SeaMonkey

Edwin, as it was in the beginning of BLaft in SC1, the Germans had very little chance to hold the eastern territories of USSR, especially in the south. The garrisons were insufficient to blunt the beginning Red Army offensive and only later near the vicinity of Odessa could the Germans succeed in a forming up the defense.

Back on this subject. I have not had any luck in researching the timeline for the arrival of the Siberians other than what we know was historical. Kuni had suggested that these reinforcements trickled in. The best I've been able to come up with is that about 18 to 20 divisions arrived for that Jan-Feb 41 counter offensive, as others were added later when the offensive gained momentum. Anyone know the exact historical configuration(OOB) and their arrival times?

JJ you are the foremost authority on these two what ifs and I can't imagine adding anything initially to these outstanding scenarios. Really enjoyed these two in SC1 and looking forward to their creation in SC2. I remember getting waxed by RB alias "arby" in the Brest-L aft. I want a rematch...you hear me RB...HEAR ME! I'm going to kick your ever-lovin scrawny as... all over Russia. Anyway (after chilling a bit), JJ, I will help you play and balance them. Let me know when you are ready.

Actually I think the Med is where the game is won or lost. I know, I know...I've said that the USSR used to occupy that status, but I was just misleading everyone. The better to unleash my diabolical strategy.

Well Colin I just made a quick scan of the stats, and just for line rifle divisions only the USSR reformed around 170 that were previously destroyed. Some of those divisons were destroyed and reformed up to three times not including their origin. Now as far as the SC2 eastern front, I think it plays well, especially after the morale issue is patched. Now with the possibility of Engineers being a bit cheaper(not sure I agree), I think the defense will be a little more substantial in 1.05. I've had good luck in using Engineer fortifications to funnel the enemy attacks while backing them with a sizeable supported counter-attacking force. Are you talking an AI game or H to H, cause I believe a patient human USSR player can pretty well blunt and bleed the Axis offensive. Emphasis on the word "patience". Sound historical?

Well Kuni, how do you keep them from getting so much experience. The game engine decreases experience in relation to the amount of reinforcements a unit takes. So make the German formations take more casualties as they carry on the campaign. A couple of ways off the top of my head is to reduce their attacking strength, or increase defense of USSR units, initially. Give USSR a higher IW and AT levels for instance or perhaps start them with higher experience=harder to kill. Reduce supply of attacking units or experience levels, decrease starting readiness and morale. Surely something can be done, forget the historical comparisons and tweak the engine to get the desired results.

Now simmer there old buddy, not good for us to get our blood pressure up. No matter what anyone says, no one, well there's always some that are completely removed from reality, can deny the Germans put together one almighty military machine. The ineptitude was neutralized as both sides graced themselves liberally with its essence as we all point out. Funny how hindsight makes all us morons look like geniuses.

Thanks HC, you take your time, for we are not worthy of your endeavors. There is so much more in this game than the compensation price, we are grateful. Well Liam, let's wait, but as soon as 1.05 is out........"I'm coming to get you".

If we are compatible(1.04 -> 1.05), then I'm ready to begin. Usually I average a turn a day, so we get through a year of gametime about every two weeks. Sometimes I get more turns in on weekends, but with a 24/7 lab to run that is at the mercy of the petroleum industry, there can be days of no game action. HC? Betas? any comments on compatibility? Is it to early?

Liam, you are spot on. I'm afraid that incorporating these details into the game might be an endeavor beyond what Hubert sees as critical. I totally agree with your assessment and hopefully someone with a great deal of experience manipulating the scripts could pull this off.

I agree Liam, the Allies should receive there most beneficial increase in morale from liberating countries rather than their surrender. For Allies, things like taking Tobruk, Paris, Copenhagen, etc. would supply the morale boost. The Axis are OK as is as long as we can have a cap on morale value, max 150%.

Look, I like these new ideas, but reading about engineers, paras, and rockets getting picked off by AFs just makes me want to scream out, the thing I do when employing these type units. Cover them with a couple of HQ supported advanced AFs! I'm sorry, but building the kind of fortifications that SC2 engineers build, for army sized units, and concentrating enough transport planes to lift a corps of paratroopers is not going to go unnoticed by the enemy, especially if that enemy has decent air recon. Ok, maybe airborne operations have a chance, but your going to build the westwall unnoticed?

No Panzerliga for this Texan. I usually don't get around to completing to many games of the same campaign when the SC platform stabilizes. Usually after a half a dozen, the recognized strategical paths get a little redundant. I like playing customs at that point. It puts you in the unknown position of not knowing what to expect, like it was for the real players of WW2. Its almost like being a SC virgin all over again. I would very much like to play a real veteran of SC, the honor would be all mine. I'm a little leary at the proximity of the new patch though, I'd hate to start over, been there done that. What about it HC, anytime soon, like a two week window? Doesn't matter if its compatible with 1.04. Are we going to see a compatible 1.05? If your game, send your Axis move, bradtap@aol.com

Yeh, but think about it Liam...have you hit a city with level 3 AAR. I've blunted more than one Luftwaffe air campaign against my Russian cities with it. The cost to the side is research at 75 MPPs/chit and 10/level to apply, pretty cheap when compared to reinforcing air units. Now, like I first proposed, Air causing strength losses is no big deal as long as the receiving side has the opportunity to apply the counter, AAR.

Liam, if you don't mind slow PBEM, a turn a day, PM me...I want Allies, already have a couple of Axis games going.

Looking forward to these changes, thanks Mr. C for your considerations and those of the beta team also.

Good point Liam, we do need self-propelled variation of artillery(ie.Rockets). How about after you have researched mobilty to the second level then the scoot and shoot characteristics kick in for artillery, a faster in-battery sequence. Colin, I hear you, your of course correct. So how about as you said, let's apply the interdiction capability for air units as they obtain the upper levels? The effect is a reduction in supply and the accompanying reduction in APs for the targeted unit. I'm for any ideas that incorporate historical effects with the addition to strategic variation for SC2.

So maybe once the Axis, obtain Iraq/Iran the effective diplomatic pressure on Spain should increase (% chance) or script once they reach 50% effectiveness. Maybe an additional boost if Axis liberate Caucasus oil icons and the 50% efficiency level is attained.

First up, Rockets need to have a cheaper purchase price...they are artillery. I know I can get this done with the editor...no problem. I want more Rocks, Paper, Scissors, which means ditching Amphib tech. Give UK 6 tiles, USA 8 tiles, Italy 5 tiles, Germany and USSR 4 or even 3 tiles range. We need airpower to evolve to more efficient ground attacking, combat support. Which means the morale and readiness reduction due to attacks will be substantially higher and strength loss should increase as research levels attain the maximum. This will apply to carriers also when attacking other naval units and to a lesser degree, land units. We want the counter research for airpower, which is of course anti-air tech that can be applied to any unit, fortification, city, port, or resource. Any others? What's the drawbacks? Obviously, with these new tweaks, which are quite historical, there will be more parameters competing for our MPPs. That's a good thing, not to mention the introduction of new strategical paths. Ohhh...the maladies of it all!

Well Rambo??? What about it? Sounds like Liam is "calling you out"? Scared? Are you really #2(not), or maybe you're just full of #2. Remember guys,....AAR.

Hey guys, I've had minors join, down at 26% for Axis. In fact it just happened in one of my PBEMs as my UK opponent had obviously made more of an investment than I, or maybe he just has better diplomats. [ October 10, 2006, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

OK this crass exchange instigates a rematch, and this time we want an AAR.

A couple of chits early as the Germans can compel the UK to invest if you get success. Helps set up a Sealion if UK defends Egypt, dilutes their MPPs. The early chits can also be an insurance policy for minors joining. If you get a big hit, you can follow up, but like Lars says, units are more important.

Good game guys, good post analysis. So it goes just like in real life, FOW, intelligence is constantly deficient, so close, but so far. Thanks for the insight.

So Rambo, what do you conclude was Liam's biggest mistake in allowing you to wrest the initiative?