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.

I agree with Sarge. I've been looking forward to SC for a long time, and I still wish great success for the game. I've however decided not to get the game simply because, based on my extensive experience with the demo and the testimony of other players, I just don't see it holding my interest for long. SC is a good game, but not quite the WW2 experience I'm looking for.

Say what you will about Stalin, but it was his 5 year plans that made the USSR powerful. In spite of the severe hardship his people suffered, they were probably better off in the long run than they would be under German occupation, which is what would have happened if Stalin chose gentler methods to encourage modernization.

You should add Switzerland to that list. In 1940, Mussolini was originally planning to invade Switzerland, Yugoslavia, and Greece simultaneously; before finally settling on just Greece after he was told he didn't have enough manpower to invade all 3 countries at once. Given the historical Italian performance in Greece, it's amusing to imagine what would have happened if Mussolini went with his original plan.

So you've never thought of combining the US and UK into one player in a 4 player game?

I think that's a very good review sogard.

You can say that again, it's basically unplayable as is.

No, I meant the later Windows 3.1 version.

Does anyone know where I can get Big 3 (the Windows 3.1 version)? I used to have it, and really want to play it again.

Ah, I've read this document a long time ago, it's quite interesting. I'd love to see a remake of CoS.

Tell me why the Germans should be able to afford to buy all 10 research points early in the game, and possibly max out industrial technology, before the USSR or US even enters play. Who says it needs to be replaced? Look, the game is currently unbalanced in favor of the Axis. This is largely caused by their research advantage and rich economy even after US entry. Don't tell me pillage isn't a huge factor in this.