Jump to content

Colin I

Members
  • Content Count

    839
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. On force concentration, perhaps two changes are needed: 1. In addition to current supply model where each unit calculates their supply individually, there needs to be an overall supply capacity of a region (Theatre) where you compare multiple supply sources with the number of units demanding supply. This would reduce supply level of units if the strategic capacity of the region is exceeded. It would be nice if a power could pay MPP to temporarily boost the supply capacity of a theatre, this would simulate Mulberry harbours etc. in Normandy landings without specific detailed rules and reflect strategic prioritization of a theatre of war. 2. Please reduce air operational movement, this is the worst offender in force concentrations because air is easiest to deploy. Its true there were strategic redeployments of air but no power would strip a theatre completely to concentrate in one location and that is pretty common in seriously competitive games. Naval concentrations are more reasonable but even there have seen almost entire Axis and Allied navies facing off in Far East, doubt port capacity would support this model.
  2. Hard to tell much but hexes and what looks to be a commitment to keep it a bit simple are good news, both. Personally want not too big a map, better diplomacy, loss of massive unrealistic force concentrations (including operational air too far or too many air units in one theatre) but keep addictive game play with flexible strategic options and competitive game balance please. Simple 2D graphics would get my vote and not too detailed map, old SPI style maybe. Nice to see this project is moving, particularly as we might see the only decent competition in Flames of War too, understand has been a nightmare to program but the board game has some nice mechanics and maps are good, restrained but informative. Its one of the few games SC could learn from. 2014 might be a good year......
  3. Thanks - its now downloading though I still see the this-game-is-not-released-yet message.
  4. Thanks. Hmm, there I have a problem. I bought it but download is being blocked as if not yet released.
  5. I'm a bit confused - Just bought Assault on Communism and cannot download as web site says it is not released yet. when I look at comments in forum its looks like people other than beta testers are playing it. Is it released or not...?
  6. It would be handy if escorting fighters evaded on rare occasions (perhaps more chance the better the attacking fighters are) thus exposing the bombers to damage. its true, escorting is too efficient right now.
  7. This bombing strategy can work in Gold too - Dragon did it to me. Its part exploit though if allies do get such dominance over German skies the axis should suffer. Agree both with fixing the strategic bombing - perhaps some improvement in air defense would be nice too. Also agree with the need for partition script for Russian surrender. I've seen Germany lose several games as it takes too long to extract your armour to face a western Allied invasion. It makes no sense that German held rail works less well after Russian surrender than before.......
  8. I think game is quite close to balanced. It may not seem that way when one strategy is doing well but there usually seems to be a counter. SeaLion shouldn't kill the Allies - actually I worry that the German gains are not enough to justify the risk. Russia is interesting. Its true that in a straight fight Germany will win. But even with Japan aiding it takes time and there are counter moves (destroying Finland, against a weak Barbarossa I've managed armour counter attacks etc.). Basically, the game is set up so that if Allies do not help Russia then Axis will win. There is a counter play that is hard to stop, try this if Axis does too well. Throw EVERYTHING at Germany. Of course Japan runs riot, but it is quite hard to stop Germany going under in this model. A refinement is take Italy first - its very hard to stop - the sheer weight of airpower (including massed carriers) tells. Any Axis defense must divert major resources from the East. If Germany goes under Japan cannot win however strong they are (and they will have India and more by then), their force pool is not big enough. The weakness of the Axis is they do not work together very well and this can be exploited. IMHO game is now about player skill. Dragon is better than me and can win with either side. It will be a great fight with Jollyguy either way and some others I'll beat every time.
  9. Nice to see a quantitative thinker in the forums. With bombers - its not clear to me if UK bomber command was worth the cost but we should consider national morale here. In terms of NM would like to see a revised system - its great that SC starts to consider this but its currently a bit simple. The effects of strategic bombing and rockets on morale should be greater. Maybe for each MPP production lost also reduces NM. Both sides went to a lot of effort to do this. In absolute terms the V rockets were not that effective but the degree to which such weapons shook politicians and populations was huge - even though Germany was clearly losing it may not have felt that way to a lot of people in 1944.
  10. Simple 2D counters please - they can look utterly beautiful as modders have shown over the years. When the game requires an overview of lots of units 3D is a distraction and the perspective and scale feels wrong. You want a combination of information - which means being able to absorb a lot in a glance, rather than a clutter of icons and indicators - and beauty.
  11. In some ways the split map is a problem for the US - despite excellent rail compared to many other nations east-West coast transfers are surprisingly hard - more than a single operational move.
  12. Rambo: Yes, we are involved in something of an epic. JG played the Axis softly then went all out against Russia. Japan ran riot and he has China, Eastern USSR and even some of Alaska - but I stopped him in India. He has had less luck at sea - Japan is still strong but Italian and German navy were trashed. The big flashpoint is Southern Russia into Middle East with Allies attacking from Egypt/Syria, Germans holding Turkey and trying to take on a weakened USSR and very strong Western Allies at same time. The Allies have massive carrier/air support but he has Tigers with good AA. Its going to be a close game.
  13. I like AA. with double intercept fighters massed TAC finally has some balance. Jollyguy has AA2 Tigers - they take some stopping......
  14. Part of the ease of manipulation is due to knowledge of scripts. The psychology of a leader, particularly someone like Mussolini, is very hard to calculate. I'd like it if unpredictable leaders had wider variation in their responses to events. Having said that a preemptive Allied strike should be possible but have big penalties. I just wanted to add a second point. Because of the scale of GC Gold Italy is a very hard country to protect from Naval assault. I've seen massed carrier attacks leading to Rome falling in a single turn take down from the sea quite often. In reality the long Italian coastline was balanced by difficult terrain and other issues. I would suggest that carrier attacks do not degrade entrenchment, the bomb load must have been a lot less than ground based air. This would make Rome a bit more secure and more generally improve realism.
  15. SC 3 There a few things I really want: 1. A sophisticated tripartite (Democracy/Fascist/Communist) diplomacy system which feeds into a political model. This would be hard but an absolute breakthrough. 2.Better operational movement (so you move one zone or X hexes maximum per op move not across the world in a single hop). 3. Better supply rules when cooperative and non-cooperative allies interact 9especially a problem now when Germany and Japan carve up Russia). 4. No animations or 3D effects but a beautiful watercolour map with 2D counters. In this some of the competitor games to SC are doing better. 5. Go back to hexes.
×
×
  • Create New...