DevilDog

OK, time to eat crow. I don't have time for a long post now, but will post a more substantial one in a new thread later tonight. I have been converted to the realization that the game is unbalanced toward the Axis. I apologize for my earlier posts on this thread - I was way off. I have been seriously spanked as the Allies in my most recent PBEM with Jolly Guy.

Don't have time to do a long post now, but will do one later tonight. Due to the game with Jolly and a experimental game I played against the AI last night I am now a new convert to "the game is unbalanced towards the Axis" cause. I think that if the fixes are minimized, the less chance other areas of the game that are currently balanced will get thrown out of wack. [ September 25, 2002, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

I would definitely prefer a maintenance cost to a hard limit on unit types.

I don't see what the problem is. Sure you can attack with several depleted units, but they will do less damage to the enemy and be more likely to take higher damage themselves.

Wow, who were you guys playing with that got up to 2 dozen air fleets? That would require several years worth of MPPs, with none going towards ground forces. What was the opponent doing during this build-up? Air units are extremely succeptable to ground attack, especially if you can factor in a few air strikes of your own. I think it would be difficult to amass such a force against an opponent of equal skill. I know that sounds harsh - I'm not trying to step on anyones toes. And further I'm not trying to make any claims about my skill - I've just played most of my PBEM games against opponents who have roughly the same skill level as myself, whatever level that is. The point about achieving total superiority is valid - but this is true about ground forces as well. Once one side begins to get an advantage at mid game it usually goes down hill fairly quickly for the opposing player regardless of who is playing which side. I guess what I'm trying to say is: if you don't want your opponent to have 15 air fleets then don't let him build them. If you get board playing against someone who lets YOU build 15 air fleets then play against a better opponent.

I understand the "historical" and "realism" arguements. I disagree with them however. Having force pools and limiting air power may or may not make SC more realistic. They almost certainly would make it more historical. And that is exactly what I have a problem with. Many peoiple in this thread and others says they want a more historical SC. Well I don't. I already know how World War 2 ended. I think that would make for a truely boring game. Who wants to start the game knowing that Germany has no chance to win? What's the point of playing? To some extent the game has to be unhistorically and unrealistically balanced to provide for good game play. If air power were significantly changed, it would unbalance the German superiority in the early game, remove the German ability to perform a blitzkrieg, and make for a more WW1 trench warfare type of game. Definitely not as fun as a highly mobile war. I don't have the exact quote, but I'll look for it - Winston Churchill said that it took centuries for Britian to gain and hold supremacy of the sea, and that was the strength her world empire was based on. He then said that in a few short months at the beginning of the war her sea power had been suplanted by air power and that even if victorious (I don't think HE said "if") she would lose her empire due to the new age of air power. I don't want limits placed on what units I can buy. What seems to have happened is some people have had a bad PBEM experience by being defeated by the German played who massed air fleets. Well the Allies have a faily large MPP production rate above the Axis. If Germany can build air fleets why can't you? To impose your will on your opponent, sometimes you will have to build units to counteract his, not just the units you want to. We'll see how it all plays out. Right now I'm in a PBEM where my opponent has 7 air fleets and one bomber fleet as the axis. I don't think that I've made my purchaces too far from what was historically done, but I outnumber his air force. Of course his is massed and concentrated which gives him a slight advantage. Even if he wins the war (we'll see) I don't think it will be completely due to his numerically inferior air force, as seems to be sugested in other threads. But his air force will certainly have a substantial impact. There are a few tweeks that could possibly enhance SC, but IMO they shouldn't be the major game changing ones being discussed here and in the other threads.

Jolly invaded Russia on turn 63. The only suprise was the four level 5 tanks that I've seen so far. He has massed his airforce to the south. America has come in, so now all the players are in the game. I would say the next 10 turns will show if the Axis will be immediately victorious. For every turn after that the odds will decrease that the Axis will be able to defeat the Allies.

By the way, how are the other combatants in the contest doing?

OK, latest update on the JollyGuyAxis vs. DevilDogAllies campaign. We just completed turn 60. Due to national security I will of course be somewhat tight lipped about my assets. At the beginning of last turn Jolly took Yugo with 3 armies, 2 corps, 7 air groups and 1 bomber. And he needed each attack to take it too. Although Yugo fell, I extracted some revenge by destroying his lone air group in the West with massed air attacks of my own. All his units are massed along the Soviet border, if he transports them west to deal with Britian he runs the risk of being caught flat footed by Russia. If he doesn't transport at least some more west, then he leaves himself wide open for a massed invasion of France. He did get some lucky research rolls - his seven remaining air fleets are tech level 2 (not level 3 like I said in another post where I mistakenly counted level 0 as level 1). A few turn ago the Italians and British hashed it out with a massive naval action in the Med. Although they managed to send a British cruiser and battleship to the bottom, the Italians lost two battleships themselves, with their remaining cruiser down to 1, and last battleship down to 4. The sub had significant damage as well. Things should start happening pretty fast within the next few turns. If the Allies win it will be a long protracted affair. The Axis will have a small window of opportunity, where if everything goes well for them they can overwhelm Russia. But if Russia holds for the first several turns things will get increasingly hard for the Axis. It's already October 1941. When Russia comes in she will have a significant MPP stockpile. And the eastern front basically boils down to a battle of attrition. Stay tuned.

My opponent Jolly Guy did to suplement his 6 Lvl 3 fighters. Game is still in progress. Will let everyone know how it turns out.

Doomsday1: Don't put me in my grave just yet. So far everything predictable has happened. Axis forces took Poland in turn 3. Then Denmark. Next came the low countries. France fell around the beginning of June IIRC. The Atlantic Axis subs were wiped out early. Brest was occupied by Allied forces for several turns after France fell. Sicily was occupied by Allied forces for several turns as well. The Italian navy made an unsuccessful attempt to take out the Gibralter fleet. The German navy was wiped out in an abortive attempt to take Norway (although the landing may still be successful). The Germans have already advanced in Jet research. The British have made advances too, although I am not at liberty to expound further. The key for the Allies is to keep bending, but don't break.

I'm currently playing Allies against Jolly as Axis. We'll let you know how it goes.

In process now. We may have to write up a serious AAR (unless I get creamed, in which case I may have to take up fictional writing). So far Jolly has rolled over Poland and Denmark, but he's in for a suprise in France.

I think with regard to substantial changes in the game engine, less is more. I've never had a dificult time winning as the Allies. The most realistic aspect of SC IMO is the pace of the game. Just as in real life, Germany's only realistic chance to win the war was to have overpowering initial successes. Once all the Allies join in it's only a matter of time 'til they win. So in the game, just as in real life, germany is going to run all over the Allies at first. But the Allies don't have to win any battles, they just need to delay until America and Russia come in. For Germany to even have a chance in the game, initially the game has to be slanted in their favor.

The patch where this is implemented is when I stop upgrading SC. IMO this would ruin the entire tech tree. I don't know what the problem with the current system is. I've yet to get any lucky tech rolls during PBEM, although I've gotten a few against the AI. It seems the point of the above arrangement is to penalize players for investing in technology. It would become very rare to see anyone max out at 5 tech level in anything (and in my experience it's already rare to see that), which means if you DO get that lucky the game will become even more unbalanced than some are already claiming it is. The problem that is being complained about isn't tech advances, but the randomness, or "luck" involved. The solution isn't to keep you from getting tech improvements - that would just make the game less fun. I vote to leave well enough alone. When you change the entire game engine just because of a good or bad die roll during one scenario, the result may not be an improvement. The suggested change will not be an improvement and will potentially unbalance the game more. If a change is required, lessen the randomness involved in tech advances. Something along the lines of: For each point invested in a tech you start out with that percentage chance for a tech advance in that field. The next and each subsequent turn your percent chance for improvement doubles. I.E. you start out with 3 points in a field. This gives you a three percent chance of a tech improvement the NEXT TURN. The turn after that you have a six percent chance of improvement, and a 12 percent chance the turn after that. And so forth. This will preserve some randomness, yet minimize it somewhat as you will be assured of eventually advancing in that tech. I would also lower the max points able to be purchased down to 5 and double their cost. However, I would still allow all five to be put into one field at a time. [ September 13, 2002, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

Thanks for the quick reply Hubert. File on the way.

I'm playing version 1.2 in a BPEM game. I don't know what the other settings are (I didn't start the PBEM) but FOW is on. During the playback of my opponent's last turn a bunch of Axis units were transported and landed adjacent to my units. Four of the axis units were identified as German HQs (which was dubious as he couldn't possibly have had that many MPPs due to other units that I know he had). Then when the playback was over and it was my turn to move, all but one of those HQs were some other unit. Two were German armies and one was an Italian corps. I've never seen a unit be misidentified before, let alone the wrong nationality be portrayed. Is the FOW really that strong? I have the PBEM file if you want to see it Hubert. [ August 31, 2002, 09:42 AM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

Yep, already got mine. Too bad that they ran out and are now on backorder.

I basically had the Italians cover the southern front in Russia. The Scorched Earth setting was on. However, once the conquered cities reached 5 MPP production, I still couldn't purchase Italian units (other than air). No problems with German units. This appears to be a carry over bug from the unpatched game, when you couldn't trace a supply line through areas controlled by your allies. In other words, the code is still seeing the German controlled area as a barrier between the Italian capitol and the captured cities in Russia.

I think you are all beating a dead horse. The current system works fine as is.

If each player got to move per "turn" (i.e. keep everything the same as now, just don't change the date until both players have had a turn), instead of alternating turns I think the problems with 2 week standardized turns would go away. Then reduced actions points during the winter could be implemented. [ August 15, 2002, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

Yeah, you're right. It's one of the few things about SC that bugs me.

Willard: I made a post a while back prior to release stating that the USA's MPPs at entry into the war should be tied to Axis performance, i.e. if Germany has practically wiped out everyone else then the USA should be able to take on Germany by itself, or if Germany hasn't even been able to take out France yet then USA involvement should be minimal. While this may not always result in a historical force pool, it would do wonders for the gameplay. My 2 cents.

Looks awesome. Send me mine at jocelyn@wt.net (hey, my wife set up the e-mail account). thanks in advance.

Don't know if the patch fixes this or not - I haven't implemented yet as I still have some unfinished games. When I invaded England in July '44 as Germany (after finally wiping out Russia who conducted a suprise attack on me), I surrounded London in two turns. I then took a turn to capture London. During this time the brits received their regular MPP allotment, even though their capitol was cut off and their ports blockaded. Hubert please fix or sumfink! [ August 05, 2002, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]