Ancient One

I don't think fighters as a basic unit are necessarily overpowered, but due to their flexibility of their use they can gain experience more quickly and efficiently than other units. I think a better idea would be to lessen the importance of experience by at least half.

I'd like it if the effects of experience would be reduced. A five star unit should be excellent, but not unstoppable.

It's gamey because it's using a game feature in a way that does not reflect the realities of war.

Why? What happened?

I'll have to say it all depends on whether SC 2 represents the European theatre or the Pacific theatre. If European, no patch. If Pacific, both.

I agree with Zappsweden except on 6. I'd also like to point out the vast difference in the profitability and plunder of the occupied territories in the game compared to reality. Also, the value of some areas compared to others is completely out of whack.

I agree with JJ about Vichy. The only alternative to such a peace agreement was total occupation, the war was unwinnable at that point. Anyway, add Vichy and Turkey to the countries that supplied the Germans with resources.

I disagree. If the Germans turn down Vichy, the colonies should always remain in the war.

What's the problem? I like the way Vichy is handled.

It's probably handled about the same way as the Baltic states, in early 1940 a pop up box appears saying that there was a Winter War and the Finnish/Russian borders are changed accordingly.

A while ago I decided not to get this game because it was too gamey and unbalanced. However, this recent patch is making me reconsider. Most of the biggest flaws (especially the way research was handled) have been corrected. Very impressive.

It's always better for Germany to take everything.

My, such a rude child you are. So tell me, if subs are not the most cost efficient naval unit, what is? Sorry, but I have trouble believing that subs are overpriced and underpowered compared to carriers, battleships, or cruisers. For the record, I think it would be great if the subs had a greater dive % and were more difficult to spot. However, the subs then MUST have their naval attack rating reduced *substantially* to maintain any sort of balance. Hubert is going to have to decide what role he wants subs to play in SC. They should either be purely offensive naval attack ships (which they already are), or extremely elusive commerce raiding stealth ships, but NOT both. Does that sound reasonable to you? If not, I'm sorry you had to sit through another one of my insane rants.

Looks like you guys have thought this through...NOT. Try thinking outside of the box. Subs are currently the most cost efficient naval unit for the damage they can do to the enemy fleet. Any halfway competent Axis player can destroy the Allied fleet with subs. Do we really need another change to make battleships and cruisers even more useless?

I've never heard anyone say that they want to repeat history close to exact. I have however heard this point presented as a straw man argument by people who want to do away with historical limitations.