["Advanced" Strategic Command]

In regard to Wolfe's "short" shopping list,

I do like these 3 of his suggestions:

1) Rain and snow hexes that change on the map (variable and random according to season) and have consequent effects on movement and combat.

2) Cities & ports bombed to Zero need to have MPPs to rebuild. AFAIK this is a new suggestion and seems quite reasonable, and provides an Xtra incentive for the bomber to go that last mile in order to achieve this. (or, the defender to prevent it)

3) Tech FOW with intelligence (true and falsely reported, depending on investment) capabilities. This one could really alter some in-game strategies, and would capture that battlefield flux & chaos quite well.

Nothing wrong with asking for those things that we favor... overall, Wolfe has a different game in mind, but some very good potential ideas for a later version.

[Taking Sweden]

As originally posted by Sol Invictus:

... Germany has a great many options that she can choose from in the first few years. Some options will be better than others. It seems that there will be a fine line that Germany must follow.

Very true. As example, in a recent game I had USA declare war-preparation on the last turn of the Demo, fully 7 months ahead of schedule! :eek:

Why? I followed a typical script -- after Lowlands and France, I conquered (in order) Sweden, Greece, Yugoslavia and then invaded Russia. That's it. (... note, no Sea Lion)

This had never happened before, so apparently the slight tweaking that Hubert did has had its desired effect. Either that, or this was an infrequent series of events when all the consequences were extreme.

The percentages for declaring war can vary slightly, so this WAS one game where they added up to a premature war response -- I don't think any Axis player would want this, for obvious reasons. Having to defend against USA activity in Atlantic and European offensives before Russia is remotely on the ropes, cannot be a good omen.

For those who suppose that we can just pluck little countries off the tree -- la di da... here I'll grab Spain, and Portugal, Switzerland, Vichy, Sweden, all the Balkans, and oh, I may as well reach for Iraq and Turkey too! -- and drop them in the sack like so many prize plums, this example might suggest otherwise.

(OTOH, could be... the aggressive Axis player may then have JUST ENOUGH additional MPPs to withstand any early USA initiative, I don't know, we'll have to see how this kind of strategy plays in the full game)

Truly, we will have to be a bit more selective in which countries we will choose to conquer, depending on variables unique to each game and our playing style. But it is apparent that we cannot just take whatever we please unless willing to face the consequences.

[Recon Pull as applied in SC]

As originally posted by mavraam:

BTW, using this technique, and by by-passing the low countries, I can break 2 tank groups through the front lines in France on the first turn of the game, and take Paris by turn 2 or 3 depending

on battle results. The gap I create is just west of the Ardannes (sp?)

Sounds familiar. I just use my extra Army's to backfill and take out the low countries once the Brittish and French have retreated to save Paris in a panic.

Innovative idea -- in all this time I never considered trying to take France BEFORE the Low Countries... I wonder how easy it would be just to "blow a hole" through the line when you have such a narrow front... well, thanks for the report, I'll have to give it a try today.

[USA's Early Strategy]

A couple people plan some intervention Ops into Norway, and I wonder if it wouldn't be better to just take Portugal and Spain?

There are more MPPs than Norway and you would have a direct threat (no waters to cross) to southern France, though that would be a difficult one-hex maneuver. I'm not so sure a competent player wouldn't be able to stop you cold in those several-hex mountains just beyond Bergen anyway.

In general, I would research Sonar and Long Range Air first. I would buy an air fleet to protect the ports from U-boats nosing in too close, and I would probably stick to the historical invasion of the Med.

Why? Because getting Italy out of the war would immediately remove 120+ MPPs from the Axis, and make the Germans have to defend against possible invasions into Greece, Balkans, and southern France, along with having to hold the line in northern Italy.

To allow the Axis free reign in the Med is a recipe for disaster, I am thinking -- it would be terrible for the Allies and their trans-Atlantic plans if Italy could build up to greater MPP levels and eventually take Gibralter, and then sortie their fleet into North Atlantic. :eek:

USA would be fun and challenging to play because there are so many Offensive possibilities! :cool:

[Gold Demo Update]

As originally posted by Hubert Cater:

squashed rare research seed bug

Hate to see that little zero-eyed fella go, he made me feel... oh, Omnipotent!

Now I have to do it the hard way, good enough... BTW, quick and efficient job on the fixes, Hubert. :cool:

[Im back!!!!]

... and the sheep's in the meadow,

and the cow's in the corn,

and... Holy Bird Feathers!

... way up in the nest, a new Robin is born!

[I have waited years for a game like this. . .]

As originally posted by Aloid:

Sounds like a number of us have been around this hobby since the "board game era"... nice to know you're all out there! It's an age of gaming that was both a pain (finding space, and those damn rules books), and a pleasure (seeing a full setup of Terrible Swift Sword, DNO, Atlantic Wall, etc.). The new guys have missed out, and it's a shame.

Avalon Hill Game Company used to be one of my 2 or 3 reasons for continued existence.

This was back in the days before the proliferation of other companies such as SPI, and I would read their strategy & tactics magazine -- The General, religiously (... it was right up there in the Pantheon along with Hot Rod and The Sporting News and Rolling Stone).

I enjoyed Afrika Korps and Panzer Blitz and in particular -- original 3rd Reich and most certainly, the advanced version.

My son and I played AH's War at Sea a lot (... for those who don't know, this is a rather simplified but quite addictive simulation of the Battle of the Atlantic, with individual ships and convoys and carriers, land-based air, and you had to control sea zones) since it was easy to set up and you could play it to completion in one evening.

If you haven't got this one, and enjoy the naval aspect of WWII, I would recommend that you look around for it. There is also an expansion kit that includes the French navy and Italian frogmen and German raiders. I believe we started playing it together when he was 8 or 9 (... to this day he is an avid "gamer" as well, though he tends to favor RTS and some of the Space-based games).

You are right, the computer has made it better in one sense -- you can avoid the lengthy set-up time, and of course, having your cat re-arrange the game after you have spent weeks getting half-way through -- what is it with cats and their strange determination to chew and scatter and ruin? :eek:

For me, SC promises to be a very welcome addition to a long and immensely satisfying game-playing tradition.

[War in Siberia]

Sunday morning second thoughts:

SuperTed was merely being helpful, and my above attempt at good-natured ribbing now sounds to me to be a disguised criticism of those who would volunteer their valuable time and assistance.

I did not intend that, and you may not even take it that way, but I feel that I should clarify this instance of an overly-quick, and not so thoughtful response. Iconoclasm has its proper place, and this wasn't one of them.

Sorry SuperTed. I put myself in the corner for an hour with the Dunce-Cap firmly in place.

[Looking Ahead -- Replaying PBEM Turns]

As originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1b:

I don't fear cheaters. Let them cheat. If it becomes "odd" that they never lose when normally they would (at least to some extent), the only logical choice is to move on (and say nothing to them either).

Sounds like a man who will live to a serene old age, smiling & singing all the way.

A victory is never a victory if you have to cheat to achieve it.

We have to be careful however, because there are a few who are very dedicated and adroit game players, and to yell foul out loud would be a selfish mistake.

Someone once said that all a man has is his reputation, his good name, so I agree that to cry about losing is in a certain sense, even worse than losing itself. You may well be mistaken.

Everyone -- except Sociopaths, has a conscience, and to keep your own cool, your own satisfaction at being an honest and straight-shooting person is far more important than winning at a game.

Cheating only diminishes the cheater, that's apparent. I will believe that EVERY person I play is honest. Nothing anyone can say will change my mind. Because I won't listen.

Let the FUN, the SC games begin!

[War in Siberia]

As originally posted by SuperTed:

Affect is a transitive verb that means:

to have an influence on or effect a change in. "Inflation affects the buying power of the dollar."

Effect is a noun that means:

something brought about by a cause or agent; a result. The power to produce an outcome or achieve a result; influence. "The drug had an immediate effect on the pain."

If you'd like to use all of the ideas together, try this one: "Stalin learned that Japan was not going to attack in the east. This news affected his decision to transfer the Siberian Army to the west. The transfer was quite timely, producing the desired effect of bolstering the defenses around Moscow."

Good job SuperTed!

The last time I heard didactic patter like that was when I was sitting in English class admiring the pivot-skill of the shortstop out on the nearby ballfield and suddenly:

I am called on! to go to the blackboard and so I grab the chalk and draw lines every whichway and stand back to admire what now looks like a tree denuded in winter with branches stuck awkward backward and forward and suchlike,

And so I remember fondly... the subject was -- CAT, and the object was -- BIRD, and the Action Verb was -- caught -- no, I think I erased that, yes, I did, and replaced it with a -- disturbed verb phrase -- thought he caught.

Which only goes to show you, elegant and finely sublime animals such as cats can make transitive mistakes too...

[USA's Early Strategy]

While we wait for that blue-skied, bird-singing August the 5th mailing day...

America will enter on or about the usual Dec '41 date, unless the Axis have been too energetic, so what would you do?

What to buy? What research to conduct, if any? Where to attack first?

Stalin wanted an invasion of France in 1943 -- is this better than securing the Med, and forcing Italy out of the war early?

Of course this would depend on U-boat activity or how far the Axis has gotten in Russia, but in general -- what is USA's Grand Strategy for 1942 and '43?

[U-Boots rule Atlantic!]

As originally posted by Ancient One:

In a recent game I destroyed the entire UK fleet with subs surprisingly easily. I could not have done that by building any other naval unit.

(... SHHHHH! Don't let this secret get out, would you! We'll have to play some of these guys in PBEM.)

Well, I have done the same, although, so far it is not QUITE as easy to do in the Gold demo, since the effects of surprise have been diminished -- though that can work both ways, so it is probably to no one's particular advantage.

A couple of games I have played the game as Raeder triumphant and even built up an Atlantic fleet of 4-5 subs, BB Bismark, one CA and a sea modified Stuka-launching flat-top. The RN survived for a single astonished! :eek: turn after blundering into the Kreigsmarine.

But, a lot depends on what the AI will do in the campaign game -- once you sink those 3-4 (or more, who cares -- bring 'em on! -- if you use the Free French option) ships that paddle out to investigate, will the AI build new ones?

If they (... or, your typically East-mesmerized human opponent) do not build more, then I wonder how the USA is going to get their troop transports across the Atlantic? They would be sitting silhouette ducks. :cool:

Regardless, this will force USA, if not Britain, to build escorts, and as we know, those capital ships cost a fortune!

Tech level 2 subs on the other hand, are what -- 290 MPPs? The Allies better hope and pray that Germany doesn't develop ANY tech for the subs, or, sorry to say, there will be no flowers & kisses thrown after D-Day.

Which allows the Axis to leave a couple corps in the West, and concentrate the full might of the Wehrmacht on Russia and in helping Balboa in the Med -- it sounds easy, and hey, I for one suspect... it just might BE easy.

[Russia is to aggresive.]

As originally posted by Bill Macon:

But for historical accuracy, the Soviets in 1941 were probably not capable of the aggression that's possible in SC.

Thanks for finding and posting a link to that helpful book review. The one thing that struck me about the article was -- the Germans anticipated that Russia could mobilize 10 million men, whereas 30 million was the truer figure.

To amend your statement, I would say that the Soviets were not capable of a SUCCESSFUL aggression. Whether Stalin or Zukhov or anyone else actually seriously contemplated that is an open question.

Certainly their aggression in all of the nearby Minor states would suggest that they felt they could throw their weight around against smaller forces. :eek:

I suspect that Stalin knew this would NOT be possible against the greatly experienced and Spartanly trained Germans, and was merely biding his time until the transformation of his numerically superior Armies was complete.

But, as you say, this can be war-gamed, and in SC we have the tools to set up any kind of scenario we wish, to include using the campaign game parameters.

Can't wait. (... please hold firm you fickle date, August the 5th!)

[Another post about U boats]

Pardon me, I don't believe I am being chauvanistic when I say -- there are uncounted millions and millions of soldiers AND civilians who are thankful that USA used its Industrial might to help the Western Allies crush the Nazi insanity, rather than, say -- finesse it to death over 8 or 10 or 15 years.

Does this mean that we shouldn't abide by the Just-War Doctrine as formulated by Augustine, and later refined by Saint Thomas Aquinas? Hardly. Might does NOT make right, then or now.

It would be sublime if we could retrieve the better aspects of The Chivalrous Age, but Progress -- and its symbols, primarily Money, is the Western substitue for communal religion, and since Progress is presently defined as material advancement, I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.

Technology can get out of control, and has, and will again as long as we-the-people worship external objects instead of a Greater Spirit. Let's hope, and even, pray that -- if it does, the wisest and most enlightened commanders -- right down to the squad leader, are at the controls.

In the meantime, we can sublimate an innate aggression by being aesthetic and creative. Playing games -- of all kinds, is one way to do that.

I don't have THE answers either, but wanted to add a few thoughts about this issue. Sorry if I have offended anyone.

[Guns instead of rockets]

As originally posted by husky65:

The SiG was a direct fire 150mm and the Wespe an indirect fire 105mm, neither would reach halfway across the hex they are in, let alone reach 2 hexes.

You are right to call me on this, since I did not explain my own rationale.

I am unaware of the actual firing distance of either unit. What I was after was a unit that would provide the artillery EFFECT that would solve some of those narrow frontages that Bill spoke about (as in North Afrika -- one hex wide as you near Alexandria, etc).

Mobile units COULD be understood -- over a week or 2 week time frame -- to have made firepower attacks on a position, and then retreated to a safer position behind the lines, since they are MOBILE after all.

Without stacking, you obviously couldn't leave them on the front line, as they would be the first unit targeted, so I proposed a 2 hex range to solve this problem -- it wan't meant as an exact replication of firing distance.

However, having said that, I can readily see that this abstraction would not easily fit into this scale. Artillery units -- except for those huge rail guns already mentioned, probably have to be considered as part of an Army.

The fact that I would personally enjoy manipulating little Wespes doesn't change the fact that they would be hard to rationalize in this scale of a game, and as you have tersely pointed out, they can't shoot but a half a hex or so... perhaps it is very nearly... just too too Aesthetic-Romantic to want to include them.

[Guns instead of rockets]

As originally posted by Bill Macon:

With no stacking in the game, rockets are an abstract way of representing the whole spectrum of ranged attack weapon systems that don't need to be in the way of front line combat units, which becomes important on narrow attack frontages.

I would agree, and go so far as to suggest that in a future SC, we are provided another unit -- Mobile Artillery Detachment, on the order of the SiG or Wespe. Tech affected or not. Range could be 2, and cost appropriate to prevent abuse.

Anecdotal report: In a recent game, I got rockets up to level 14. Because I hadn't gotten any Industrial advance, this was so expensive that I only bought one because I was very interested to see what might happen.

Well, at the outset of Barbarossa, I attacked a front-line Russian Army, and it was reduced from 10 to 4. That's 6 SP damage on one launch! :eek:

Somebody wondered if it would be worth it to invest in rockets? I would think -- yes. Though you absolutely would need Air Support. I have never had any sized Air Fleet do comparable damage to a fresh infantry unit.

[ July 26, 2002, 01:17 AM: Message edited by: Immer Etwas ]

[U-Boots rule Atlantic!]

As originally posted by KevGaming:

Got to hand it to you Hubert the changes to naval surprise makes using U-Boots a worth while exercise!

I would agree, and add my grateful thanks!

In the few Gold Demo games I have played (...and, admittedly, it is not a large enough sample size to form steadfast conclusions) it seems as though the changes benefit the Royal Navy more than the U-boats. :eek:

Since the effects of Surprise! have been diminished, it SEEMS to be easier for the AI (and most certainly for a Human opponent) to survive long enough to counter-attack.

Then again, this underscores the need for hunting in packs, so that you might swarm the ASW. Also, the benefits of Research (either Sonar or Advanced Subs) becomes that much more important.

All in all, I am very satisfied at the changes in the naval war, and even, forgive me, would like to see even LESS damage per attack.

But, I realize that the ground-war is and was paramount, and this is a relative side-show. It's just that it is so much FUN to engage in the ocean-going hide and seek, that I guess I just want it to last longer, and cost less to repair or reinforce those sleek combatants.

[Paratroopers]

There was also a planned airborne attack to take the airfield near Oslo in April of '40.

However, fog prevented the drop. Nonetheless, it was vital to take that airfield, so several pilots landed their fighter planes and held off the rapidly dwindling resistance (hence, one of the reasons for the subsequent outcry against Vidkun Quisling) with their machine pistols.

This allowed transports to land with reinforcements.

One way of looking at this issue of Paratroops, is to abstract that corps-level unit and assume it could also include the follow-up gliders/transports.

This would ease the concerns of those who say that such a small fighting force could not muster enough strength to justify their inclusion in a future game. Over a week or two, that AB could expand by air-drop to include other reinforcements/supplies.

[Research]

As originally posted by Ancient One:

One game I had 7 points invested in research: 3 in Heavy Tanks, 2 in AT Guns, and 2 in Industrial Tech. Industrial Tech advanced 4 levels in 4 turns (0.0001 chance)

If your calculations are correct, and given that Hubert has stated that this is NOT due to the nefarious Seed Bug, then you will have to play -- what? 10,000 more games for this same kind of fortunate Industrial Tech advance!

Same goes for me with a couple of my "lucky" developments, which were not due to our little friend the Seed Bug. Well, that's the way it goes, eh? Just have to play many, many, many games.

[Research]

As originally posted by Hubert Cater:

This is a bug with the random number generator that recieved a seed of '0' on rare occasions, sorry to say that it has been fixed

And here I thought those cold-shouldered Stars had finally... finally, begun to turn my way.

But no, just another glacial gaze, eyes full of mis-seeded zeroes...

[GameSpot Review]

As originally posted by husky65:

Compare and contrast such rubbish to the movie Apollo 13, which takes a dramatic event and simply shows its drama.

Which means -- it COULD be done again.

There are many pampered "bottom-lines" in Hollywood, none of which are more important than making money, however you might (... deliberately) screw up Historical accuracy.

You are right to assume, however, that it is immensely unlikely that this picture would be made in any satisfactory, let alone artistic, fashion.

[GameSpot Review]

As originally posted by Camicie Nere:

Immer - you're thinking of Norsk Hydro "heavy water" plant at Vermork.

It's a really fascinating story about how the British dropped in some commandos to sabotage the plant and how these guys escaped on skis all the way to Sweden while being intensively hunted. A really interesting episode that has not really gotten the attention of historians that maybe it deserves.

Haven't had a chance yet to pull out the appropriate reference material on this, but now that you mention it, I do remember the British commando raid -- expressly for the purpose of foiling that German (mis)adventure.

You are right -- that would make a heck of a story, either rigorously historical, or magazine article length non-fiction, or even -- a kind of semi-mythic epic, say like -- Guns of Navarrone, where you would preserve the general outline, and use poetic license to make the story even more interesting/exciting (though I am not sure you would even need to do this).

I am surprised some enterprising La-La Land script writer hasn't tackled this topic.

Given the current interest in anything WWII, and Nazis as (justifiably, I would say) modern-day Scourge and EVIL Personified, and the fascination with ever-potential Nuclear horrors as apocalyptic frisson, and then -- you could mix in a love-triangle, as in Casablanca and presto! -- Box Office magic! :cool:

[Additional Review for Strategic Command]

As originally posted by Otto:

If you see a review and want to know if others have spotted it yet, take a look at the site. If you see a review that is not on that list, by all means email me and let me know.

Otto, you are absolutely... SMOKIN' .

Hats off to you for taking care of all this kind of helpful stuff! :cool:

[GameSpot Review]

As originally posted by Straha:

I have to say that the reason for the invasion of Norway was NOT to get hold of the Norwegian resources, but to secure the shipping for the *Swedish* ore

IIRC, the Germans were also greatly interested in Norway's cache of "heavy water" to be used in their fledgling Atomic Energy program. As you say, I will have to look it up to be sure on that, but perhaps someone else has this information at their fingertips?

Excellent analysis on the other points -- you should write reviews for these so-called expert gaming sites.

I agree 100% on the Sweden issue -- there has to be a reason NOT to attack them -- I do it in every game that I play and cannot think of a compelling reason not to.

[U-Boots rule Atlantic!]

One thing I would like to see, eventually, is some way to model USA's tremendous number of convoys to Britain.

You could either do it from the beginning, with some version of Lend-Lease, or simply pick it up when USA enters the war.

Something on the order of 20 MPPs per turn, which would provide another convoy route to attack with the wolfpacks.

This would also serve a good purpose -- by spreading out the convoy lanes, it would force the Allies to search farther afield in what is admittedly a restricted ocean area.

Seems like game-balance could be maintained by slightly decreasing the cost of the U-boats? Or, by reducing Commonwealth committments? I don't know, there must be a way that would maintain the status quo?

Anything that more realistically portrays the immense amount of tonnage that was shipped from America's factories would only enhance the Battle of the Atlantic.

It wouldn't have to be an exact replication, but something to add a little more sub-chasing flavor.