Options for weaker countries
said on Aug 20, 2009 at 09:18 PM

Would be nice to have the option to explore for coal/oil in regions that are not controlled by your nation or even the ocean. I'd propose paying a one-time fee or continual tax to the country to mine/drill in the area, then get all the resources (or partial) if you get lucky . . . with ocean sites may just have to protect with navy, but don't have to pay anyone for drilling-if allies want to drill in same region, it's ok, but output isn't as high

Would be fun to have the option of creating cities in a region. This is realistic, think about Shenzhen in China-basically went from fishing village to over million pop in a few years.

  • batman
  • MHII, MH
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 20, 2009
  • posts: 8
said on Aug 20, 2009 at 09:31 PM

batman said

Would be nice to have the option to explore for coal/oil in regions that are not controlled by your nation or even the ocean. I'd propose paying a one-time fee or continual tax to the country to mine/drill in the area, then get all the resources (or partial) if you get lucky . . . with ocean sites may just have to protect with navy, but don't have to pay anyone for drilling-if allies want to drill in same region, it's ok, but output isn't as high

Would be fun to have the option of creating cities in a region. This is realistic, think about Shenzhen in China-basically went from fishing village to over million pop in a few years.

The first idea sounds interesting, but founding cities wouldn't work out so well. You cited Shenzhen, but that growth didn't happen during WWII, nor are there any comparable examples in WWII.

  • Light-Infa
  • location: United States
  • joined: Aug 10, 2009
  • posts: 212
said on Aug 20, 2009 at 09:38 PM

I like the idea of the ocean drilling.

_________________
"Mors ultima linea rerum est mortalis."
said on Aug 21, 2009 at 08:18 PM

MajorLufbery said

I like the idea of the ocean drilling.

me too, I could play as Sweden and then drilling after oil out side Norways coast!

_________________
"Idea becomes real" - Nordic Battle Groups motto

"A mans success isn't based on how high he can reach at the top ... only how high he bounces up when he have hit the bottom" - General G.S Patton
said on Aug 21, 2009 at 10:23 PM

that would be a nice option when you run out of coal.

said on Aug 21, 2009 at 10:39 PM

...good ideas. Game is poorly on resources. you need: Metals to build units, Oil to produce arms and to run your units. most important is COAL as you need it to feed you industry. But there should be GAS too. Regarding my scenario (ww3) I recalculate Coal now and will include LNG and Nuclear Power. Okay, in ww2 there has been no nuclear power, but natural gas should be available....and fishing should be added to food.

  • alwaxer
  • location: Zimbabwe
  • joined: Aug 13, 2009
  • posts: 42
said on Aug 21, 2009 at 11:18 PM

alwaxer said

...good ideas. Game is poorly on resources. you need: Metals to build units, Oil to produce arms and to run your units. most important is COAL as you need it to feed you industry. But there should be GAS too. Regarding my scenario (ww3) I recalculate Coal now and will include LNG and Nuclear Power. Okay, in ww2 there has been no nuclear power, but natural gas should be available....and fishing should be added to food.

But natural gas really wasn't used as widely in WWII. Let's compare it to other resources:

Oil, you need it for arms as oil is required to power vehicles, so it's inclusion is important.

Coal, number one source of power then and today, basis of the industrial revolution

Metals, well a tank isn't made out of thin air. Armaments and the such are made out of the resources this resource abstracts.

Natural Gas, hmmmm. Hardly used as a power source (during WWII), not an element in the construction or operation of any vehicles at this time. Couldn't be transported by pipeline efficiently and effectively until after WWII. In your scenario, Natural Gas does make sense, but not in WWII.

  • Light-Infa
  • location: United States
  • joined: Aug 10, 2009
  • posts: 212
said on Aug 22, 2009 at 01:12 AM

thegeniusmartin said

MajorLufbery said

I like the idea of the ocean drilling.

me too, I could play as Sweden and then drilling after oil out side Norways coast!

But, wouldent that be a sort of hostility towards Norway, withough asking permission.

_________________
"Mors ultima linea rerum est mortalis."
said on Sep 02, 2009 at 06:28 PM

yeah, so ...

hahahahahaha lol Norway will be owned by me when the new game comes out!

_________________
"Idea becomes real" - Nordic Battle Groups motto

"A mans success isn't based on how high he can reach at the top ... only how high he bounces up when he have hit the bottom" - General G.S Patton
said on Sep 25, 2009 at 12:43 AM

that could give norway a casus belli against you if they decide to use that suggestion

  • warman45
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Aug 22, 2009
  • posts: 288
said on Sep 27, 2009 at 03:40 PM

for drilling oil, the problem is that oil, in a realistic scenario would always show up in the same historical places giving the real-life player an unfair advantage and taking all of the fun out of "searching for oil". at the same time, i cant imagine a random oil generation system where oil shows up in different places working out.

however i think that fisheries do need to be added, as fishing is a major part of many nations food supply and commerce

  • Sword_Beach
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Sep 06, 2009
  • posts: 125
said on Sep 27, 2009 at 08:08 PM

Sword_Beach said

for drilling oil, the problem is that oil, in a realistic scenario would always show up in the same historical places giving the real-life player an unfair advantage and taking all of the fun out of "searching for oil". at the same time, i cant imagine a random oil generation system where oil shows up in different places working out.

however i think that fisheries do need to be added, as fishing is a major part of many nations food supply and commerce

Yes, another good idea.

_________________
"Mors ultima linea rerum est mortalis."
said on Sep 27, 2009 at 08:23 PM

lol thanks again

  • Sword_Beach
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Sep 06, 2009
  • posts: 125
said on Oct 07, 2009 at 07:12 PM

Well fishing isnt a huge income and it dont really helps your modern industry! And you have food! On the right upper corner on the game you see ........ food!

_________________
"Idea becomes real" - Nordic Battle Groups motto

"A mans success isn't based on how high he can reach at the top ... only how high he bounces up when he have hit the bottom" - General G.S Patton
said on Oct 12, 2009 at 09:29 PM

first of all while food is a resource, none of it comes from sea regions so tho we have food, controlling sea regions should give you additonal food. secondly many nations especially japan depend on large scale government fishing for food

  • Sword_Beach
  • location: Unknown
  • joined: Sep 06, 2009
  • posts: 125
said on Jan 28, 2010 at 05:24 PM

why not build fishing ships that harvest fish from the sea for food? You could send these out all over the world to harvest additional food for your country!

  • Joe7
  • location: USA
  • joined: Aug 10, 2009
  • posts: 27
said on Jan 28, 2010 at 05:28 PM

How about a bonus to food production for regions next to the sea to simulate fishing? A possibility...

_________________
DEMONS
  • FDR
  • MHII, MH GOLD, MH
  • location: Montserrat
  • joined: Oct 17, 2009
  • posts: 1234
  • Banned
said on Feb 20, 2010 at 05:56 AM

Light-Infa said

batman said

Would be nice to have the option to explore for coal/oil in regions that are not controlled by your nation or even the ocean. I'd propose paying a one-time fee or continual tax to the country to mine/drill in the area, then get all the resources (or partial) if you get lucky . . . with ocean sites may just have to protect with navy, but don't have to pay anyone for drilling-if allies want to drill in same region, it's ok, but output isn't as high

Would be fun to have the option of creating cities in a region. This is realistic, think about Shenzhen in China-basically went from fishing village to over million pop in a few years.

The first idea sounds interesting, but founding cities wouldn't work out so well. You cited Shenzhen, but that growth didn't happen during WWII, nor are there any comparable examples in WWII.

I'm wondering if when the factories were relocated from the Russian west to the east that new cities and towns were created. This is a possibility as not all of the receiving towns and cities could handle the new influx of workers and factories and new cities and towns would have to be built. Also, during the war were there not new factories that were built near towns that soon became cities? Something to research...

_________________
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
  • 00crusader
  • location: United States
  • joined: Dec 04, 2009
  • posts: 142
said on Feb 20, 2010 at 11:50 AM

A very good example! A city in Russia win only 10 000 citizens expanded to over 300 0000 people after that Stalin had send a LOT of industrial material to the Urals! That should be possible in MH2, or at least hat is what I really hope. :D

_________________
"Idea becomes real" - Nordic Battle Groups motto

"A mans success isn't based on how high he can reach at the top ... only how high he bounces up when he have hit the bottom" - General G.S Patton
said on Feb 22, 2010 at 11:11 AM

Gotta go with you on that one TGM!!!

_________________
Watch out buddy, the last time you only got a hole through your head...this time it could be worse
  • 00crusader
  • location: United States
  • joined: Dec 04, 2009
  • posts: 142