More Alternate History

[Def]

I'm about 3/4 of the way through the Winter War campaign, but out of curiosity I decided to snoop through the game files to find out how it would end, since after the Someri scenario, the date in the campaign map jumps abruptly from 1942 to 1944 without a Siege of Leningrad scenario (something which I was excited for the whole time). I found out then that the campaign always ended in the Lapland War no matter what.

It's quite a disappointment for me, because the novelty of making alternate history while enjoying OoB's solid gameplay is why I enjoyed the Rising Sun campaign so much. I basically disregarded playing the Americans after Bataan because why would I? They won in real life; there's nothing interesting in winning as them in OoB.

In the Rising Sun campaign, I could destroy Spruance's CV task force at Midway, and crush Vandegrift's marines at Guadalcanal, which then sets the stage for the New Caledonia Scenario. One thing leads to another, and the final Melbourne scenario, where you basically have unlimited time and could field production license Tigers, is a very fitting climax that rewards you well for your efforts.

I was extremely hyped when I managed to hold the Russians back and even make an honest-to-God counteroffensive in the 2nd Mannerheim Line scenario, but the peace deal the Finns get in the game in the same one IRL - very harsh and extending beyond the original demands, no matter how terribly you destroy the Russians. I was disappointed, but I cheered myself up. There was still the Continuation War, right? Supported by the Germans, maybe I could Make Finland Great Again™.

But again, disappointment. Finland always loses in the end no matter how well you play; no matter how many secondary objectives you take. In the Rising Sun campaign, once you get to Melbourne, there will be an event popup describing the Germans taking Moscow in 1946. I thought that in Winter War, I might get to take part in that glorious victory... instead, it ends with me kicking the Krauts out of Lapland.

Yeah, sorry for the rant. But I would like to see more alternate history in future DLC's and campaigns.

[I'm Spartacus]

Don't know what they will do - but you raise some interesting points and thoughts on how they could proceed. The Dev does listen to feedback especially when it is well thought out and presented. I'm sure he will consider this.

[Zipuli]

Well, the Rising Sun campaign has also only 1 path available. Lose at Midway and the campaign is over, and the non-historic path is the only one available. Some branching would indeed do good for the game, but it would be quite a lot of work.

[I'm Spartacus]

Yes I asked him about the branching before - and he replied that if he did that it would need about 50% more scenarios for a campaign to work with branching.

My own thoughts are also that branching was OK back in the days of Wing Commander when information was not so available - you could end up in the losing branch but not realize it - now people would know instantly and go back and replay to avoid the losing branch - thereby making it useless.

[Def]

Branching wouldn't be bad, but I could do without it so long as all campaigns end up in victory. It's a real let-down when you perform loads better than the real Finns but literally nothing changes. Hell, don't bother trying your best in the Mannerheim Line missions since Finland still gets a horrible peace deal.

Also, a Siege of Leningrad with Finnish forces attacking from the North and German forces attacking from the South would have been incredible. Alas...

Seriously, when the inevitable German campaign releases, I don't want to be defending Berlin in the final scenario.

[Anonymous Helper]

This is rather unfortunate. I was considering getting winter war DLC during next sale but if you can't change history, there is not much point in playing the campaign (or any other one really).

[Def]

It's quite disappointing, yes. But the Rising Sun campaign is definitely worth a buy. The Axis win at the end of it, and it features air, land and naval warfare scenarios of all kinds.

[I'm Spartacus]

and the U.S. Pacific being the equivalent from their side

And I own and have played all the DLC previously as a beta tester

[Uhu]

I will create a modified Winter War campaign, where the actions of the player - especially achiving given 2nd goals will make a difference after the end of Winter War and after the end of Continous War. I will aslo pay attention to historical equipment availability, because the devs gave no attention about it. :( I would even implement some extra captured Soviet armored vehicle, but I couldn't yet figured out, how.

[Def]

Originally posted by Uhu:

I will create a modified Winter War campaign, where the actions of the player - especially achiving given 2nd goals will make a difference after the end of Winter War and after the end of Continous War. I will aslo pay attention to historical equipment availability, because the devs gave no attention about it. :( I would even implement some extra captured Soviet armored vehicle, but I couldn't yet figured out, how.

Great! I'll be looking forward for its release.

[jalperi]

Originally posted by Uhu:

I will create a modified Winter War campaign, where the actions of the player - especially achiving given 2nd goals will make a difference after the end of Winter War and after the end of Continous War. I will aslo pay attention to historical equipment availability, because the devs gave no attention about it. :( I would even implement some extra captured Soviet armored vehicle, but I couldn't yet figured out, how.

There could be also alternative history scenario of battle of Salpa-line if player lost the Tali-scenario. Also in real life scenarios Karelian Isthmus '41 and Battle of Ilomantsi '44 could be nice scenarios. But i am looking for you release!

[Uhu]

I'm just back to the first scn, because the mission texts are so spartanian simple, that I cannot this let it in that state. :) Instead of playing a "chess in WW2 clothing", I like to play with more immersion: named units, important commanders and campaign-stories. So, in the last days, instead of playing, I started to make the scenarios more colorful with more text and more pictures. Also tried to modify the unit list, but I have problems to create new ones (with the existing modells). But I already made plans, how to make the scenarios and the campaign better! And more historical.
By the way, I wondered, why the Battle of Honkaniemi isn't in the game? The only tank action and a wonderful possibility for "what if" - doing better, then in history. This one, which I definitely want to make. But I know from my earlier experiences, that scn making costs a hell of time.

[jalperi]

Originally posted by Uhu:

By the way, I wondered, why the Battle of Honkaniemi isn't in the game? The only tank action and a wonderful possibility for "what if" - doing better, then in history. This one, which I definitely want to make. But I know from my earlier experiences, that scn making costs a hell of time.

I think because it wasnt very important battle and was a small battle, also because its include on Summa scenario.

Edit:
Oh and also its funny in Viipuri scenario that if you loose Viipuri the campaign end or is it that?

[Uhu]

True: after I have read your comment, I looked on the date of the Summa scn and thought about the location of the Honkaniemi battle, it got clear to me, that it is in some way included. Still, no need to become sad because of it, because there are other possible scn's to make, especially, if we speak about the what-if direction. :) Surely I do not want to fight against the German arm-brother, so at least, that scn should be edited.
I think, a big siege of Leningrad would be to much for the Finnish army. But the capture of Murmansk and the region seems to be possible, as I have read, instead of the German divisions, the Finns advanced successful to the east and stopping it was more a political decision, not a military one. And capturing Murmansk would have a great effect on the overall situation in Russia...

I don't know about Vipurii, as I'm not so far in the game now.
On the other hand, I found amazing features in the campaign/editor: several achived/not achived secondary goals have an impact on the later campaign!

Originally posted by jalperi:

I think because it wasnt very important battle and was a small battle, also because its include on Summa scenario.

Edit:
Oh and also its funny in Viipuri scenario that if you loose Viipuri the campaign end or is it that?

[Uhu]

Still there were more participants, then at Someri :) I just have read about this battle and ask me, how this could be put in the campaign...? It looks like an "alibi scn", to grew the number of the scn's in the campaign. And maybe to show some naval battles in this DLC? I see now, I will let this out, as playing this in campaign would be total ridiculous.

Originally posted by jalperi:

I think because it wasnt very important battle and was a small battle

[jalperi]

Originally posted by Uhu:

Still there were more participants, then at Someri :) I just have read about this battle and ask me, how this could be put in the campaign...? It looks like an "alibi scn", to grew the number of the scn's in the campaign. And maybe to show some naval battles in this DLC? I see now, I will let this out, as playing this in campaign would be total ridiculous.

Yeah, i have no idea also why its included on campaign. If i had but some island battle, i had but the battle of Suursaari(March 42) instead of Someri, but it wasnt so big battle also. Between October 41 and May 44 there was couple of other interesting and bigger battles. Excample Battle of Gora(october 41 to january 42) or Battle of Perkjärvi(on april 42) or Battle of Suhosaari(October 42) which is very interesting battle, there was also Italian fleet on the battle.