Kuniworth

Seems case blue started early? When is the start date for this scenario? Historically it commenced on june 28th 1942.

Yes but later in the war russians actually fielded artillery corps which would be fine to include.

German player seem unable to reproduce the advances of barbarossa in ww2

Looks like the germans will hold out after all.

Yes that is entirly correct. Soviet field armies consisted of 5-6 divisions while a german corps had less, about 2-3 infantry divisions at start of barbarossa. This is the way to simluate this. Soviet corps-structure resurrected later in the war together with the old army structure. But I would not put emphasis on that, instead make sure the russians can field as much as possbiel of the field armies. In my battle for russia scenario the russians will start with the mech corps that can't be rebuilt. However after that they will from mid 1942 recieve the tank armies. I''m not sure how you are simulating that, but tank armies should be immensly powerful but few in numbers. While germans fielded 10+ corps during the war in the east the4 Red Army never fielded more than 5 and eventually a 6th Tank army.

On which date did Minsk fall?

Mike, I believe we are on terms here. More different unit-types increase the tactical options of the game as well as simulate certain aspects of the war. Mountain units is something I miss, heavy and light cavalry would be nice for napoleon warfare and cruisers in two sizes(heavy/pocket battle ship and regular size) would be awesome. Your suggestions to include dreadnoughts is perfectly fine with me. To sum things up thinking a bit more about it, Hubert please read: ADDITIONAL UNITS: Dreadnoughts(older battleships) Heavy cruiser Mountain infantry unit Light cavalry Possible escort carrier Heavy armour(so we have light, medium, heavy) Light/heavy artillery ADDITIONAL FEATURES: Land mines Sea mines(perhaps minesweeper unit?) Bridges - very important even on strategic scale

Yeah that is a good solution as well. The red army abolished corps but then put them back again when leadership had improved. In 2 years the red army in the midst of war completly reorganized it's command structure, tank and army forces and even the airforce. Back to basics and then reintroduced the old organization structure in some ways again - bigger, bader and a formidable force' A most impressive transformation in 700-800 days which the japanese would taste in manchuria a bit later!

Some suggestions here, for improvments not to critizise, - The pop up talks about t-34 and kv-1:s. Infact the reason the soviet union quickly abolished the seperate tank formations in 1941 was due to the problem they had operating them. Not that t-34:s would be needed but rather that the mech corps was too huge formations. They were extremly powerful formations, the inexperienced crews and leadership of the red army could not handle them. It would take until mid 42 before the tank armies emerged. - Also with what I see in Lithuania and Latvia needs to be considered. Historically it was a rout, Manstein crossed the Dvina immediately, Riga fell and the russians never could mount some serious opposition except locally. The Northwestern Front melted away. From what I see, german struggle even to advance on Riga on time.

Considering units I'd like to say that the list is almost complete now. To be able to have seperate cavalry instead of using the anti tank unit feels like a huge leap for me lol Also the idea of introducing different bombers opens up a new scale. Instead of using tech advances to simulate for instance heavy bombers there are now different units. Maybe it would have been a great idea to do that also for tanks, adding heavy tanks as a slot. That way a divisional game of barbarossa could simulate KV-1:s and light tanks at the same time. Also the same case could be made with cavalry(light/heavy), artillery(light/heavy), cruisers(light & heavy) to open up the tactical scale. one thing though that is still missing is mountain troops. Most armies had them, germans had seperate mountain corps as some other countries as well. A-bomb should be introduced. And last but perhaps most important: Mines are also missing. Though mostly a tactical feat in ww2 it played a strategic role too, sea mines bottled up the soviet baltic fleet. I hope it's possible to introduce these units. If not here but for sc3. Another suggestion for SC3 is unit icons. Regardless if we have counters or 2D-units, topdown view or isometric I hope Hubert and his crew would add some different unit sets. Imagine adding unit sets for ww2, ww1, us civil war, napoleon warfare etc. That would be awesome as it is a true pain in the ass to do that kind of stuff.

Thanx for the enhancements Hubert you made me very happy. Almost like I forgot about sc3 but just for a while

German panzers in the south should be bled bad in the first couple of turns. IRL soviet counterattacks at Dubno and Brody exhausted Kleist's 1st panzer army.

When this is released I will remake my Battle for russia scenario. I suspect the scale I used with german corps and soviet armies made it easier to simulate the historical timetable. For instance seems difficult with distances for germans to capture Minsk around june 28th. Al deserves an applaude for daring to create an AI for this scale. No easy tadk for sure. To simulate the transformation of the red army I would make soviet corps and mech corps impossible to rebuild. That was never possible with w&w. Another thing which will be easier to simulate will be shock armies, soviet artillery corps emerging late in the war and german armydetachments.

This is excellent!

Nice to see the introduction of light tanks to simulate the soviet mech corps. That was always my problem. Soviet should have nearly 30 of them at the beginning of Barbarossa. How many tank armies have you set for the soviet player to be abl4e to produce. The tank armies should appear in mid 1942 at the earlist and be a total of 5 or 6. Are tank armies the unit size soviet armour represent or is it something else?

abukede: how many days is a turn? to simulate barbarossa properly wehrmacht should be able to capture Riga immediately and then armygroup north should advance on Leningrad, reacing Tallin at end of august and Leiningrad itself in mid september. On the center Smolensk should be able to fall in mid july, in the south Kiev should be rip for the taking in mid september. Those are key for the timetable to fold out correctly. How about HQ-ratings, are they historical and are they representing army/front commanders or perhaps even corps commanders?

Hm seems like you copied alot from my w&w eastern front scenario. Still how are you gonna solve the Riga-problem eg possible to be captured immediately? How do you avoid Pskov as a bottleneck to be able to reproduce the fast german advance? - What ratings do HQ:s have?

Mr D Luftwaffe, I've been waiting since 2005.

If germans are still in Dar-Es Salaam vicinity it sure is a looong way to Paris.

I say this is one of the all time best scenario ever made for sc2 engine.

Can anyone tell me where I can find or prehaps the complete differences between the ww1 and ww2 game engine? Everything from units etc...

Reporting.

Here is the example I'm talking about, from my nach stalingrad scenario. Look at the difference how much smoother these units are...

A graphic overhaul is very much needed. Unit icons in breakthrough and ww1 looks really bad and a mix of different styles. I see games from 10 years back that have better graphics, it should'nt be that difficult to improve. Heck in my Stalingrad scenario I used unit icons for my bm-13 katyusha rocket launcher and the nebelwerfer from the old game Stalingrad and they look hundred times better. It's like the old sc2 icons were too much detailed which made them look a bit rough and the ww1 icons are the opposite, looking at a german ww1 vanilla division it looks like a ragon's head or I don't know what. In sc3 I would prefer a top down view, easier to edit and make great maps and unit icons. However if that is not possible please make the game look great and make it easier to edit. I like the editor but all that work with silhuettes and stuff is just too hard to produce different unit icons.

Been thinking about the next version of strategic command(sc 3) and what the main focus should be. And now I have an weird idea. I think it would be innovative if the next series not focus on one or the other conflict but at multiple conflicts over longer period of time. And the natural choice for this would be from the prelude of world war 1 to the cold war. After all all these events of the 20th century is connected to one another. Say the game would start in 1914(or perhaps the french-german war of the 1870's and Germany uniting) with diplomacy and tension building up for a major conflict. The major conflict(world war 1) is conducted with various outcomes and is the base for the upcoming world war 2 and then with only to alliances left(capitalism/democracy-fascism-communism) the cold war begins. Would it be possible for the sc series to go from strictly war to simulate a longer episode of the 20th century?