SeaMonkey

This has to do with that deselecting feature for units with remaining APs and being able to come back to them later. Probably not going to happen, maybe if SC3 sees the light of day.

I believe it had to do with the static fronts that were characteristic of SC1. Airpower was seen to be unrealistic as the parameter needed to break the trench warfare. The tile configuration made the avenues of attack more numerous and hence a refocus of importance on the ground combat forces. But only HC knows for sure.

Maybe you want a game of SC2? You are free to choose.

Got to hand it to you TFL, the management of the Finnish people/political representation of WW2 is to be admired. Bravery and sacrifice when it was needed and diplomacy and mediation to avoid catastrophe when it was appropriate. In the end accomplishing the goal and not undermining the self esteem of the Finnish people. I salute your countrymen and I hope that in the future your country can be counted on to do the same.

Well JJR since you are an American, with probably a lot of undeserved mystic, and me being a Texan first, American second, you may need to subdue me to joining the Union. I believe you Americans had a little problem with that in the past? Don't believe I will go willingly, that Alamo blood runs thick within my veins, and I may prefer death. But,..... if you would like to try to coerce me to your side....name your weapons. I may submit, upon your success, to being an American first, Texan second, but what do you wager? Don't amuse me with the rest of this backboneless world, devoid of pride and chivalry, let's keep it "in the house", where the warriors preside. [ December 05, 2006, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Legend, you are such a bump wipe!

Remember SC tiles are 50 miles, thoughts of disengagement/engagement characteristics need to take that into account, as well as the time period involved per turn, ie. avg. two weeks. For a surrounded city / blockaded port unable to trace a supply line(uncontested tiles) to its capital or primary supply source should immediately acquire a supply of 3 / 30% efficiency, unless scripted otherwise. This would allow an HQ in the vicinity to provide a higher (8) supply efficiency but at the risk of loss. You know your opponent will target that HQ ASAP. The HQ fulfills an organization and coordination requirement for air supply, or possibly clandestine ops. Every turn that the city remains surrounded the supply should drop by one until it reaches 0 making the HQ support worth only 5 at that moment or without(HQ) the remaining units in the pocket have consumed their logistical support base. Gentlemen, I believe you know we're talking SC3 here, because I doubt this enhanced supply model will find its way into the code of SC2. But ideas are good.

I applaud you JJC. Refreshing to hear someone thinking outside the box. "The game is an abstract game- and the artillery unit just represents an artillery concentration rather than a separate stand-alone actual historical artillery corp." Been trying to get this across to the crowd, especially Blashy(he's beginning to get it), for the better part of four years. SC Rockets ARE artillery.

I believe a simple solution is to make contested ZoC block supply in either player turn. Only by having a friendly unit occupying the tile do you negate the effect of the opponents ZoC for supply tracing purposes. This is the way it was for most board wargames I grew up with.

ND, other than carriers, most WW2 surface vessels carried maybe one plane and could only be launched and recovered under manageable conditions. Still, its a good point, a SC taskforce could have numerous planes with good spotting characteristics even without a carrier. I believe the focus though is something that can assist the sub's survivability. Is it worth a test?

Good one JDt2, a reasonable way of looking at it. I've been trying to think of a disadvantage to the extended spotting for gameplay purposes that has impact. Some exploit other than the obvious spotting range inland?

Yeah TFL, I already suggested something on those lines, but the problem is; Who's going to code it? You? Me? Not likely. This is a quick fix suggestion that is compatible with the present code. Doesn't require anything other than a modification of the spotting parameters using the editor. Its for some abstract thinking modders to try out. Now.

Ok, got an idea. The biggest problem of this Atlantic sub warfare program is that once a sub is spotted the Allied taskforces can be configured in a way so that the sub is surrounded and its escape movement halted by "surprise contact". That happens because the subs spotting range is one, the adjacent tiles only, which allows for the collaring. How do you overcome it with the present system? Perhaps a bit unrealistic, but what if the sub's spotting range was say 3 tiles? That would give the sub enough of a spotting perimeter that the Allied naval forces would not be adequate to stop its escape to all directions of the compass. It could also serve to avoid lurking allied blockades in its proximity, ie. its decision to run and not fight. Maybe it should be four tiles? Now what if this additional spotting range could only be activated when the sub goes to "silent" mode? Could this also be coded for water only tiles, not to exceed one land tile for sub recon?

Thanks Cap'n A, a breath of reason!

Game experience for SC and SC2 dictates it is about a 5% chance you get that initial Atlantic deployed sub back to a friendly base. This is for me and my usual opponents. I would be interested if someone else could elaborate on their experiences. My SC conclusion is sending out subs is near a suicidal mission which precludes one of the most attractive features/strategies of playing this type of game.

Come on Blashy, give me a break, you've got to be kidding. Perhaps in ideal conditions when a plane from a surface vessel happened to fly directly overhead and the few spotters happen to look in the right place and weren't distracted and the sun was directly overhead, no deflected mirroring, and the birds didn't crap on the windshield and the engine wasn't leaking oil and the rivers had stopped flowing so the water was perfectly clear and no cloud shadows or fish schools or sea currents, plankton, whales, oil slicks, rain, fog, mirages...shall I go on? Are we talking my backyard pool or the Atlantic ocean? But everytime in SC2 a sub comes within 50 miles of an opposing warship, they are discovered. Sounds logical to me, I'm sure it happened all the time. Oh yeah, I wanted to come back an edit with a particular emphasis on the word(s), "EVERYTIME", add "ALWAYS" do you get it yet Blashy? Maybe I should consult my Thesaurus for additional synonyms if not. [ November 29, 2006, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Subs need the ability to truly run silent, just like IRL. That is how they made it into the Atlantic and elsewhere. Until the "surprise contact" phenomenon can be neutralized by selecting "silent" then the sub strategy is likely to be unproductive.

And to add to Liam's revelation, when my Panzers with HT 5 and four medals.....well heck just a couple at this point, cut through your forces like a hot knife in butter, remember Michael Whitmann was leading that heavy tank battalion in the assault.

There are certain things you are compelled to do in an historical context. DoW of USA or the joining of the USA to the Allied alliance is one of those. If you would like to have more freedom of decision, then that is why HC created the editor. Direct yourself to the custom campaigns and you will attain your goal, or better yet conjure up your own. Oh...by the way... the only stupid question..is the one that's never asked.

Did you take the CGN file out of the file folder?

Its not total luck and randomness. Its a system of calculated risk taking. You have to be ready to respond to your opponent's moves while still following your own. IMO most of you are too aggressive and don't play with your cards held tightly to your chest. Being patient, motivated and conservative seems to lead to more SC success. But I could be wrong!

Good idea Edwin, but let's keep this simple. As losses accumulate there should be a temporary triggering mechanism to reduce the capacity of UK(home) supply sources(cities). Example: after 200 MPPs have been lost to raiding, UK cities go to 90% effectiveness. Then perhaps a new threshold is activated for the next level of reduction. The recovery would be slow, based upon the amount of time to replace the sunk transport capacity and the ability of the Kreigsmarine to maintain the sinking threshold. In this case 200MPPs with an inherent recovery of say 20 MPPs per turn for UK. Let's say the sub raiding reaches the threshold and supply goes to 9 for UK cities. Next turn if the subs don't maintain a greater loss than the recovery, UK cities go back to 10. If the subs maintain a greater MPP loss than the UK inherent replacements then the next plateau of reduction ensues and UK cities go to 8/80%. And so on and so forth.

a234, I believe you are talking about the success of Allied aircraft detecting U-boats with radar, which was quite widespread. I'm sure the radar of surface vessels could be successful in the proper circumstances, but would be a much rarer occurrence. Remember also that U-boats were equipped with radar sensing devices allowing them to detect a radar search and hopeful avoid a confrontation. Not saying it shouldn't be considered, but the dynamics of the counter-measures IMO offset the usage, at least by surface vessels.

TJ let me try to explain the reoccurrment of history to you, as you have just denoted. Your right, it happens all over under a different guise and because the world is smaller the consequences have a greater realm. It makes no difference what the pretense is, we can debate that forever, what is important is to derail the replay and that will require action. Remember history, words are full of false promises and deception and the greatest consequence is to the ones that fail to act, believing in the words to protect them. Someone did something, that is what caused the reaction, and someone will do something else and there will be another reaction and it very well may escalate before it gets better. What is telling is about those cultures that nurture their loved ones for the future. To guide their offspring to a brighter path, a better world for all. Gaze out at the cultures of today, choose the ones that cultivate the future, build their civilizations and not the ones that muddle in the past of grievances and inept traditions.

Yep ND, its all about logistics.