DevilDog

Nice reference to THGTTG.

If my copy isn't waiting for me when I get home from work I'm gonna have to sue someone for pain and suffering. Well, living in Houston probably the best I can hope for is tomorrow....

I agree with Titan's post. The only thing I would add to those ideas would be the addition of the feature of having planning phases available (but they wouldn't have to be required). Meaning that if your units do not start adjacent to the enemy units they are to attack, they should require attack planning to be done (maybe with a pull down menu that says "planning" where you choose where you will attack). Then the longer you wait without moving your units who are to participate in the attack, the better bonuses you will receive when it goes off. An additional feature to go along with this would be Strategic level Intel, where the longer you let a planned attack go before executing it, the more likely the enemy will get wind of it (presuming that they have the intel capability to penetrate your intel defenses). Once again Hubert just some ideas for SC2.

I coulda sworn I read somewhere a while back that it was gonna be included.

Well I guess the only way to find out how many copies were sold is to have everyone post here. I bought one copy....

Yes, but don't forget that the demo ends only several months short of when Barbarosa actually took place. So you wouldn't have a whole lot more troops. Play a game with no FOW and check out the number of Russian units. There are enough that it would be difficult to take out Russia reguardless of how many units Germany has. And don't forget that the longer you wait to invade the more units Russia gets, as well as a higher MPP pool for the first turn of active hostilities. [ July 26, 2002, 06:13 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

I think many posters on this thread are confusing Strategic level planning with operational planning and tactics. The United States have usually had superb strategic level military leaders. If nothing else, WW 2 showed that. The very plan to use overwhelming resources and production against the Axis is a type of strategy. In fact the whole strategic plan to invade France was to create an opportunity to bring this strength to bear. That being said, I will definitely agree that historically the U.S. military commanders at the operational level, and at times even down at the tactical level, have left a lot to be desired. Don't know how a U-boat thread devolved into this discussion. [ July 26, 2002, 12:33 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

I've heard the "Soviets were about to invade" theory before from several different sources. There certainly is a lot of evidence to support it. One of the reasons the Germans did so well initially is that the Russians were deployed in droves along the border - meaning they were easy to surround, and once surrounded they were screwed. Many of their major supply dumps were located well forward as well - a major screw-up IF they had been intending to deploy for a defensive fight, but understandable if they were planning to invade Germany.

Has anyone else experienced this? Russia was likely too weak in the beta, but now it seems way too strong. I played a game recently where all settings were default (so no FOW) and I was amazed at the increased number of units Russia had. I never even made it close to Moscow, and I began my invasion the first turn in August. With the beta I had one game where I was about one turn from Russia surrendering (had taken everything except St. Petersburg and Moscow, both of which were surrounded) (and yes I had already taken everything back in the Urals). This was very difficult to do and probably wouldn't have happened against a human opponent. Maybe Russia needed a slight tweek to make it just a little tougher, as most attacks aren't nearly that successful. However, Russia is now too fortified. I think the adjustment to Russia overcompensated. I doubt I would willingly fight Russia in this game any more, as even a novice gamer could easily hold off and then beat back the Germans. What does everyone else think? [ July 26, 2002, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

Here's my vote for an up-to-six-player patch.

Where can I get that Mod?

I remember reading about that as well. Could it have been in "Bodyguard of Lies"?

CM:BB

Usually I buy 5 points and put them into one catagory. But I probably average only one advance per game. My one game exception to this supports the "there's something wrong" theory. I had one turn where I put 5 points into Industrial Tech and the next turn I had an advance. And the next. And the next. And the next. And the next. I ended up with Industrial Tech maxed out in just five turns. It was like the die roll got stuck. I have never been able to replicate this though.

Because then it would be obvious. What will be more fun than making all new SC community members pass through an initiatory butt-kicking PBEM. This will be ensured by the right click to reinforce function. After losing a dozen or so straight PBEM games we will of course let them in on the joke...

Wait! Wait! Let me get my 2 cents in! I think there should be a nominal return in MPPs for naval disbanding (20-35% or so). But that there should be a delay in receiving these MPPs (like 6 months to 1 year). The purchase of naval units is abstracted, i.e you have to assume you've been building them for a while. But this is harder to do for naval disbandment - the game would actually have to create the delay in MPP returns.

The other thing that I think got unbalanced is the reduction in striking power of the air fleets. It's a toss-up which had a greater impact in France, the German armored units or using the Stukas as flying on-the-spot artillery. The German airforce had a decisive effect on the battle for France (at least in '40 it did). Now playing as the Germans, my air fleets are next to worthless. In one game on the green setting I bombed the Amsterdam unit with all three of my air fleets. Result? Two of my air fleets took damage and the Allied unit didn't take a scratch. I think it's dangerous to make major play balance changes off the beta demo. Lots of the things people were complaining about could be changed by doing research; it was an incentive to do research actually. Maybe the German air fleets would be a lot more effective if they were at a higher tech level, but there is no time to do that at the start of the scenario. The France '40 scenario should already start with the German advantages over the Allies. I think if it's too hard for the Germans to take out France and deal with the Allies in the early war years, when they historically had the advantage, it will make them a walk-over in the mid war years (there might not BE any late war years). Every play balance issue has to be weighed out over the length of the entire war. A small tweek in the begining may have a profound (and negative) impact on the later war. The real trick is play balance and making a fun game. Because in real life WW 2 there were few times when opponents were evenly matched. The trick is making the game show all the advantages one side may have had, without making it such an automatic blow-out that it's no fun. My 2 cents.

The other thing that I think got unbalanced is the reduction in striking power of the air fleets. It's a toss-up which had a greater impact in France, the German armored units or using the Stukas as flying on-the-spot artillery. The German airforce had a decisive effect on the battle for France (at least in '40 it did). Now playing as the Germans, my air fleets are next to worthless. In one game on the green setting I bombed the Amsterdam unit with all three of my air fleets. Result? Two of my air fleets took damage and the Allied unit didn't take a scratch. I think it's dangerous to make major play balance changes off the beta demo. Lots of the things people were complaining about could be changed by doing research; it was an incentive to do research actually. Maybe the German air fleets would be a lot more effective if they were at a higher tech level, but there is no time to do that at the start of the scenario. The France '40 scenario should already start with the German advantages over the Allies. I think if it's too hard for the Germans to take out France and deal with the Allies in the early war years, when they historically had the advantage, it will make them a walk-over in the mid war years (there might not BE any late war years). Every play balance issue has to be weighed out over the length of the entire war. A small tweek in the begining may have a profound (and negative) impact on the later war. The real trick is play balance and making a fun game. Because in real life WW 2 there were few times when opponents were evenly matched. The trick is making the game show all the advantages one side may have had, without making it such an automatic blow-out that it's no fun. My 2 cents.

The thing that has me somewhat puzzled though is the AI seems to get bonuses. I've played both the Axis and Allies on the default settings, and lost my navy each time. At first, as I was playing as the Allies I just figured Hubert tweeked the Italians to have a more profficeint navy. But then, playing as the Axis my Italian navy was oblitterated in a heart beat. I think the AI is great now, but it's difficult to conquer France before late Summer or early Fall. I hope the full game play balance is OK, as the historic German timetable seems unreachable now. A quick fix might be to have both sides take their turn before the date changes. [ July 20, 2002, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

The thing that has me somewhat puzzled though is the AI seems to get bonuses. I've played both the Axis and Allies on the default settings, and lost my navy each time. At first, as I was playing as the Allies I just figured Hubert tweeked the Italians to have a more profficeint navy. But then, playing as the Axis my Italian navy was oblitterated in a heart beat. I think the AI is great now, but it's difficult to conquer France before late Summer or early Fall. I hope the full game play balance is OK, as the historic German timetable seems unreachable now. A quick fix might be to have both sides take their turn before the date changes. [ July 20, 2002, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: DevilDog ]

By far my favorite operational level wargame though is Crusade In Europe. Must be about twenty years old. I think it was the first "real time" wargame. I wish I still had a copy.....

Yeah, the original Wolfenstein butt. I still remember the only time I escaped; by wearing an SS uniform and not shooting anyone on the last several levels. Towards the end the tension was thick enough to cut with a knife. A real nail biter....

The reason no one replied to your previous post is because that question has already been answered. No download of the final product will be available for obvious reasons.

In his book "Crusade in Europe" General Eisenhower goes into detail concerning the German bombing of the ship loaded with gas off the coast of Italy. It was there as a deterant to the Germans and ready for retaliation if needed. While the event was somewhat embarrasing to the Western Allies (and would have resulted in serious Allied casualties if the wind hadn't been blowing out to sea) the event did reinforce the Allied doctrine of retaliation. Hitler knew they had it and were ready to use it. That's why he never used it himself except on defenseless civilians.

Directiv#21: Good catch of my typo. Of course I meant Sept '39. Straha: I think you're wrong on the Germans being ready to take on France in '39. I've read several books by some of the German generals (usually self serving about how if only it wasn't for Hitler they would have won the war) and they all agree that the main German fear in September '39 was that the French would attack, and that if this happened they would be in Berlin before the Germans could react. There was only about a one month window where this held, but the Wehrmacht was unable to go on the offense against France in late fall '39 like Hitler wanted. The attack on France had to be postponed several times. True some of this had to do with redeployment, but some of it also had to do with mobilization and reorganization of the German forces. Some of the best books I've read on the subject were from the Library - the next time I go I'll look for them and let you know the titles.