SeaMonkey

Remember how it was in SC1, you loaded and moved to the coast and landed the next turn? You all know SC2's feature, so how about we have both? Amphib tech should be tied to the enhancement of APs. Each country starts as historical level was for that timeline. When you create an amphib or land, it should cost 2 APs on a clear hex in perfect weather. So say for Germany who starts with an Amphib AP level of 4, they can create the amphib and move 2 sea tiles or move two sea tiles and land on clear terrain. Now of course moving into an enemy naval unit's ZoC will cost an additional AP or landing on a non-clear tile or in inclement weather. Now you have a real incentive to research the amphib tech category. Better yet, let's just set the amphib features to historical for every side with a time sensitive enhancement and use that category for AntiAir for units while adding some hard and soft attack increases for AFs getting Advanced Air.

Forget the diplomacy, buy the Royal Engineers, ASAP, and fortify the Island.

Yeh, you may have to dig the holes, fill the sandbags, cut the timber, but remember a SC turn provides ample time to accomplish the task, IRL. Since we have these immediate entrenchments, I want the Bombers e-reduction capability back, Leningrad is a tough nut to crack when the Red Army engineers have prepared the area. Its taking me all summer with two army groups and all the German airforces, minors and Italians too. I know, I know, I'm a bit short on tech, but.....that's the breaks.

A234, not to spy , banish the thought. For patrol purposes, naval exercises, training, humanitarian missions, etc. You're going to spend millions/billions and leave your Task Groups in port? :eek:

Interesting JJ, your concept has possibilities, perhaps with a Soviet re-entry. It would be a totally different game.

You started this Hubert, I'm innocent. Maybe you should thing about an add on module, maybe with hexes, the suggestions above, pass through naval movements, etc. I would like to see some research categories for rocks, paper, scissors attributes. For example, if we add aa to units then ground attack needs to be researchable for air units, AF and TAC. Did I mention the inclusion of Artillery? Now this wouldn't be for free, what's a fair price forum? Hey if GG can do it with "A World Divided", why not Hubert, who created a much better game.

This is really a tough one. Not that I don't agree, its so obvious, but the ramifications to the balance of SC would be catastrophic. I mean, the game hangs on the USSR being able to hold on until the western Allies re-enter the fray. With the additional help of the USSR nationalists there's really no chance for the Allies. Incorporating this "what if" will require a revamp of many of the SC2 parameters and a rebalance testing phase. Not that it couldn't be done, but it will require the most precious investment.

Not my fault HC, your the one that brought up the second bomber type.

I think we should wait for 1.06. Now... the pressure is on Hubert.

HC, you are such a tease. Now how about them artillery units?

I'm OK with that, but I thought they were named Strategic Bombers in the original SC. Now they're just Bombers. My thoughts are that if they represent the faction of an airwing that has the level and dive bombers in it(remember its naval effectiveness and our numerous discussions) then Bombers should at least have the effectiveness of AFs as far as entrenchment reduction. Think about it. If other units' attacks enable entrenchment reduction, what is it about the firepower/ordinance delivered by bombers that excludes them from the same effectiveness, possibly greater, as in SC1? Where was I when this discussion happened? Must have had my head up my......well let's don't go there.

Please Hubert, give me my bombers back..... no naval spotting, now no entrenchment reduction, WtH???? I feel neutered.

Have I gone nuts? I put a unit next to an entrenched=6 or x enemy unit so I have full intel, then unleash my bombers. What happens?????? No entrenchment reduction, it remains at 6. Conversely using an AF, entrenchment reduction. Did I miss something here? Has that feature been dismissed. We had it in SC1, the manual states, page 92, 4th paragraph, a -2 entrenchment reduction. I've noticed in the mods I'm playing also. What happened to this feature???? Anyone???

What's the "window of opportunity"....ie time schedule? Are we waiting for 1.06? Is 1.06 compatible with 1.05a.....Hubert? Rumors abound that some very interesting custom scenarios are in the works. IE. I like your suggestion ND.

Well JJR, what's your impression of the slitherine boys? Me thinks these guys are laymans when it comes to a WW2 game, relative to what Hubert has created. They may get there eventually, but this first offering will probably be close to disasterous and I question the longevity of their support. If they truly have dedication to create a viable WW2 platform, then maybe the second edition will be attractive, but I've been surprised before, so we shall see.

Sorry I don't agree. What keeps neutrals from reporting combatants' locations IRL? What we really need is a "pass through" function for naval units on the open seas, with a % chance for a "surprise contact" based upon experience, tech level, type, and perhaps morale indications. Partial land/sea tiles would always result in stopping contact for naval units.

Always great to hear from our Forum Historian, the honorable JJ. As a catalyst of ideas based on history he is unsurpassed, Edwin's a close second. Now it seems we have the infancy of a pre-hostility era of diplomacy much like Days of Decision module for World in Flames. Who would like to see perhaps a 5, 4, 3 year pre diplomatic scenario for SC2? One based on maneuvering, builds, research, diplomacy on quarterly turns. The point system for builds could be inacted based on these decisions and the outcome of the "Diplomacy Scenario" could lead to different alliances and hostility start dates. Of course we wouldn't be historically inclined anymore, but would preserve the venue. The action would start when the initial representatives of the Axis and Allies alignnments DoW each other.

All that has been referred to is correct, IMO. Africa is the Allies if they want it. But as the Axis you can cut the Med in half and provide for some nice recon and diversions in force. Sometimes these will lead to a full scale offensive and if the Allies are not diligent Axis can rest the momentum. Since Tunis is not effected by Malta, that is your stronghold(base of ops), supported by Axis air and seapower there is good supply close by. You can also take out Malta during one of the winter doldrums with a little planning. It can be a very interesting test of wills(and fun) with the idea being to make your opponent invest more than you while achieving stalemate.

Fubarno, AA system is cutting edge, nothing like it anywhere. Soon BftB will debut, check out the scenarios, maps, at Matrix, this will be most awesome AA yet. Only one problem, no PBEM, only TCP/IP. Look out, perhaps North Africa is next.

Welcome Sniper to SC......the AI has really gotten that good? Seems like its still a chump to me. The AI doesn't have any special abilities if you play beginner without any experience allocation. You should be on even ground. Group your Kampfgruppes around HQs that are in supply, 8 minimum. A good composition is about 4 armies, 4 corps, a couple of Tanks. Bring in some air support, perhaps handled by another HQ, use your bomber for recon and reducing the AI's supply sources. Learn the fine art of examining your units for supply, readiness and morale and attaching them to your HQs. Try to build up your experience on key units, allowing them to make the kills and not taking adverse combat results. Save them for the "special moments" where the game hangs in the balance, plan ahead, hoard your MPPs and funnel the AI into your strength, set up diversions. But above all...enjoy the game, learn the mechanics and then play these nasty humans.

Iran just got an inventory of new parts for its F-14s from who else, the only other country that has/had F-14s. More oversight, corruption. Don't worry US won't tackle Iran as at breakfast we were discussing this issue and since it seems the new cereal was suspect, we got an idea. "Let's get Mikey", err I mean Israel. No one likes them anyway, they are warmongers, agitators and just downright mean. And I'll add they got some badass weapon systems and are not afraid to use them and US will supply them more if they need them. So who wins, Israel in this corner with US backing, or Iran in the opposite corner with Russian and Chinese help? I'm taking/giving odds.

Simmer, now let's all say it together Commerce is Good! Let supply and demand control the markets. Allow innovation and improvisation to flourish. Remove the government rules and regulations that hinder business and above all get off your fat asses and do something about it and stop complaining. Sitting there with lawyers that have your cajones in a lock-box ain't going to accomplish jack. I just put 10 gallons of fuel that i made in my truck, this is just a bit of the many thousands, perhaps millions, no for sure millions of gallons that I have been responsible for. The world needs something else, you can bet someone will find a way to provide it, but with all the lawyers and politicians creating multi-tiered management systems(ie regulations) to get their slice, you bet it will cost us all. That's the bottom line. You see we're all interconnected, no one gets away with jack, we all pay more or less, now or later, and the mode of payment comes in many different forms.

Tried the demo of The Calm and The Storm. :cool:

CEaW, check the slitherine website.

What's the deal gwg, you been living in a cave? Perhaps you are just trolling, a pathetic attempt at disguise. Or maybe you've never heard of the SC legacy? If so....you have the forum's permission to ... REJOICE!!!!