Timskorn

Is the game scipted or does allow for "what ifs" like not attacking Poland and attacking France, etc.? As the game goes on, yes, but it still follows a pretty historical path. In the 1939 Fall Weiss campaign (the one most people play), you are already at war with Poland and France. At this point you can't change that fact, but many different strategies can be employed that can affect your long-term decisions. After Poland and France falls though, it's up to you how to go from there. War with Russia WILL happen eventually, but as Axis you can have it start sooner or later than the historical date. There are plenty of strategies, on both sides, that allow a different outcome each game. You can use diplomacy to sway Turkey to the Axis, for example, or try and take it by force. Or you can invade England and hope Spain and Turkey are emboldened by your success and join your side automatically. How good is the AI? The AI is excellent. It has come a LONG way through numerous patches. As a veteran player, playing a game on Expert gives me a run for my money. Giving the AI a +1 experience bonus on top of that, well I'll probably end up losing! How "realistic" is the combat? Depends on what you mean. The biggest complaint people have is the fact SC2 abstracts the entire destruction of a division. Lots of units get wiped off the map in a game, which realistically didn't happen that often, but in SC2 you can "buyback" those same units at half the regular price as an abstraction of "reorganizing and refitting" and routed unit. For the balance and play of the game, combat works great. How well is the research handled? Research is fairly generic. You buy chits in a category, such as infantry weapons, and each chit gives you an increased % chance of successful research. If you hit it, then next turn your units can use the new tech. But you can research many different categories, such as industry, subs, rockets, etc. and they are definitely a big part in your overall strategy (such as if you wanted to go heavy with Axis subs over tanks, early Allied bombers over ground units, etc). How well is the diplomacy handled? Diplomacy is very well done, in my opinion. This is one area that really helps make each game unique. As Axis, for example, you can try early to get Spain to join your side…but then that causes the US to ship some of its Pacific fleet over to the Atlantic. Certain military actions can also cause diplomacy shifts as well. Lots of cool things with diplomacy, both through scripts and your own actions. What over positives or negatives are there? This you would really need to play the demo a few times to figure that out for yourself. There are a lot of long-time, veteran players that have been here since SC1 and is a testament to how good the game is. Multiplayer is definitely one of the reasons for its longevity as well (on top of the awesome dev and patch support, of course). But whether single-player or multi-player, you will get your $$$ worth with this one.

The real trick is finding that middle ground between grognards and casual. To create the "beer and pretzel" style wargame that appeals to both. I know some argue that you can't try and cater to both or you'll alienate both, but that's wrong. It can be done, and SC2 is proof…albeit, *early* proof. It can certainly be even better. There is always a temptation in a game like this to add more depth through features and more realistic modeling of war. This is both rooted in the desire to add more strategic options (and in theory, making repeated play throughs more satisfying) and to make it more historic. Adding oil, for example, would create a whole new layer of not only the decisions you make for your own troops and strategy, but how to deny those same options from your enemy. It also risks actually narrowing down your overall options if winning is heavily dependent on having it. The other desire is simply to make it more historical. There's a major threshold for each player in determining what is acceptable or not to have, or not have, in a wargame. Does it make it too gamey, or too rigid? Is it actually fun to include this or that, simply because that was in the real war? SC2 has done a fine job of finding that balance. I think the risk outweighs the reward at this point in adding too much to it. SC3 would have to be the game to tackle a new system from scratch, in my opinion. Also, I too went back to SC2 vanilla recently to play the Global War mod. It's refreshing to actually NOT have the extra units, allowing the game to go back to more of a chess match. I do miss the double-strike armor though… WaW is also great because it created a new gameplay experience, but didn't obsolete SC2 vanilla in the process!

Retreat rules in SC2 would have little, if any, benefit to the gameplay. For one thing, it would be terribly annoying. Imagine you hit 3 or 4 units down to 1 strength, they all retreat out of danger. Next turn, your opponent reinforces them all or op-moves them all away. It would prolong combat and give more benefits to defense, which doesn't need any more help as it is. Two, as Bill said it's already abstracted and there is much more satisfaction in removing a unit from the game via combat than chasing them around like whack-a-mole. I understand where you're coming from and the logic behind it and the idea might work in another game, but I don't think with SC2. This is something that would need to be planned on being in the game from the beginning, in my opinion.

I loved Command HQ…such simplicity, yet with enough detail to make strategy more than putting more units in one area than your opponent. The map was basically a series of squares that allowed overlap of units which occurred in real-time. It was really novel, actually. Only infantry could enrench, and happened when they sat for x number of turns. Only armor could "blitzkrieg" through units, and flanking bonuses applied when you engaged a unit from multiple sides. Air units could bomb cities and units, intercept and be used for paradrops. Subs could sneak attack by sitting still at sea, and land units attacking from sea were considered amphib assaults with penalties applied. I'd actually love to see an updated, more historical version of that. It was truly a "beer and pretzel" wargame. Ok, I'm off topic…sue me. But to try and make a point here…I think its mostly hardcore wargamers that make hexes a big deal. If something "works" and is fun, I really don't care what is used. If it's hexes, great…if it's squares, whatever.

Yes! It is a tough fight for the Germans though if the UK is prepared for it. Concentrate your airpower and land troops on a single unit. The UK won't be replacing them and that will free up more room for your forces. Now, if you can't move because the UK has more units there than you do, then you're in trouble. In the end it's a big gamble where some recon and surprise can tilt the odds in your favor.

This idea came to me after I was offered a free copy of a Battlefront game for inspiring the latest contest. I naturally picked PDE, but I suddenly felt like I had to give back something even more. It rests in my philosophy to support smaller publishers and developers struggling to carve out some market share against the multi-million dollar behemoths like EA. Having also worked in that kind of industry I've seen the "do or die" mentality that comes when a publisher and developer spend millions on a game. It *has* to become a hit, or everyone loses. Companies shut down, jobs are lost and the gap between big developers and small ones widens even more. With that in mind, this new contest has two main goals. One, to generate traffic to battlefront and two, to generate sales (primarily for the SC2 series but if they buy other games here, that's great too). Contest:The contest is tentatively titled, "The Ridiculously Easy Strategic Command 2 Contest". Most contests are typically geared towards people who already own the game (scenario or map contests) or towards people with some sort of skill (story writing, art, etc) or anyone with a reasonable IQ level. Not this one! If you have the capacity to type a number into a post, you are in luck my friend. I'll be choosing a number between 1 and 10,000 and whoever gets closest to the number wins the prize (or prizes: see below!). Prize and Challenge: And what is the prize? I'll be buying the SC2 bundle package and the PDE expansion to give away to a lucky winner. I want to take this one…or two, or three steps further and throw out the "challenge" part of this contest. I challenge anyone out there, particularly the veteran players who have been here a long time, to match my prize. Think of it as a donation to support a company and developer that brought you a game that's given you years of enjoyment. If you are up for the challenge, post here. You can opt to buy the SC2 bundle w/out PDE, PDE by itself OR both the bundle and PDE. If we have multiple prizes, we'll award them to the people who got closest to the number. I was going to require the prize packages to be bought before the contest starts, to limit "flaking on promises" that often happens with contests like these, but it was decided it could be handled much easier through Battlefronts purchasing system if we held off until the winners are announced (and PDE is closer to release). The main thing is we're supporting Battlefront and Fury Software. Not only as an extra "Thank You", but to help spread the word on a great game that gets largely ignored by review sites (mostly because they are only interested in game reviews that bring in advertising $$$). For those who won't, or can't, buy a prize package you can help by spreading the news on this contest to anyone even remotely interested in this kind of game. This is an easy opportunity for them to have a chance at getting a free copy and at a point in the games life where it has come along a LOT in terms of balance, bugs and gameplay if they were initially turned off by it earlier. Of course there are "hexers" out there that won't ever like it, but whatever. THE CONTEST WILL NOT BEGIN YET. Again, this is a preliminary thread to get some feedback on the contest in general, and garner some support in terms of prize packages. Once things are set I will create a new thread announcing the start of the contest, the rules, prizes and when the contest will end. Also…this is an UNOFFICIAL contest. Battlefront and/or Hubert aren't guaranteeing anything, so if you offer up a prize and flake out you'll probably be put on Rambo's Coward List. Also…if anyone from an online games mag (or if anyone knows them) would be interesting in helping promote this contest once it begins, such as Armchair General, that would be much appreciated as well!

Zvonar, I believe Arado234 has been looking to start the tourny, so if you guys can get going I'll add you both in. Let me know!

Ibukovec and The Real Deal are now matched up with each other for round 4.

Yep, definitely use any of your ideas you've posted here. Since this is an official contest though, just make sure if you haven't already that your idea conforms to the outline given. This would be a good time to revisit your concept too and see if there's anything you'd want to add, change or remove from it before posting for the contest.

I've always been lured to try WitP. I'll visit the forums once in awhile, read some AAR's, look at some screenies and get excited to buy it...then I don't. I feel like that's a game I'll tackle when I retire. Big reason I stick to SC2, I feel like I can accomplish a lot in a short(er) period of time.

No, AAR's are up to you guys! Just have the winner post here when the game finishes.

No rules guys, just have the winner post here when you're done. Just have fun, try some different strategies and hope you come out on top.

Jeff: If you check out the scenario design challenge thread, you will see some ideas for how to handle naval/air warfare, invasions, etc. and feel free to add any of your own! For a Pacific mod, there definitely needs to be some fundamental design additions/changes to make it feel right. I'm sure there's a lot that could be added, but hopefully if HC and team are adding new features for a Pacific mod they address the core ones (Primarily, expanded naval/air rules and invasion rules).

Jon, I wanted to do that! My first scenario I ever made using the Empire Earth editor was based off of Red Dawn. Had to lead a group out of the mountains to ambush a convoy, sneak into an occupied American city, meet a contact there who is ready to lead an uprising, then blow up a T-72 to initiate it. The final battle involved your guys and resistance fighters pushing them out of the city. With the PDE expansion we should be able to do the Red Dawn thing somehow...on a larger scale, of course. IIRC the story was Russians came in through Alaska and Canada, and cut the country in two after heading south to link up with the South American forces that invaded Texas (and paradropped in disguised as commercial airliners). Realistic? Probably not, but it'd be a fun scenario to play out.

Awesome! Thanks Edwin, sounds fantastic.

Great to hear Edwin. This is one thing I loved in the EU games. I know this won't be as detailed, but these added decision trees are great. There were a lot of tough decisions that had to be made by leaders and generals that, upon hindsight, either led to victory or disaster. Allowing us to make these kinds of choices is fun and can give us that hindsight at the end of the game, "If only I had done this…" Are these decision trees going to branch quite a bit? For example, will there be decisions that appear only if you chose to accept the UK neutrality, but won't appear if you didn't? Or will these be limited to single large decisions only, like the one you cited?

Modding is just very time consuming...I did a lot of AI work for SC2 and it took me weeks, if not months to get what I wanted. And that's just adjusting AI based off what was already there. Creating it from scratch, maps from scratch, graphics from scatch, etc...that would be a full time commitment!

I love the way SC2 is shaping up. We have the core game, heavily patched and with a global addition. We have WaW and a global war addon coming for that, and possibly a pacific-only scenario and now the PDE expansion. Until SC3 comes out, and maybe even after that if it's a different engine/time period, this SC2 mega-package should keep us busy for a long time.

Atomic weapons would definitely be a nice addition. Considering the timeline, it's still early enough that the US wouldn't have stockpiles of them and Russia would be playing catchup (which may work, balance-wise, as the Commies probably outnumber the Allies 2:1 in most scenarios). New units and new abilities will be key as well…otherwise it may just feel like a generic Red vs. Blue war using the same units from SC2 but with different graphics. It would be AWESOME to see minor conflicts arise in neutral countries, or maybe even countries that have already joined a side, to depict the ideological struggle between both sides. Say Greece joins the Allies, but Russia could continue using diplo (or sending MPP "aid") to communist forces there. When they get enough support, a couple units and an HQ appear in the country to try and take over the pro-Allied Greek government. As the Allied player, it would be possible to see the level of Communist support in that country (ala the diplo screen) so you know how close it is to revolution. In any case…it would add a great dynamic to the game, and something that would capture the "feel" of the ideological struggle between the west and the east.

Was very glad to see this announced today. Looks and sounds great and love the massive map scale. I think it's a perfect continuation for the SC2 engine. The West vs. East situation creates an interesting new dynamic to the war we've been used to. We're used to "Axis in the Middle" and the Allies fighting from the outside in. Now the front will be divided right down the middle, in a sense, and will open up all new possibilities for the Allies in creating new fronts against Russia in the South and SE. It's nice to see America opened up on the map, but will it be a battleground in a typical game? Without the Pacific area represented a Russian player can't try and move in on Alaska or the West Coast. In any case, can't wait for the summer!

No more thinkin', get to the buyin' part.

Everyone give their rebate checks to Hubert!!!

Here is my theory: Hubert is busy creating an amazing Global War experience with WaW. Not many of you probably check the mod forum, but this is what Hubert posted on December 28th: Here is hoping we see some of the designs implemented from the challenge thread, and even if not, I'm sure we can expect some nice additions that aren't found in either SC2 or WaW. Not to mention, hopefully, a fleshed out scripting and AI on par with the Fall Weiss scenarios. If it has some big design additions, enough to almost consider this a new game in the series, I hope Hubert and/or Battlefront decides to do some kind of pricing plan. Either charge a fixed price (probably lower than the stand-alone games) or offer a way to "pay what you feel is worth it", like Radiohead did with their recent album. After all, Hubert has to spend his time working on something that won't make him additional money when he could be starting on a completely new project. I'd be more than happy to "contribute" some money to his work, even if he releases it for free.

This prompts me to a question I've been meaning to ask. In another game I'm in, I decided to go for a Sealion and took England. Did the British people not have the means (whether in equipment and/or men) to draft an emergency military force to repel the German invasion? I can't imagine the bulk of their fighting men were already in operational units. Germany organized units to defend the homeland, Japan was ready to throw everyone at an Allied landing of the mainland, and of course the US would have organized forces (and which they do in-game). Did Italy organize home defense units? My question is, why don't the Brits get some free units after a week or two of fighting in England? Just a question. I feel for gameplay purposes it's currently balanced well, because you need garrison units in all three cities to keep the Brits from sabotaging everything, which is a representation of their continued resistance in England.

Spring 1944: Russians are in two defensive positions. One surrounding the city north of Moscow, and the other in the Urals. The defensive pocket north of Moscow is merely enough to force German units there to take it out. They are behind fortifications, but the end result there is inevitable collapse by the summer. The Urals are the last line of defense and plans to be a prickly thorn before the Germans see the surrender of Russia. Western Allies are clearly waiting to launch their final, massive D-Day upon Europe. Kman knows this and has been busy fortifying every conceivable landing or invasion location. Yugoslavia is fortified in case we come in through Greece, and the lands E and N of Vichy France are fortified, including fortifications surrounding Paris. The Russians will certainly be able to hold on until D-Day arrives, but the western Allies, despite their numerous forces, have their work cut out for them. Experienced and numerous German troops will be sent from the Eastern front to deal some serious damage. While the outcome seems certain, the Allies must make one last effort. They haven't assembled five million men for nothing...