Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mathiasbw

sc3 improvements/suggestions

Recommended Posts

hello all, specially hubert :-)

- more countries/country slots (minimum 80 or 100), no no-go/"dead" areas

- more units/unit slots (minimum 30 or 40)

- natural disasters (historically and randomly), earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, floods (with animation on the map)

- missions (like the fort-de-france mission), e.g. more mpp's with "treasures", capture/rescue of generals/presidents/dictators/monarchs, sabotage, espionage

- men-made floods to stop the enemy ground forces (like in the netherlands in ww2 and in belgium in ww1), tunnel warfare, undermining, land/naval mines

- with ww1, ww2, ww3 (e.g. 1962 or 1983), ww4 (e.g. 2001)

- global wars like 7-years-war, 80-years-war and hypothetical global wars, e.g. in 1898 (manila incident)

- new units/weapons:

nbc weapons, emp weapons, weather modification weapons (all with animations on the map)

intercontinental missiles, helicopters, special submarines (carrier subs/sen-toku class subs, rocket subs/rocket thrower subs, stealth subs, long distance subs/nuclear subs/electro subs/fuel cell subs...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hello all, specially hubert :-)

- missions (like the fort-de-france mission), e.g. more mpp's with "treasures", capture/rescue of generals/presidents/dictators/monarchs, sabotage, espionage

Glad that you liked this "Mission":D

Hopefully others did as well, althoug it's a little complicate to "explain" the AI how to react to a human Mission... confused:

Did you hear about "Operation Mincemeat" or "Operation Oak" or "Operation Siverfox", or even this one for Japan: "Golden Lily"(!) :rolleyes: , ?

i was allways a fan of Indiana Jones and the "Raiders of the Lost Ark" :D

If you know any more "Missions" where not much peaple heard of, just let me know. I'm Allways keen on these ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Disneyland "Miission" was one of the reasons why SC got quite a heavy broadside of critic when it got tested in the german gaming webside "Gamersglobal.de".

I too consider it absolute fantasy that german buccaneers reach the caribbean to board and seize an enemy CARRIER AND CRUISER, and after song, dance and arh-arh-arh & ho-ho-ho leave the treasure island with sacks filled of Gold and shipsloads of Plunder.

Next thing would be to offer a DE to search for the holy grail. Once found, Germany wins the war.

Yes, your Fort de France DE is that far streched from history. Unfortunately.

Much better would have been a DE for try to get or salvage vichy french ships in Oran.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xwromwood:

Yes i heard that the Buccaneer Mission was not allways welcome.

But anyway a focus point in these Month of June 40. Clear is that Historically none attempts where made to access this Vichy Belongings from the Axis Side. Yet the Allied Side was not so shy and got the Plunder :D

Here is a related article of Daily Times Jan 10 '41 ( i have several "outcuts" of historic Newspapers avlbl , even in German, if you want pm. )

i think some things like this in a Global-Map spice up the "dead regions".

Also available this fascinating 300 Pages Book:

"War, cooperation and Conflict" The EUropean Posessions in the Caribbean 1939-45

by Fritz Andre Babptiste.

you can Google Read this partly in Google Books.

post-55-141867623992_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks PowerGmbH.

The germans failed even to smuggle Agents into the USA or the UK. Hard to imagine that the same organization should be successful in staging a coup that even Francis Drake would have made look like a bloody amateur.

I'm all in favour of spicing up dead regions. But a 3 or 4 times smaller mission would have been far better. Sink the Jean Bart, sink the gold transport, plot false intel, send saboteurs via sub, or rescue Agents by sub. But not steal a carrier (it is not a single carrier in SC terms, its a carrier group), steal a CA task force, well, that was definetly too much. You can tell because this never happened, and nothing comparable did happen anywhere else. Alone the german capture fo a caribbean carrier task force is so unlikely like a german base on the dark (we come in peace) side of the moon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an interesting thread here ^^ ,

- Missions offering limited rewards (MPPs, morale, unit or tech) in exchange of diverting ressources from main war theatre/effort would be interesting.

*

- Something like: sending a german sub to Tokyo (and/or a jap sub to Kiel) for tech exchange, each country would gain a random % increase in one research field:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-1224

Between 1942 and 1944, approximately 35 submarines attempted the journey from Europe to the Far East, and at least 11 attempted the journey from the Far East to Europe.

- Some more missions in South America or Africa and a decision event instead of just an event for operation catapult :) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks PowerGmbH.

Alone the german capture fo a caribbean carrier task force is so unlikely like a german base on the dark (we come in peace) side of the moon.

:D right. The approach of this event is anyway based on a problem that in fact this Carrier Group would belong naturally to Vichy France and never to Germany.

I think a correct event would be in a way that VICHY-FRANCE with help of Axis "bribes" or "pression" would get "independently" active against UK, a thing that is far closer to history, and use it's limited resources in the Caribbean as a sort of Independent Co-Beligrent Nation VS UK only.

That is what happended in fact (Aditional Infos: Battle of Dakar 40, Battle of Syria in 41, Battle of Madagascar, and later even the Vichy DOW on URSS, see wiki. )

If then in such an event UK won't "blockade" these regions the Vichy Carrier might "pop-up" and make a little noise around in the Caribbean until UK gets it chased like Bismark.

I think this could be fun as well.

Anyway a thing of limited rewards for specific "missions" in form of Morale or Units or even Tech could be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more events and operations/missions are always good :-)

my suggestion for all what-if-fans: a map/campaign with planned/prepared operations/missions and planned/existing, but not used weapons/units.

powergmbh: do you know the operations tabarin and foxley?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
more events and operations/missions are always good :-)

powergmbh: do you know the operations tabarin and foxley?

Thanks for this info. i just read in Wiki. Interisting in this Article about Actic Missions is also the fear of UK that an hypotetic attac by Axis on the Falklands could "activate" Argentina if Axis would "gift" these islands to Arg. "President" PĂ©ron. Quite Fascinating What If Idea!:D

Regarding Antarctica i also read about Axis placing manned "Weather"-Stations in Greenland in 42.

The Problem on these abnroad "Missions" is always how to get them reasonably into a scenario. Deinitifeley the "Argentina - Bring - in - idea" is fascinating!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missions stuff

--------------

Force 10 From Navaronne

Where Eagle's Dare

The Eagle Has Landed

U-571

Ronald Reagan movie blowing up some fuel tanks

Dirty Dozen

Yeah, how about some cool spy stuff? Lets you get a temporary snapshot of some of the enemies social-political-economic activies.

Even better, get some leaks of enemy positions? Your spies report,"The 7th Panzer unit has just been formed in such-in-such city". Partisian message, "Train movement (Operands) lead us to believe three Army Units & one Corp have been relocated near Lennigrad".

*Could make an NR-17 (rated 17 and older version) of SC which adds SS-units & Concentration camps.

Where Legends Dare,

-Legend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a way with multi threading to have the AI opponent plotting its moves while the live player is plotting their move? That way the computer would not take as long when the AI turn starts?

I also like the idea of simultaneous moving where both sides plot their moves at the same time and then execute to see the result. Perhaps that is too big a change?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see the AI attack the highest value targets before considering the easiest targets it can defeat. I have noticed that the AI seems to go after the easiest target, such as a garrison instead of targets that are the real threat. So I would just keep rebuilding cheap garrison units and watch the AI pound them rather than go after my tank which was going to cream them the next turn. The AI, especially the AI's aircraft should go after Leaders, Air Units, Tanks and Ships, even if it cannot do as much damage as it could do against a lesser target.

Perhaps this could be changed for the current SC2 games too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about when selecting "unit properties" we see the % evasion of the unit. In addition, as a unit gains experience we see an increase in the % evasion. Usually as a unit is degraded in strength it gains experience, this means that the unit will increasingly be more difficult to eliminate at lower strengths which simulates a better ability to disperse. Think about air units having a more difficult ability to eliminate a unit!:)

The idea of incorporating "evasion" into combat resolution, which Big Al has intelligently applied to his campaigns, could mean a lowering of the number of units required on the battlefield, thus reducing the players' requirement of pushing units around, ie. less micromanagement.:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about letting the number of fighter intercepts be dependent upon a strength setting entered by the owning player. Since "intercepts" are an automatic action and it is easily soaked off by your opponent using multiple airstrikes, allow an indefinite of scrambles from your in range interceptors.

When you select intercept in the mode menu for the fighter unit, the game engine follows with "?", which when not followed up with a number denotation stays in the auto mode of 2 intercepts. But if the owning player would like to have multiple intercepts inacted, he selects a number corresponding to the strength the unit is reduced to when it will no longer conduct the sorti.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SeaMonkey

I am not sure whether you have noticed that you can set fighters to intercept up to 25 times in the scenario editor. I am not sure how useful multiple interceptions beyond twice and possibly three times would be as the defending fighter would tend to lose strength and hence experience and therefore be much less able to maintain a reasonable defence over time.

Regards

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking what can we do to see supply more significant in combat resolution?

Given the time allocation of an SC turn, why is it not possible to relate reinforcing to APs. Usually a reinforcing unit uses all its action points by initiating the action and since the action of reinforcing further dilutes the combat prowess of a unit, ie experience, why not allow a unit with enough action points to both reinforce and either attack or move.

Usually I wouldn't advocate such a feature, but when a time reference of two weeks to a month is the associated to a SC turn, it seems units should have a greater variety of action choices during the time period. Perhaps a decrease in "readiness" would be appropriate for a unit engaging in reinforcing and the choice of another action in its turn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Interdiction. In-range tac bombers to go after any moving units (configurable).

This would make for effective, immediate responses to shore landings unless total air superiority was achieved. Which should sound a bit like real life.

2) bulk updates to units.

mid- to late-game updates are a tedious pain in the behind. Select a batch of units, then pick, say, an air defence upgrade. Or "reinforce to max". Or somefink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should really allow manpower pools and replacing losses also depletes the manpower pool. Allow veteran replacements of losses- it would just take longer for replacement to reflect the needed training and integration of the new troops. This will bring more realism to this already fantastic game - also allow limited foreign manpower pools (historical) to be available. Allow units and leaders to develop special combat attributes. Allow supply priorities/levels given to HQs. Supply should be limited as in real life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concur emphatically aesopo! Let's not stop there, the oil factor needs a place in the supply calculations also. Is everyone OK with the force limitations for the manpower model? Perhaps an offensive like logistical card should be available for the players' discretion, kind of adds to the unknown, emphasis on intel like ULTRA, MAGIC, and others for surprises a player couldn't deduce from the playing map deployments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...