Doomsday1

Not gamey within the game parameters, but nevertheless effective... I have an opponent that provides colorful commentary and ahistorical takes on our game. i feel my pulse quicken in anticipation of unzipping the file and loading 'er up so I can see what dastardly deads he has performed on my gallant forces. As far as a gamey move within the parameters. the French naval forces screened by the Royal navy lying in ambush of Benito's navy. italy declares war, and its a new take on "Taranto".

Gamey stuff like this is why I and others never liked the Free French option. If this option is to be considered as a default setting for play balance, it needs to be reconsidered. Hopefully Hubert will make an appropriate adjustment one of these days.</font>

In a couple of PBEM games as the "Allies", I invaded Portugal and subsequently Spain with no success. I did so to take pressure off the floundering Reds, ...a kind of second front in the West. I knew a "Torch" would not draw enough forces to help the Motherland, so I gambled on the Iberian penisula and lost. My US forces consisted of the 1st and 3rd US armies with "Patton" HQ, an airfleet, a tank army and 2 US corps with the Brits faking a landing in Southern France and joining the fray the next turn. What ensued was disaster! The Axis player (unnamed so his head does not swell) operated a sizable force complee with a full complement of 5 airfleets and a couple of HQs. Needless to say, a few turns later, the US forces were routed. The appearance of untersee boats sent the proud 'Alabama' to the bottom to pay Davey Jones a visit before she could reach a friendly port. What was left of Patton made it back via a very SW route to avoid detection for future defense of the homeland. Losses in Spain could not be recouped. This allowed "The Rock" to fall into the enemies hands trapping elements of the Royal Navy in Mussolini's pond. In another game, I thought it would be keen to attack the lowlands(low countries)thus butting the french up against the Belguim fortress and depreiving the Axis plunder and experience. What foolishness. First, due to lack of sleep, I thought the Belguim forces would join the forces of good to stem the evil tide, instead, I found I had an enemy on my flank. Next, as HC pointed out, this made the Americans angry, and their readiness dropped to -7. The Axis player was able to put off his Barbarosa till mid 1942, at which his vastly superior numbers, equipment and experince rang out the death knoll for Russia.

Hubert, This is the match I have been waiting for. Having lost to both these players (Jollyguy and Iolo), I personaly would find it interesting to see the outcome of this match. Both of these players, I feel, are suberb. Me..I am average. I work on emotion and impulse, not always to my advantage. Playing these guys has made my game better. So....how about it guys? Has anyone given a good account as the Allies? Iolo...are you game?

I have been busy squeezing in turns for the 9 different PBEM games I have going, reading up on the posts,trying to be more of a grog, keeping my 'babe' wife satisfied ...with intellectual tidbits and somehow making it to work. I am playing two Canadians, a Spaniard, a German, three fellow Americans and a guy from Japan. I am axis in 5 of the 3 games, I game is a mirror. Its been historical...and "gamey". I lovvve this game!

qb]</font>

I was only trying to expand the discussion... don't know where profusely is indicated. Whats the purpose of your comments Sir knob? To inflame....Article name and author should be sufficient even for a knob. My source was printed in the March 2002 World War II magazine, (by the way, nice ad for battlefront.com.) The author is a living member of the 79th. And you? Some knob no doubt.

Without doubt air power is strong, and it should be. Too strong in SC...maybe. I just read an article titled "Thunderbolt Strike on the Road to Montelimar" by William Cogan Jr. which graphically descripes how P-47 fighter bombers from the US 79th fighter group shot up and destroyed over 2,000 enemy vehichles on a 30 mile stretch of highway as they (Germans)retreated through the Southern France , July '44. "[A]s we travelled up the Rhone valley, wrote one flier, the destructive powers of the fighter-bombers became apparent with grim clarity that none of us had ever fully realized". This carnage was exacted in a mater of hours. Of course this was not an everyday event, or even a weekly occurence. Part of what is lacking in the game, IMHO, is artillery, namely AA. The Germans effectively employed the dreaded '88' as an effective AA weapon, and flakpanzers to protect not only vital material resources, but men as well. The AI in SC simply does not punish airpower enough for attacking men or armored units unless they are covered by friendly interceptors. The question is, is it realisitic to have say 5 air fleets pound one army group while ignoring numerous other threats and remain unscathed? If these aggressors were damaged, (fighter bomber losses were common occurence among the P-47s and Typhoons, and I am sure the Soviets lost their fair share), then said aggressor would have to repair those fighters before taking to the skies to rain destruction from the skies. a bit of a reprieve. For game play, without the benefit of strong air units being able to cripple opposing units, and as my dear friend/PBEM enemy Iolo pointed out, (you owe me a turn!) the war just degrades into trench warfare without eiher side gaining a clear advantage. Solution: Some type of overall limit on how many fleets can attack a single unit, or some kind of reciprocal damage? I am not sure. As someone pointed out earlier, lack of trained, skilled pilots was very much part of the undoing of the Luftwaffe, and very much so for the Japanese. What makes sense for SC?

Reminiscent of my old Axies & Allies board game by Milton Bradley...and Risk....only way better!

1. I agree that you cannot play the US as a continental power, at least not in '41, however, I stick to the contention that the MPPs the US recieves is still to low. By 1943 the US was in full production, sending hundreds of B-24's and B-17's to the UK to start strategic bombing. (These were expensive planes with large, highly trained crews). In this game, that cannot be replicated and still cover the other major undertakings the US was involved in, like North Africa, build up for taking Sicily and Italy proper and the War in the Atlantic. Not to mention advances in nuclear warfare, keeping england fed, and aid to the USSR. Won't even discuss the naval build-up necessary to defeat the Japanese. 2. The US historically defeated the U-boat menance with the technique of convoying, as well as having aircraft cover almost the entire expanse of the convoy routes. The Royal navy did not protect the US from a pipe-dream axis invasion. By 1943 we had ample Naval strenght w or w/out the HMS-whatever. Looking at what the US had in its aresenal after defeating germany & Japan, it was almost overkill....we mothballed more ships that the Brits ever had in service at any time. 3. I think the production rate sucks. The starting point is fine, but it does not take into account the massive build-up of everything conceivable. I remember watching a movie rendition of the Battle of the Bulge. A German officer was dismayed because he knew it was a futile pursuit to even think they had a chance when he saw that the US was flying fresh cakes from Boston to the men. The US and its production is what saved the day. An increase of 2-3 MPPs per turn would more accurately reflect the historical US production rates and might be what is needed to counter the known axix bias inherent in the game as it now plays. Still love the game, but maybe a additional tweak or two might make it better, Eh?

Well...realistically,(hate that word), historically(,hate that word too) there is no way that war would have ended in a draw. I don't mind so much running out of time against the AI, but against a fellow Pbemer...I wish we could see it through. I don't know what it takes to cap off the game as far as code and all that... What would also be kind of interesting would be to turn on the red-skis and do the "Patton Scenario" where we, ( the good ol' USofA) push on to the Volga, stop communism in its tracks, free the eastern bloc from almost 50 years of bondage, and make the world safe for democracy!

Well...realistically,(hate that word), historically(,hate that word too) there is no way that war would have ended in a draw. I don't mind so much running out of time against the AI, but against a fellow Pbemer...I wish we could see it through. I don't know what it takes to cap off the game as far as code and all that... What would also be kind of interesting would be to turn on the red-skis and do the "Patton Scenario" where we, ( the good ol' USofA) push on to the Volga, stop communism in its tracks, free the eastern bloc from almost 50 years of bondage, and make the world safe for democracy!

Hang in there. I expect we will see some changes regarding this and other little discrepancies which hinder the allies. All await the results of the BIG PBEM CHALLENGE, which should reveal certain inadequecies, which, once adressed, will make for even a better wargaming experience.

Beats me...whats worse is when you "sue for peace" or was it going to the "peace table"...or something equally wrong. I would have liked to see it through, to the last corp,..to the last MPP. I think of it as a penalty for not turning up the burners!

Dog: Thanks for the update. Sounds like Jolly Green Giant, or whatever his handle is, (just kidding) is playing within the historical parameters as we know them. For $19.99, I will sell you all hie pet moves (again joking). Do the Allies proud!