Bill101

Me too! The more I read about SC2, the more I look forward to it.

Xwormwood wrote: "I am very sure that SC II would be selling better with hex-system, because we, the wargamers, expect, know and love hexes." Actually, I think you'll find that there is more diversity in the wargaming field than you think. Boardgamers may use hexes all the time, but in my experience table-top wargamers very rarely do. In my club we have fought a very large number of historical campaigns over the years, and last year we fought the very first ever with a map system using hexes (bear in mind that we've been doing at least one campaign a year for the past 25 years, in all the others we have used a wide variety of maps and mapping systems). Therefore I would suggest that one half of the wargaming community will be open to a non-hex based game. Their questions are more likely to relate to other things, such as the game's playability.

These French Nazis, as you call them, are already represented by the forces of Vichy France.

I see two options unfolding here (though it might be a bit boring to work out and program in the historical one): 1) Historical weather. 2) Random weather, as described above by DD. I'm not fussed if it is all random, but if it is easy then it would be nice to have a historical weather setting too. Also, will it be possible to have winter equipment to lessen the effect of the Russian winter? Or am I taking things a bit too far? [ April 18, 2004, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Shaka, I think you have a point. In one way, SC1 already discourages us from putting airfleets in mountains and swamps, because their supply (and therefore their readiness) will be lower. If I am in a big air battle, I try as much as possible to avoid putting my airfleets in such terrain, so maybe the status quo isn't as bad after all. It is at least simple to use. [ April 18, 2004, 07:19 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Exel wrote: "No. When D-Day comes, you invade along the entire coastline of France, bringing most of your western army ashore at once. Surely you can't claim that to be realistic?" Actually, it depends on the situation. I have carried out invasions with between 1 and 10 units landing on the first turn. But, whatever the size of the invasion force, Brest is always the initial target. A 50 mile stretch of coastline is rarely uniform. Having been to the Normandy beaches, I can say that some aspects of them are rather uninviting to both the tourist and invader alike. Fancy climbing Point du Hoc? I don't, but the Rangers managed it.

Suitable landing areas are more common than one might think. The real problem is keeping the troops supplied and reinforced once they have landed. If it is possible to create a Mulberry harbour, to land extra supplies by boat, and also to evacuate when things go wrong, then I'll be happier to consider restricted landing areas. However, at the moment landing areas are already restricted by the possiblity of capturing a resource to provide us with supply. No resource = failed invasion. Therefore in SC1 the only good place to invade France is near Brest. As we all know that isn't historically correct, but unless other features are changed we will need to continue landing there.

You are right - Hitler would not have made Vichy twice. Which means that what happens to France should it be conquered for a second time should be different to the first time. I have also thought about the allies having to hold Paris for 2 or 3 turns before Vichy reunites with France, as you have, and I think that could work too.

But Shaka, fitting one airbase into a 50sq mile area is not the problem. The problem is fitting enough air bases for a whole airfleet of hundreds of aircraft, along with thousands of personnel and all their logistical support. Some terrain will fit this role better than others, and I think it is reasonable to question whether some terrain hexes should be able to support an air fleet.

I'm more than happy to use tiles as I don't understand the fixation with hexes. If playtesting shows that tiles work, then tiles it is! Tiles will have the effect of making ground war, and the use of reserves, more important, with the air war slightly less important. Isn't this historically correct?

KDG: An option to return Vichy to France also implies an option not to do so! VVeed I would only automatically return Vichy after the liberation of France if France's surrender conditions are changed. Under the current surrender conditions, if the Axis were to retake Paris in a counterattack then that would lead to the surrender of both France and Vichy France. France's Surrender Conditions I would like to see alternative ideas for France's surrender conditions too. For instance, if the Free French option is off, then France's surrender terms could be like every other country's. Or, perhaps better still, France's surrender depends not only on the fall of Paris, but also on how many French units are still in the vicinity of Paris when the capital falls. That way, the French might continue to fight for a few more turns, giving them the option if they are very lucky to retake their capital. I think that this could add something to those hard fought battles for France that sometimes occur. Maybe then we could have the chance for Free French land and air units based on a dice roll just as it currently is for French naval units? [ April 17, 2004, 05:59 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Yohan wrote on the subject of Spanish partisans: "Shurely (don't call me Shurley) you are thinking of the Spaniards during the Napoleonic Wars?" "Today they would just climb into a hole and vote their government out for trying to perhaps fight terrisom and uphold any sort of decent morals." This isn't a very useful contribution to the discussion, and I presume it is based on your ignorance of Spanish history in the aftermath of Franco's victory (as well as your desire to score a cheap political point, but in the wrong forum for it). There was a Spanish resistance movement throughout WWII, as well as an invasion of Spain in late 1944 by about 15,000 Spanish troops in an unsuccessful attempt to spark off the liberation of Spain. Exiled Spaniards also fought on all fronts against the Axis, in the French army (especially in the French Foreign Legion), British Army (including the Commandos, the SAS, and training the Home Guard in anti-tank warfare), the French resistance, and even in the Red Army. One of the first allied units to enter Paris in August 1944 was a Spanish tank company. To have Spanish partisans in WWII is totally historical. Because they were the losers in the civil war, and also because they didn't have any big international backers (they generally weren't communists, at least not ones aligned with the Soviet Union) their story has been left largely untold and forgotten. If you want to learn more, then hunt down Antonio Tellez' book on Sabate (his life was even turned into a film by Hollywood) and, if you can read Spanish, Eduardo Pons Prades' Los Guerrillas Espanoles is a good general survey. But please, no more comments based on ignorance.

When both France and Vichy France have been liberated by the allies, can there be an option for the allied player to transfer control of the Vichy portion from the UK to France? It has always seemed strange to me that France is never reunited in SC1, even after the chance of a German re-conquest has long passed.

As we all know, when the Red Army advanced west in 1944 and '45 it didn't exactly install democracy in the liberated areas. There was wholesale conscription into the Red Army, while what industry there was was used to produce equipment for the Soviet war machine. It's always struck me as odd that the Russians can liberate an allied minor like Yugoslavia or Greece, and the UK benefits from the extra MPPs! Would it not be more historical for allied minors liberated by the Soviets to be controlled by and help fund the Soviet war machine? In addition to this, as the Yugo partisans will often help in the liberation of their own country when the allies win, would it be possible for the Yugo partisans to randomly alternate between Red and non-communist? That way, Yugoslavia might swing for the east or the west, and it will also help to get us in the mood for SC5: The Cold War.

Will there be a possibility of large scale sabotage, i.e. the economic effect that the Russian partisans currently have, but without the partisan unit appearing? In my opinion this would better reflect the majority of resistance activity.

Actually I'm not sure that you are in a minority. I am excited about it, and judging by some of the talk of creating mods on Finland, the Pacific and WWI, others are too. Welcome to the forum!

Exel wrote: "I just don't get it why you people object to having things not totally under your control." This is a clear case of misunderstanding what I've said in my previous post. However, I've just read your compromise suggestion and it is certainly one possible answer to the problem. Kelly's Heroes' Atom bomb example is useful, but only if we are talking about researching atom bombs. It was such a new technology, reliant on rare components and major scientific breakthroughs that its research isn't in the same league as designing, for example, a more powerful aero engine, or a heavier piece of artillery. I would concede that atom bomb research, if included, could be more luck based. [ April 15, 2004, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

I think the main problem with this thread is that those who want less luck to be involved in research are being misinterpreted as being against there being any luck involved at all. I want luck to play a part in this game, but I also want its role in research to be reduced. It's just a question of getting the balance right. From what I've seen so far some steps have been taken to address this in terms of how the research is implemented, but we don't yet know how research itself will be carried out. [ April 15, 2004, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

One could say that if the Dark Forces of the Evil Axis Empire are still in control of the UK and France at the end then it is a defeat for the allies, but that is letting my anti-fascist bias interfere with a wargame!

Rambo wrote: "If you sit around waiting for the retail version, I'll be playing SC3-Pacific by then". Hopefully we'll all be playing it by then! I think some of the critics miss the point. Battlefront's marketing strategy works, and the success of Combat Mission is the proof.

One can incorporate both investment and luck. For example, let's say that investing 500 MPPs in aircraft research gives an estimated wait of 10 turns before the next level of jets will be ready. However, there could be a dice roll built in so that in reality they could be ready in 8-12 turns. That way we have both planning and luck mixed together, in a way that avoids the situations in SC1 where games can be decided (or at least strongly influenced) by one side's very good or bad luck with research. [ April 15, 2004, 08:13 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Long term strategy really is the key to success in this game, and no amount of reloading is going to make up for a hopeless strategy. However, where reloading could help is with both research advances and launching attacks on really important targets. If your opponent is always winning their combats extremely easily, and you suspect that they might be loading and reloading their turns until they get things right, then ask them to play by TCP/IP the next time. That way you'll be able to see just how good they really are. But my main advice is not to worry about it and just play. I really think that the vast majority of players play it straight.

The Polish OOB in Fall Weiss is also a little wrong, as some Armies are down as Corps and vice versa, and this doesn't reflect their real strengths either, as the Krakow Army was the biggest mobilised army, yet it is a Corps in SC. I would be more inclined to represent the Pomorze Army with a Corps. In reality they had more formations than SC gives them, though as the majority were still in the process of mobilising when the war began adding half strength units would probably be the most realistic way to correct this. If the Germans are bumped up then maybe the Benelux countries will also have to be bumped up a little? I can't wait for SC2 when we'll be able to make the campaigns exactly how we want them... [ April 15, 2004, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: Bill101 ]

Exel wrote: "They have stated numerous times..." I must be blind!

I haven't seen this discussed already, but looking at the first screen shot (the one entitled 'add unit'), there are numbers in brackets after the troops type, e.g.: HQ (4) Corps (3) Army (3) etc. Does this mean that there might be troop limits in SC2, and if so, will it be optional?