Bill101

Why not read a book or magazine, put some music on, relax, ring up a friend, talk to your girlfriend or wife, get yourself a drink, etc etc. Or do like I do and play PBEM so that you don't have to wait while the other player does their move. Just how long are people taking to make their moves? Mine take between 1 and 5 minutes, depending on what stage of the war we're at. Are players taking a lot longer than that?

Thanks to you both for the interview. It was very interesting reading!

Hi Desaix I'd love to try out your campaign, but your email address doesn't appear on your profile. If you could send me it by email that would be great. Thanks

For units that won't risk taking any damage by attacking, I agree that preventing them from making any attacks when below a certain strength, somewhere between 1-3, is fine. However, for units that will risk receiving damage when making the attack, I would still allow such units to attack, as while they might inflict some losses, there's a good chance that they'll die in the attempt.

I'll be happy to give this a try via PBEM, as a friendly. I'm presuming that in return for the no DOW rule, there is no bidding. Also, just want to clarify: can the Axis DOW on the USSR or USA, or do they have to wait until those countries have joined the allies before they can attack?

The problem is that the town of Vichy has no strategic value apart from the fact that it was the seat of the government. A knock out blow to Marseilles would end all hopes of resistance in Vichy France in a way that a blow at the town of Vichy would not.

Mark has a point though, in that historically the allies only attacked neutrals, such as Vichy France, as part of a wider strategic campaign to drive the Axis out of the Mediterrenean. Invading countries simply to gain resources was not on the agenda, which is one reason why the allies are the good guys! That said, the concept of plunder is really simple and radically changing this at this stage might see SC2 delayed by a very long time. The alternatives would involve diplomacy, and as this is going to be featured in then perhaps the allies will do less invading for resources anyway? In the long run an extra ally is always worth more MPPs than a conquered nation, though admittedly it all depends on how long you've got...

There's not normally any problem with playing mods, but the only thing that springs to mind is whether you are using a different patch of SC? Were the mods made using patch 1.06 or earlier?

Titan, have you been playing SC against the computer or against other people? I've played the demo of Axis and Allies and I would recommend instead the game it was based on, Kohan, which is also made by the same people. It works well as a fantasy battle game, which is what Kohan is, but not quite as well as a WWII game. Or download the demo and make your own mind up!

Would it be possible to have the rocket detachment self destruct once launched, thus making them expensive one-off weapons, as A bombs were? I feel that this would better simulate an A bomb, but not having any idea how long it would take to program I'll leave it to you to decide whether it's worthwhile or not...

Although the original scenario proposed here is of the western allies having to do a DDay AFTER Russia has fallen, I think that there would definitely be a possibility of still winning the war if the allies were ALREADY established in Europe when Russia fell. Admittedly this is a slightly different scenario, but I would hate to see a victory condition whereby once Russia falls it is automatically game over. I have played a number of games where the Axis have thrown so much effort into the east that it has been a race to see if the western allies will be in Berlin before the Germans are in the Urals. In such an instance, why let the game end when Russia falls, if the western allies are still doing well?

I've thought about the conquered countries too, but the worry is that the Axis player will give everything to Germany. This would considerably benefit the Axis overall as due to the better German HQs every MPP spent on German land and airforces is worth more than the equivalent spent on the Italians. I like the system at the moment where you have to plan your conquests correctly beforehand, and occasionally I've been forced to give the country to Italy when I wanted Germany to have it, and vice versa. I guess it depends on what the public demand is. If this is a simple programming task (providing such a thing exists!) then maybe these abilities could be added to the game options.

Currently (i.e. in SC1) when a country that started the game as neutral is liberated by the allies it will be placed under British control, with the British receiving all its MPPs. It would be good to have the ability to transfer all liberated non-East European countries between the western allies. For example, Spain is liberated from the Germans and the allied player decides to put Spain under American control. There should be limits to this, in that territory that was originally French or British cannot be handed over to another power, while East European states liberated by the Russians cannot be handed over to the western allies. Another thing I'd like is that in a game I'm playing at the moment France has been liberated. Syria was never conquered by the Axis and I'd like to now transfer control of the country back to France. Can a feature allowing this be put into SC2? Thanks.

I sometimes position a German bomber in Copenhagen as it can watch the coasts of both southern Norway and western Germany. It is a bit more expensive than having 2-3 corps watching the coasts for allied commandos, but sometimes opportunities occur which the bomber can take advantage which the corps can't. For example, if the allies keep bombarding Bergen then the bomber can move north one turn, and then strike the allied battleship the next. As long as the allied airforces are occupied elsewhere then this can prevent further attacks, and when the allies use weakened ships it can be a pleasure to sink them in this way. I'm not saying that this is necessarily better than placing corps to guard key areas around Denmark and northwest Germany, but if I have a few MPPs to spare then it can be useful (and as you won't need the 2-3 corps to guard the coasts the bomber doesn't actually cost much more). In one game I played some time back two Italian bombers put paid to a large number of allied raiders and a significant chunk of the Royal Navy, but it's not something that I'd try often. It worked in that game because the allies put a lot of effort into raiding and bombarding, and with the Luftwaffe escorting the Italians, the bombers soon built up a lot of experience (4 stars!) as they rarely suffered any significant losses. I should point out that this was in a 1941 game where the Axis had been halted and needed to play defensively, and I've never thought of doing it in a 1939 game. [ October 21, 2004, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Perhaps I overstated the case, but I've been surprised how a number of experienced SC players have floundered in the other campaigns, like 1941. I'm not saying that they should have won in their first attempt, but when people give up not very far into the game saying that they don't know what to do, then it shows that they haven't got a good grasp of strategy.

The test of real generalship is being able to adapt to different situations and still perform well. A good Fall Weiss player will without doubt be a good SC player, but if they can only do well at Fall Weiss because they have memorised all the correct moves for the first few years of the war then they will never be an excellent SC player.

I was just thinking that as we've already got a very successful league why make another. It's not a big issue, and perhaps some players might want to start off with a clean slate?

Yes, I always have done. Since the AA radar bug was discovered other people have started doing so too. The bug is that if your airfleet is based on a resource, and you have AA radar, when it launches an air strike and is intercepted it will benefit from the AA radar in the clash with the enemy airfleet. However, the intercepting airfleet will not benefit from any AA radar research of their own in this clash. I should add that it's not because of this bug that I invest in AA. The beauty of AA research is that it makes enemy air attacks on your resources and cities more expensive, while it doesn't cost you a penny! [ October 18, 2004, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

I prefer to give the UK and France IT level 1 (or 2 if you are feeling adventurous). I don't like giving the UK a ton of MPPs at the start because it often leads to ahistorical situations, especially if the Axis are slow to invade the Low Countries. I guess it's because I prefer a long, hard fought game to one which might be decided early on. Another rule is not to allow the Axis to land any units in North America until after the UK has fallen. This: 1) frees up both the Canadian corps and army for use overseas, thus giving the UK a small boost at the beginning. 2) means that the allies don't have to keep moving the Canadian corps around Canada to watch the coast, which must be the only boring aspect of SC (and it really is boring having to watch the Canadian coast!). Give this a try, with the USA and USSR getting the usual bidding points. [ October 18, 2004, 11:21 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Curry, just want to clarify, are you suggesting having SC1 in a separate league from SC2? I'm not sure whether I'd like them to be kept in the same league together or separated, and would welcome thoughts. Thanks.

Arngrim, you don't need to watch the forests. Naturally we have to accept some limitations on realism in SC, but I do feel slightly uneasy with anti-partisan warfare as it is in SC1, as at the moment you can use a dozen corps, all of which might only be at strength 1, to prevent any partisans appearing. Also, if Yugo partisans appear, kill them with air and the hexes they were in will remain khaki. I believe I'm right in thinking that as long as you don't move any of your troops into those hexes then they will never produce any partisans again.

Thanks. I might contact him when the SC2 demo comes out.

I always visualise SC1's rockets in that role, as a correct simulation of V1s and V2s would probably only allow them to inflict damage on cities and resources. Maybe this will change for SC2?

Exactly Shaka! In the first world war many "Pals battalions" were formed in Britain from volunteers who all lived in the same area and often worked together. Given the horrendous casualties at the front the effect of losing so many people from one area, at once, was devastating, and their memory still lingers on today. Part of the poignancy is of course the naive enthusiasm with which many of them went off to war.

John Maybe this will help: Standard infantry division during WWII (ok it's abstracted and obviously not always correct). 3 British battalions = 1 brigade; 3 brigades = 1 division. 3 German (and many other nationalities) battalions = 1 regiment; 3 regiments = 1 division. If British sources are talking about a British regiment which had more than one battalion, then they will write something like this in an order of battle: 42nd Highlanders (2 battalions). If you see this: 42nd Highlanders Then assume that there was only 1 battalion. In the British army the battalions of the same regiment will often be serving in totally different theatres. That way if it all goes wrong in one theatre you are not losing the whole regiment, and transfers from the other battalions in the regiment will help to form a core of experienced soldiers to start rebuilding the shattered battalion.