Welshwill

Historical intrigue, that is what I'm looking for. A scenario to play out what might have been just like the "what if" scenarios within SC. When Spain & Turkey join the Axis In SC they are combatant nations not neutrals, it didn't happen it is make believe, just like the game that I would like. Their were a number of occasion when the Cold war it was a little more than cold, maybe luke warm? Berlin blockade Korea Cuba Yom Kippur

The Cold war is also part of history, and I agree, thank christ it didn't go hot. But as I mentioned, it is something that I would like to see in a game along the same lines as SC. Just because the doesn't appeal to you doesn't make it a bad idea, I imagine that their a number of people that would enjoy a game of this type, think RED STORM RISING for the PC. So I will except the fact that if it ever becomes available you won't be adding a copy to your collection, but I will. On another point. Do you end an SC game when Spain & Turkey enter for the Axis after Sealion has started? Because the inclusion of both these countries in any SC game is no more fictious than a NATO/WarPac game. [ October 14, 2002, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Welshwill ]

I am well aware that the Warsaw Pact became defunct in 1990. What I would like to see is a game where "what if" scenarios could be played out. For one, even though I am new to gaming, many of the games on the market are based in fiction. Tell me in your oppoinion, what the difference is between a "what if" scenario in SC and a possible NATO v War Pact "what if" version based on SC?

This is slightly off topic, but I would like to see a WWIII NATO v War Pact game.

I think the idea is that the placement of fortifications will be selective and follow a historical context.

That is a fair point, but. I am now ten moves on and have only had one more advancement. I know that it is supposed to be random, with improved odds if you max out your points in that catergory, but what is happening in one of my current games is bordering on the ridiculous. I have to say, if this is how it is going to play out then I'm not going to bother with SC and I'm going to find a more well balanced game. If the memebers who usually resort to insults don't like what I'm saying, tough. If it needs to be said then I'm going to say it. If you want to keep your collective heads in the sand, and in the past I might add, then so be it. You will only succeed in stiffling the development of this game. So to all those who wish to critisize, and their are many, my oppinion. UP YOU PIPE as they say in the UK. This is a democracy and if you don't like well.......I don't care.

Sorry to drag up this topic AGAIN! But. I'm currently involved in a PBEM where I had an excellent start. I have invested the full five points into industrial tech and in 35 turns have had just two advancements! In the mean time the Brits have had at least three, as I'm fighting L3 jets and the Russians, who are notouriously slow starters have had at least one in jets. How am I supposed to compete? Again the plea, THAT SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE! It is getting to the point where the game will become boring as thier is a distinct inbalance and I for one enjoy the challenge of a well balanced game. It doesn't matter how well you perform and what strategy your using, if you are going up against greater numbers with higher tech development then at best you have static warfare. Where is the fun in that? [ October 05, 2002, 05:51 AM: Message edited by: Welshwill ]

Thanks Hubert. It should make for a better game in the East.

Yes. We are both using the V1.04 patch. The only place that I can position a new unit is Moscow, which is surrounded.

The consequences of the Germans surrounding Moscow i.e. unable to purchase additional units or supply current units. Is this an intentional part of the game or an oversight in the design?

That's a possibilty. The only drawback is that it takes a good bit of the randomness out of the game. You know that you're going to have level 1 tanks in 1941, and that's that. That's another possibility, although it might create some problems with gameplay. Gee, is this my level 1, level 2, or level 3 tank that I'm attacking with?</font>

I agree with your assessment on both of the above points. Your idea to restrict the research invest to one catergory makes alot of sense but I don't see that it would overcome the problem of the inbalance that occurs. If the Germans decide to pump all their booty into research then they will still have higher tech levels earlier in the game. In the past I have suggested that you restrict research by date i.e. you don't end up with King Tigers and Me262's in 42! One other idea is that previous units purchased at a lower tech level don't get upgraded, true to the facts. I mean when the Germans deployed the Panther they weren't able to issue every unit with the new tank and they still had to rely on the Panzer III & IV.

In my current PBEM I'm playing the Axis. I have been very careful during my campaign in the West, trying not to provoke the USSR to early (Random setting). The only two countries that I invaded other than Poland & France were The Low Countries & Denmark. My question is; Is the USSR destined to come into the war before a given date regardless of what the Axis do? The war readiness just kept climbing regardless of what I did or didn't do!

I'm currently playing a PBEM in which my opponent has had maximum allocation in Ind Tech, for the Italians, we are now in late 1943 and he hasn't had one advancement! Not that I mind. Will

I'm not saying that the US MPP should equal the Russians but, it should increase to simulate the massive increase in capacity and output that is a historical fact. Your right about getting the tactics right, but if you wait to long then the Germans are pulling in ~600MPP, with significant research development and the US have the choice of investing in research which is so random they might be lucky to achieve level 5 Ind Tech by the time the Axis have knocked out the Russians and are turning on the UK. Where is the fun if you are totally outclassed in all areas. Isn't it designed to simulate the European Theatre? US MPP isn't even close to simulating that FACT! if only because it remains static. Will

I think a limit should be placed on Tanks & Jets, maybe restricted by date. It seem crazy having L5 jets in 1941 and it also gives an unfair advantage. My suggestion for jets would be L1/2 between 39 & 41, L3/4 between 41 & 43 and L5 after 43. I think this would follow the historical trend. Will

As an aside this raised another point, the 'Japan attacks Siberia' switch that you can set to prevent Russia gaining the Siberian armies. IMO, if that is set to on (ie Japan attacks Siberia), the USA should roughly double its available MPPs, the C'wealth (UK in game) should pick up another 20% - 30% (India, Aust and NZ production and forces mostly) because Japan could not have attacked Siberia AND gone south for the oil, so the Pac war would never have happened.</font>

That is an extremely unfair comment. Have you ever thought that the reason it might be his first post is to warn his fellow members of a potential problem. I have only been a member for ~3 months and have posted very few messages, but they have all been of some relevance to the game. You owe this guy an apology for assuming he is out to make trouble. As it turns out he was right. WILL! [ August 17, 2002, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: Welshwill ]

That is a fair point but, the MPP allocation still doesn't represent the massive industrial advantage that the US brought to the Allied cause. The level of US manpower at the end of the war was huge and if you say that the MPP allocation represents the total men under arms in the equations, what about the manpower that the US mobilized to service there industrial needs. Will

On the other, the Shadow Side, so to speak, I would add that the decision by The Raving Lunatic to commence his conquests in 1939 would be a major reason for the eventual defeat of Germany. I totally agree and if their hadn't been so much infighting amongst the high ranking Nazi's then the war could have had a radically different outcome. Will

The pips indicate what level of technology they have attained. Will

In one of my current PBEM I had virtually no advancements in research even though I had the full allocation in Ind Tech! Can you imagine, I'm trying to hold the Germans, with level 5 jets, in Russia with only level 3 jets!!!

I will conceed the point on Lend Lease allocation to the Allies but, their is no increase in MPP throughout the war to represent the massive increase in US industrial production. Also, when the USSR is defeated shouldn't the US MPP increase to represent a return on the resources no longer being sent to Russia? The US industrial might during WWII was one of the main factors in destroying the Axis, this is not being represented accurately within this game. By 1944 the US MPP should be close to double even taking into account the Pacific allocation. What in your collective oppinions were the main factors in destroying the Axis? Top five only, not in any order of significance. 1) Huge Soviet reserves in manpower and their disregard for losses. 2) The Russian winter. 3) Churchills uncompromising will to continue and the British people, of course. 4) Roosevelt. 5) US Industrial MIGHT!