Galatine

My 2 dozen or so games tell me this game went beta _way_ before it's time. I really wonder how for long and by how many it wasplaytested by. I will admit that at first blush I enjoyed the game but on looking deeper and with more play, there have been _numerous_ problems that leave me feeling frustrated and disappointed with the gameplay. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it honestly seems that a very poor AI has been girded up with battle outcomes whose chances of success change depend not on situation, but on how badly the AI plays. And the AI plays VERY badly. That's not even the tip of iceberg with my problems but I won't even try to list them all here. Then again, if the makers aren't even open to the possibilty this game needs a _drastic_ overhaul, I have a feeling you're going to hear about them from many others very soon. The beta game is too short to enjoy but too long to hide it's flaws. Back to Loch with you Nessy... [ May 25, 2002, 11:20 PM: Message edited by: Galatine ]

This is as of the last time I saved the game: January 10 1941 All initial Allied terrriories held, including France and the Lowland countries. North peninsula taken to the south 1 hex past Hamburg. Essen surrounded and undersiege. Cologne 5/6 surrounded with the near mine allied control. South Germany invaded and held two hexes deep. British income: 155 French income: 115 German income: 130 My tactic: I sell the bomber squadron for 450 MMps the first turn and buy a tank and an army. Next turn land them, Alexander's HQ and the two Corps from Britian on the North pennisula, with the Royal Navy crossing to the East side. Take the port and hold it and the coast with Navy. Advance south to outside Hamburg and link up with lowland forces. Reinforce and take Hamburg.

My issue isn't with bombing not having any effect. Of course it will. In Devildogs case above, it had a strong one, eventually reducing his economy by 100 MMps. But his example begs the question: How much did the Brits spend (in fighters/bombers and repairs) to do that 100 damage ? Likely it was several thousand MMPS. The real issue is: Does investing in strat bombing have a good return for value? My answer: Not even close. Option a: Invest 500 plus MMPs in bombing a city so the enemy temperarily makes 2-3 less a turn. OR Option b: Form two Armies, take over the city permanently, deny the enemy 10 income, increase your income by 10, immediatetly free those armies for defensive/offensive action. Maybe I'm way off base here but as PBEM games are played it will be interesting to see how many consitantly winning strategies will include significant use of bombers. My money says few, if any. [ May 23, 2002, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: Galatine ]

Some good points above, some ok and some, well I'm not sure about. My 2 cents worth: 1) HQ's for naval units. An Admiral's flagship? 2) Separate carriers from their fighter squads. I shouldn't lose my carriers last strength point because of an attack on a ground unit. 3) a) Drastically reduce the range of fighters rising to the defence against bombing runs. Unless they have radar it should be a six hex area, not there maximum combat operational range. Optionalise the use of fighters rising to the defence of bombing runs, as well as escorting. I shouldn't have to ground my bomber squadron just because my nearby fighter squad is weak and will get killed if it automatically escorts. 4) Increase the strength of strat bombing by a factor of 5 at the minimum. In a very similar board game I play, each bombing strike does 1-6 damage to an ecomomy while the bomber itself costs only 15 to build. That means on average the unit equaled it's cost in damage in 4-6 runs. 5) Allow units to enter ports. It acts as a barrier or artificial wall to limit access to a city by not allowing entrance to the hex. If I had a island with 6 ports is is possible for it to be taken? 6) Any fighter/bomber squadron station in OR next to a city hex should be allowed to reinforce AND still engage in offensive operations in the same.

I don't think Sealion is the AI's intent for this particular scenario. I'm fairly certain the scenario's pre-set goal is for Germany to complete the securing of Fortress Europe. Once that's done, the AI is content to sit pretty. Your strategy of moving directly to a British withdraw basically fufills that goal and so is unopposed. I admit it is EXTREMELY hard to hold the lowlands(let alone France) but there in lies the challenge. It would be interesting to see your strategy tested against a more flexible opponent. I suspect in a PBEM it would play out very differently. [ May 22, 2002, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Galatine ]

I tried the fall back strategy but it failed everytime. The income from sacking the lowlands is too great and give the Axis a yearly total edge. I hold the Lowlands capital rotating out the Corp to moving in a British Army . The brits can afford to reinforce regularly and the Army is stronger. I operational move the Malta fighter squad to central France. (Italy generally won't enter the war unless Paris is burning.) Units in Canada and Gibralter are shipped to Europe ASAP. I open a second front in the Northern Peninsula (A single corps by transport) and guard the land route by lining the seacoast with battleships. Any German unit heading North gets hammered on the way. I don't plan to hold the second front, but to force Germany to redirect forces from the France front and score some attrition. By the time Germany resecures the North I've transported Alexander over to take charge of the British units who are positioned to hold the weak unfortified North edge of the Magnoit. That usually gets me in postion to stall Germany for a few months but it never lasts.

Thanks for the word Hubert! It's good to know right off the bat that you guys are open and active regarding input. Still, the math doesn't add up. Cost benifit ratio is far too high. If the most damage done to the German defenders is generally to their figher defense, then the best defense to bombers is to station the defenders fighters so far, they _don't_ rise to the defense. To using a 500 MMP to to nickel and dime a self-repairing resource would seem a waste of effort. By my guestimate at an average of 2-3 damage per run on a non-figher defender site, per turn, minus repair, it would take 31 plus runs to equal the cost of the unit. And that doesnt' even note that a pause or the need to strike multiple targets would make it even less efficent (as each target would continue self-repair as other targets are hit.) Thats a pretty bad return for value.

Has anyone seen America enter the war early? If so, what was the trigger for it? I assumed the "America is preparing for war" message was just a timer warning that the demo was about to end. With my first game as Germany I tried invading the Balkans for money and just holding the line against France. My lesson: Don't make neutral enemies...

Good thread idea. I'd personally like to hear some input. It would be nice to know how well I did at the end of game. The demo kinda' leaves me hanging in limbo. So far, I find the Germans _far_ easier to have success with. Straight on attack and quick as a jiff, the Vichy is installed. The Allies however, are a bloody pain. Stalemate is the best I can aim for and usually it's a constant struggle to hold the line. With one slip, I'm free-falling 'till defeat. [ May 22, 2002, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Galatine ]

Maybe you guys can help me out. Strat-bombing (with defenders or with out) seems rather useless to me. I risk my 500 Mmp bomber to do around 1-3 Mmps of damage to a resource. If my run is unescorted, the bomber takes 5-6 damage from enemy fighters that rise to the defence. If I escort, my bombers are hurt less but my fighers take 2-3 instead. Fighters that I then can't reinforce or use for that turn. To repair costs (approximately) the percentage of original cost to build. With a bomber, that's several hundred Mmps, during which I can't use the unit. This, while the resourse site automatically regains one point a turn. Am I totally missing the point here?

Here's some things I noted: 1) You needs the moneys. 2) You can't move or attack, and reinforce in the same turn. 3) You need supply lines back to your side. The longer the lines, the less you repair. 4) Right click on unit and select 'reinforce'. It'll open the menu for you.

The better part of a morning spent downloading (getright aided)and remainder playing. Two thumbs up! Finally, a great board game has a great computer version. Quick SAT/GRE type quiz: Squad leader is to Combat Mission, as Strategic Command is to...___________. Don't answer! I'm sure battlefront has taken enough guff from that company's lawyers already! I eagerly await SC going gold!

I'd say the impact value of mines depends mostly on map size and cosequently, on force size. Ideally the price of minefields (or at least area size) should be on a sliding scale determined by this. In a small battle (800pt) on a 'small' map, minefields can hem in a significant area of the field making them tremedously valueble.

Yoo-hoo! Someone understood my point! It seems that this board is still a little too-Grog for me and I've been playing the game for almost a year now! I'm sure its a great historical tactical model but personally, it works just fine as a game too. I wonder if this whole board doesn't have too much Peng attitude leakage. The board has become a little like an elite club or frat. You're free to join (in) but the initiation is not really worth the parties.

Sweet Mother of Mary! Slapdragon, If it takes that long to explain why 'newbies' upset 'Grogs' it proves my point better than anything I could say! Newbies shouldn't have to stand up to that kind of intellectual scutiny. I'm not sure any one should. Politeness is culturally relative, this board is international. Every personal opinion shouldn't be a matter for debate. Am I the only casual, non-historian, non-military buff who just wants to play a fun game? I'd just like a place where normal non-Grog people could ask a simple non-Grog question and get a simple answer instead of 20 page disertation proceded by an explaination of why it was a stupid question to begin with and followed by endless debate on some minor over or undermodeled game feature! Ok, new question: Is there a club I can go to discuss this game with everyday people who aren't experts in WWII, Solviet tank doctrine or some such and just want to talk, not debate? God, from the way some of you act you'd swear it wasn't a game at all! [ 11-24-2001: Message edited by: Galatine ]</p>