Canuck_para

I think bombers should lose efficiency as well. Consider them strikes on the air fields where some damage is done to the infrastructure and personnel. They would be less ready to carry out offensive strikes when they have to repair and reorg.

I agree. I think it should be deadly when transports or amphibs are caught by naval units at sea. This would force players to keep a navy to protect landings unkike now where the Axis can land easily even when they have no navy.

Have not heard anything about it but I know it has been requested by a few people. I think it would be great. Even an option to allow one of the Allied powers to by played by the AI while a person can play the other would be interesting.

JJ, what about the Germans having the option to create Vichy or not. If they do the game is the same. If not all of mainland France is under German control ( I could see more partisan activity). All French territory outside of Europe could then either become neutral, join the Allied side or a small chance of joining the Axis.

Bio, I agree that bombers should not be immune to morale loss but IMHO I don't think they should be sitting targets to strikes on them. Because of the scale of the game it is not like a single raid which would wreak havoc on the grounded planes. In this case the bombers represent a large spread out formation with it's own integral AA and some ground defence.

I think the Brit navy would have continued on fighting from Canada if the UK was conquered. It is more realistic to have the UK Govt move to Canada than Egypt. The UK had already moved it's gold reserves to Canada and Canada had a better industrial complex and was far safer from the advancing Axis forces. For game purposes the capital is moved to Cairo to be near the oil but in reality what weapons were produced in Egypt to support an army. As for Malta and Gibralter, if Germany does force a complete surrender of the UK I can't see why either one would have fought on with no support. Germany would probably use them as pay offs to Spain and Italy. I agree that Ireland should provoke some sanctions.

Why were they not used? I just played your mod up to the Japan entrance but I got a critical error. Has this been fixed? I was allied and had every country conquered but Ireland. I am going to try it as Axis.

I think based on Michael's figures Canada should have 1 corp, 1 army and 1 tank unit plus an HQ as a minimum. All at full strength.

I have enjoyed the mod but why is the Soviet Navy so large? Good work overall. I am almost done a game as Allies and will try one as Axis soon.

I think Canada (and all Commonwealth countries) should have the same tech level as the UK. They used the same eqpt. In Canada's case most vehs and wpns were produced in Canada and shared with other countries. This is why they should be different from other minors who I feel did not have the same industrial ability. I do think that Axis minors should get a tech level at 2 less than the Germans. This could represent the hand me downs that Germany gave to it's allies. If Germany is level 3 IW then the minors should be lvl 1. Same with AT. I am not sure how much any minors used eqpt from their major sponsors besides infantry wpns. Did Germany lend any tanks or did they need them all? What about aircraft? I know the Allies produced tanks that were shared with all the Commonwealth and Free Forces.

I guess you played Clash of Steel.

I think it would be great to have a 3rd side like in CoS. What a classic that game was.

This has changed in V1.02 I do believe. Now plunder is not based on the number of surviving units, so as Axis I attack every Frenchy Frog that is on the map. Remember, every extra casualty you cause early to the Germany may mean him not buying that extra aircraft that turn, maybe delaying it for the assault on Russia. </font>

This.....this sound like what Canada would do with MPPs. </font>

Canada would set up a Royal Commission to figure out what to do with it, spend years investigating and then scrap all the recommendations from the Commission. It would then spend whatever is left on patronage projects in the Government's ridings.

It could be that the elite replacements arrive at the same time as the new eqpt and the whole unit is trained at once.

I have only had one ship and nothing else in all my games. It is a low chance.

There is only a chance the units will become FF, unlike SC1. Also the units look Brit so check for the French Flag.

Maybe have an option for the bomber to raid conveys in properties and then have a random chance to intercept any convoys that are within range. Of course this would not really be a strategic bomber role but light and tactical bombers but there is not such a unit.

I have two other issues that I am not sure has been addressed. I think air attacks against swamp hexes should be lowered. The reason is that soft ground absorbs a lot of the force and dampens shrapnel. I also think tanks should only be able to entrench at 2 levels less than infantry in cities and forts. This is to reflect that cities and forts are better manned by infantry than tanks. Infantry are much harder to root out. Just a couple of points from an old infantryman.

Will there be surface raiders in the next patch? While they were not as effective as the subs they did have an impact and kept the Allies busy in the begining. On a similar topic is it possible for the Allies to disrupt convoys from Norway or Sweden?

Kuni, what does your response mean? I did not see anything aggresive in the original post. </font>

I doubt it. Last time I checked out .war-historical, Giftzwerg was still going stong seven years after I first saw him. There really are people like that out there . </font>

Kuni, what does your response mean? I did not see anything aggresive in the original post.

Amen to that. I still can't figure out why he ain't banned yet after all these years. Annoyed me more then once over the years I'm more of a reader then a posting type though, so i don't complain that easily. </font>