their keyboards... :ploed:

This is possible and I believe would be wildly popular and yes, making CoW lots of $ to boot.

1. Lol, carriers weren't taken out for balancing, they were literally broken, as in, they could not funtion. Devs are trying their damnedest at it though2. Some people play this game for simply the mechanics and gameplay, not for historical purposes. While I do find RP very entertaining, a majority of the player base prefers the system of people creating their own alliances and such without having to correlate with history, I find doing this as well as strict RPing keeps both fresh

3. In his 2nd paragraph Pizza says doing this would most likely be an alternative

Thanks everyone for noticing my post and giving feedback.

I thought I had something else to say but I forgot. Whoops.

Post a Reply

Please log in to post a reply.

Back to Suggestions
Quick Launch