Norse

Taking that pic down

the AI isn't lame at all, this screenshot was at the easiest level. Just upp the level to default and set +1 Experience level, then ur in for a treat UK even managed to make a "Stalingrad" out of my Sea Lion forces :eek: Both Germany and Italy had industrial tech 5

What pussles me is that in the '41, '42, '43, and '44 campaign, there are virtually no Axis forces on the westfront! Now I don't see the historical factor in this. I recall a quote from Rommel, "I have 500.000 men defending the shores, but I have no idea where the enemy will attack, so where to deploy them?", or atleast it went something like that. After all, Germany lost about 250.000 men in Normandie if I remember correctly. Where's the units?? 2nd SS Panzer and all that? How can we have a Falaise pocket, if there are no Germans to surround? A 1940 campaign with more units for all, based on historical warmaps, is probably what I'll work on Germany had 3 HQ's historically against France, UK had subs etc., I'll post when I've done it so you can see what you think of it ~Norse~

I got 247, grrr, you beat me with what, 6 points :eek: I totally SWAMPED the Ruskis at the end there mwhahaha A really cool thing that happened in the game, after I took Poland and prepared to invade Sweeden, then France declared war on the Netherlands and I hadto rush to their aid! notice my Dutch and Beglian corps units ~Norse~

That's really nice Manstein. Just make sure you don't get addicted to thoose Cola light corks.... hehehehe You know I'm just kidding with ya Want a game sometime?

No time to speak, must....play..... *drools with eyes all red and about to pop out of his scull* ~Norse~

Now that the game is shipping, I want to express my greatest gratitude to the creator of this outstanding game! We the cannon fodder wanted this game before you even made it, and now it is done! THANK YOU HUBERT!! Outstanding! We shall have much fun with this ~Norse~

I agree with Mannerheim on this one. Finland did good with minimal forces against Russland. In the demo, when Finland joins the war, Russland is smashing the Finns and I always haveto retreat (maybe Im just doing something wrong). In reality, the Finns pushed the Russians back and took back Karelia, and Germany asked that they should attack Leningrad with them. I never get the Finns to do this good in SC. To smash Finland would require alot of Russian effort IMO, so it wouldn't be wrong to give the Finns a HQ unit to represent their quality. In the game the Russians just need a couple armies without HQ support The reason France isn't given an initial HQ unit, is because their communication-links were outdated (ww1 style mostly). By the time a unit recived an order, the order was already days old and outdated! If France is to remedy their situation, then they need to spend MPP's to improve their ways, IE buying a HQ unit themselves. Also, if France is given a HQ unit from the start, then Germany might not be able to conquer them, or atleast not as fast as they did in reality. Gameplay issue. I agree, something is wrong here. This is a good suggestion. Instead of giving the minors a HQ unit, then the major power on their side should be able to command them. Either way is fine with me, but I think something should be done about this issue. Good point. ~Norse~

I think we need to ask the real question here. Shouldn't the minors posessing a fleet of atleast moderate size be given a naval unit to represent their naval presence? (Turkey, Sweeden, Spain) I think yes, because they had a presence that would haveto be dealth with. To sink their fleet, would require the commitment of atleast one or two naval units from any major power. If the fleet is not sunken, then it would prey havoc upon cheap naval units such as the transporter and cause some resistance in the name of their country In my opinion, this needs to be in the game. But I understand that everyone doesn't agree with that, which is fine. ~Norse~

What sources do you use to claim that Sweedens fleet was 45.000 ton? Though even if you are right, and it measures 45.000 ton, then it is an advocate for why Sweeden should be given the naval unit on strenght5. Remember that it cannot be reinforced anyway. ~Norse~ [ July 31, 2002, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: Norse ]

Yes indeed, 1 naval counter is a 'fleet' unit and not just 1 ship. The name of the ship listed is probably just the capital ship or so. Anyway, this is what Old Patch said Sweeden had: Cruisers of different sizes, 14 destroyers, 12~14 submarines, and other support crafts. Let's do alittle math, and say the Sweedish navy consists of 30ish ships that they'll use. Germany had about 50ish naval vessels, after removing their training vessels and the ones in the pipeline. Now, you are saying, "but the German fleet had bigger and better ships". Sure, that is why they get 4 naval units at full strenght. Is it still unfair to give one counter at strenght 5 to Sweeden? ~Norse~ [ July 31, 2002, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Norse ]

Here are my answers to what is posted so far. It is extremely unfair to compare Norway's naval forces to the Sweedish naval forces during world war 2. Norway sank Blücher using an outdated coastal fortress, and Norway only had 2 or 3 ironclads from the 1890's. To compare this against the Sweedish navy just doesn't match up, it is not comparable. (Norway spent its money on infrastructure instead of military, after all, Norway had just gained it's indepdence and were a struggling nation in thoose days). Therefore, I don't see how your "but Norway didn't do well on the seas" argument are valid when discussing Sweeden's navy here. Aloid is saying that a naval counter will stop another. Two things, the Sweedish coast is pretty long, and there is no way the Sweedish navy can prevent anyone attemting invasion here. That is just not possible. Secondly, the Sweedish navy was large enough to have a naval battle against the Germans, where both sides would take some casaulties but the Sweeds are eventually defeated. If the Sweeds had a naval counter in the game, then this would be portrayed just fine (and historically correct in my opinion). Aloid, as the German commander, if you move your navy to the exact location the Sweeds have their navy, then there will be battling before you can properly unload your troops. The lack of ANY Sweedish naval presence is historically incorrect. For me, it takes alittle of the realism away, as even in a game as SC the Sweeds would have a naval presence. I agree, they should be given a Cruiser unit on strenght 5, then it will be perfect. Then a simulated attack on Sweeden will be portrayed much more historically correct. Hubert, can you please add a Cruiser on strenght5 for the Sweeds? At the very least, it would not be historically incorrect to do so. Just take a look at all thoose ships Sweeden had. Now ask yourself, as the Germans, can you really send ONLY transports to invade Sweeden? Surely, the Sweeds will have the ships to attack thoose transports if they are not given escort of some kind (air, naval, atleast some battling need's to take place). ~Norse~

First off, I don't think the argument used here, that the Sweedish navy 'might' end up hunting Italian subs is a good enough reason why the Sweeds shouldn't have a naval unit at all. After all, world war 2 was all about "odd" things like that. You had New Zealanders fighting in Italy, and arabs fighting under Rommels command in France. Still, the Sweedish unit would haveto slip thru the German wrath and hope that Sweeden would survive long enough for such an event to even happen. Secondly, the Sweedish navy would atleast be able to sink a couple ships and cause some hindrance. So if it were a Cruiser unit, then it could hit a German naval unit and cause some damage, before Sweeden would surrender and / or the Germans overpower the Sweedish naval unit. I don't see why this would be unrealistic. I mean, after all, when Germany attacks Sweeden in this game, most people commence an invasion from the sea. And why shouldn't Sweeden be capable of atleast causing a couple points of damage here? I put my vote on giving Sweeden a Cruiser unit. Spain and Turkey can get one too, I leave that up for someone else to discuss. 25 year old equipment doesn't neccesarily mean that it is inadequate and completely unable. Just look at the Finns when the Russians came. ~Norse~ [ July 30, 2002, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Norse ]

I would like to point out to Hubert that Sweeden had a top-modern fleet at the outbreak of world war 2. I just wanted to point this out, so you can make a decision of wheter it should be represented by a Cruiser unit or not (I think it should). Anyway, you know I love your game ~Norse~

I agree Manstein, we shall see how it works out

Actually, going defensive in-debth doesn't leave you in a much weaker position, because the only thing you won't get is some Ukranian factories. Well you might say that is a big loss, but on the other hand, you can conquer Sweeden, Spain, Vichy(and Greece) once USA/USSR is in the game. Going all defence means u should atleast theoretically have the units to go on a quick offensive against thoose nations to sack their MPP's (except Vichy, unless ur really good ). So you can say, that atleast you get the MPP's and factories from Sweeden and Spain, instead of from Ukraine. The tradeoff is that USA/USSR is out of the game longer, and you face less attrition warfare, meaning you get more time to build your defences. And you can research more instead of buying units for an offensive (anti-air, industrial tech, I imagine would be the most useful here) Just imagine something like this. France, you have your main defence 1 hex away from the coast, with armies, tanks and lots of rockets (good coastal defence eh? ). Behind that is the airfleets and HQ's for all. Then at the coast you got the corps. All units are entrenched to the max of course. Even if the allies outproduce you by now, then they will still need to bombard your corps till it's gone, or you just reinforce it back to max again, and you know its really cheap to reinforce a corps compared to the airlosses it takes to bombard it. You might just be able to stand up to a much stronger foe this way, not sure, but I think it would be possible. If you just take your time and get some airfleets and rockets, then you can sink some expensive battleships each turn as well. Of course there is the possibility that the allies will be able to overrun the German defences, and by then it's already too late, so this approach doesn't work at all. Espesically since USSR will be in a good position here. Somehow I got a good feeling about this though Man I can't wait for the game to test theese things out ~Norse~

The 6th army in Stalingrad didn't surrender until february 1943 or so. It wouldn't make sence if the battle of Stalingrad was over already, if you start in 1943. Just make the 6th army a corps instead to represent it's reduced combat value. ~Norse~

We've discussed different agressive and highly agressive Axis strategies lately, and you all seem to have your own ideas of how to smash thru the allies quickly to obtain victory. But I was thinking about a different approach. Basically, being highly agressive comes with a certain risk (as we know the axis lost), and the allies are going to outproduce the axis soon. So I was thinking, what about going at it as defensively as possible and see what happens? Have any of the Beta testers tried this approach? Take the Low Countries and France as usual. Then build an in-debth defence in France and against USSR. Send 2 more corps, a hq and an airfleet to Norway (to make sure allies don't use Norway / Sweeden as a staging point for an invasion directly against Germany). USA and USSR would be out of the war for much longer too, and Germany get some time to soldify Fortress Europe. If possible, Germany should hit Spain and take Gibraltar once "USA prepares for war" happens. That way Italy is safer too, and can soldify it's position in the med. Well, you can fill in the rest, drop some tech chits on Industrial research and so. What do you think? Have anyone tried this? Results? ~Norse~

Norse, I can assure you that is a very tough scenario. :eek: </font>

It will definately be Axis in 1943!! Stalingrad is about to surrender, and the Allies are coming in way strong! It's time to either get a final decisive victory somewhere, or go on the defensive to establish a stalemate against the allies! Can't wait

Were given Algerie as a bonus for taking Spain? I don't see what Spain hasto do with Algerie, as Algerie were a French colony. Spain is an axis minor ally anyway, if you attack Spain then you scare your other minor allies from joining you, and the US and USSR readyness percentage increases.

I read another post of Hubert, where he wrote that USSR collects an ammount of their MPP's each turn that they are neutral. When USSR joins the war one way or the other, then USSR will have the collected MPP's ready to use on fresh troops on turn 1 of their war. I like it So if you play as the Germans, then hitting them in 1940 or 41 may be favorable than hitting them late in 1942. My 2 cents on the Russians set to random is that it is a good approach. The Russians had the troops posed near the border, that could have gone onto an offensive, if the Germans did not deploy any defences against them. This is portrayed in the game, and I like it The percentage thing ensures that USSR will join the war at some point regardless, and then will have alot of mpp's to spend right away. ~Norse~

Hvis du ikke har ett forsvar mot Russerne, så kommer de til å rulle over ditt Tredje Rike. Derfor må du passe på å ha nok styrker i øst til å kunne forsvare deg selv, hvis du har det, så tar det lang tid før Russerne kommer. Se på war view også, så ser du USSR = XX% og USA = XX% , når prosenten når 100, så erklærer de krig på deg. Det er den politiske delen av spillet. Fek, jo flere land du angriper, jo mere pissed off blir Amerikanerne på deg og prosenten øker svært raskt. Tar du det rolig, så tar det lenger tid før de kommer. In other words, it's all part of the fun ~Norse~

SS_Obergruppenführer is right, one naval counter isn't just 1 ship. When it says "Carrier Hood" or whatever the name was, I like to read that as Hood is the main ship where the fleet commander sits or something. I mean, in the 1940 scenario that we play in the demo, UK has probably 300 ships or something, and it's only portrayed in 10 units or so (can't remember the exact number). So that would be 10 fleets, not 10 ships. I doubt you can place all thoose ships into one single hex without them seeing each other, atleast not in normal weather. And weather effects give no penalty in this game, so ~Norse~