SeaMonkey

My impression is JJ has got a pretty good take on this post German surrender scenario. I'll cite Truman's objection with McArthur's suggestion of bombing Chinese staging areas in Manchuria during the Korean war, "Wrong time, wrong place, wrong enemy", or something to that effect. The lesson is to act when the evil is in its infancy. Recognize its potential early and neutralize it before it becomes strong. The chance was lost in 1919 at the lesser cost, then completed ????, well we hope, 70 years later at an enormous cost. Of course you must run the gauntlet from those that supposedly have the greater clarity of vision, so they say, and preach we shouldn't get involved. Takes a great deal of conviction to overcome a vast media of naysayers, especially when your inclined to do the "right thing". Its either here or there, now or later, but one thing is for sure, it will have to be confronted. Has history taught us that ........yet???

Not bad SO, but I can envision something more akin to the unit building feature of TOAW. Since SC is about corps size units, you take a basic building force, say battalion strength, with a predominant type of equipment and group it together into your SC unit. The attributes of the individual building blocks meld together to give the corps/wing/fleet unit it's combat strengths. Obviously not all building blocks are elligible to be grouped together, naval, air, and ground would have to be kept separate. Now you have the real life ability to customize all your own combat forces for the tasks you deem necessary. Naaahhhh , to much micromanagement.

I'm in agreement that certain morale effects from surrendering countries is unrealistic. I understand that this is an abstraction and the effect is a general code that causes this unrealistic effect from time to time. To fix it, morale boosts should be left to scripts. In that way they can be customized and will almost always return a realistic boost.

Its only a game. But wargames have a connection, mostly to the past, but some with potential future ramifications. We play intially because that is what it is, play. Same as fishing, sports, collecting, we extract some degree of enjoyment, escape from the day to day necessities of living, stress management for some. The Axis represent the disadvantaged side, always a favorite for enthusiasts. The connection? Well that is the special thing about wargaming. The playing of, eventually compels us to examine the roots of. Man's constant struggle with himself, when he is at his best and his worst. The ultimate struggle of good vs evil, yet an inner struggle that tears him apart and serves to be the terminator of his very existence. What is the attraction? Need I say more?

Thanks guys for helping my PBEM bud (Agamemnon) out. He's a veteran SC player and a good one at that, he just gets frustrated from time to time. No wonder, I've led him down the primrose path of GGWaW and some of my SC1 custom scenarios, which he adopts to very quickly and always provides me good opponent. A great SC veteran, just a little confused at the moment. Hey, we've all been there. Come on Ag...we'll get this thing figured out.

Yeah... your right SO, guess I've been watching to many movies. I respectfully withdraw my idea. :confused:

Give surface vessels the ability to "evade" similar to the sub's ability to dive.

Got to agree with the subs effectiveness in port attacks. Way overblown.

TJ, its the island fortress efficiency, not the port(port keeps opponent from transporting out/in). Take it to 0, then reinforcement max is 4.

Good idea xw, but I believe we still need to limit amphibs to corps size units only. All others must use transport from harbor to harbor. So now we need to park a warship squadron or sub pack in the harbor to preclude invasions.

"Didn't you know?" Well if I didn't, I do now! And yes, I should've, but maybe I'm a part of the 5% and just smoke screening my way through so no one knows. Better to conjure up more conspiracies, half truths, downright lies and misgivings. Arranging my deceitfulness to run amock through this Earth's populace, keeping everyone diverted from the real purpose.......the "secret" agenda. OHHHhh!!!! I give up, y'all are way to smart for me...you see my evil intentions. We want to subjugate you all....MUHha, Ha ,ha.....Muha, ha, ha. And I promise to stop, if you'll just send me one MIIILLLLLION dollars.

"The problem with SC2 is that the subs are identical to surface ships. They can't bombard, and they can occasionally evade attacks, but otherwise they behave the same and they're used the same way." DT....hummm....have you looked up the definition of identical, lately? How about "similar"? Subs are classified as naval vessels in most navies of this planet? Why the classification? Sorry, I need a more logical argument than this statement to change my opinion. Ohhh and how many shells fired from surface vessels hit their target everytime? % of attempts ,...please.

Hey Yogi I understood what you were after the whole time, just trying your convictions, showing you another perspective, not necessarily one that I even agree with. You agree, we must address all possibilities, excluding the outlandish? As you have stated, I agree that the set of probabilities has to be defined by the era's limitations. Anyway, Sombra has restated my preliminary conclusion which he seems to also agree with. The USA has the mechanism to provide for an historical military buildup. Will it work out that way everytime....most probably not. But given a certain set of actions and a % unknown luck factor, the odds are that it will occur to a reasonable degree a greater percentage of the time.

Rambo....show'em how its done.

Retributar....with all do respect...CRAP!!!! Come on...don't be a conspiracy theorist, you give the human population to much credit. Yeah, keep telling yourself..."Its only a movie" :cool: The animal, although cunning at times, usually is not sophisticated enough to pull off such grand schemes. It takes a lot of coordination with his fellow, inept, disagreeable cousins. Look around you, everybody has there own perspectives and opinions. Now look at history. I ask you, is it ripe with misinformation, intelligence breakdowns, attitudes of complacency. Is it so hard to believe that things get overlooked everyday. Just examine one day out of your own life. How many people make mistakes, everyday.....and some cost them their lives. Large groups of people make idiotic decisions together(jonestown), Waco, etc. Seems pretty apparent to me, but don't bother to listen, I'm just one of the 95% stupid, inane people of this planet that are manipulated by the other 5%. [ May 21, 2006, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Fair enough then Yogi. You want a reasonable facsimile of conditions and circumstances facing the historical players and then proceed down your chosen path to conclusion. Only one problem, IT CAN'T HAPPEN. Why? What do you have that the historical commanders didn't? Very good, yes.... hindsight. There is no "unknown quantity" that faced the original historical participants. They didn't know how things would turn out. You want something, that if you proceed down the exact set of original decisions then you will have the original conclusion. OK by me, we can toggle off and on, but I really think you need to pursue a different game engine then SC2, or learn to manipulate the editor. Perhaps your inclinations can be met on a smaller scale, operational in scope( doing better than Rommel, Patton). I just believe you will always see something lacking for this GS scale and we so want you to be happy.

Hey Rambo, since we both like to use subs, have you noticed that your subs don't raid everytime even though they are astride a convoy route?

Sorry guys, I think this model is alright, not perfect, but adequate. Belligerents should have the option of warship attack doctrine or merchant raiding, simple as that. Subs were adept at both roles. From historical data, subs accounted for 189 warship sinkings from 1939 to 45. Now tell me that's irrelevant.

Well like it wasn't a great effort IRL to neutralize Malta. Just pound(rotate Italian Navy) the fortress entrenchment down, keep port/fortress supply at 0 precludes any effective reinforcement. Make sure your 3 beginning German Luftflottes are HQ supported, the Italian AF can help also. After about 6, maybe less, summer turns land your amphibs.

Have you tried diminishing the Western Hemisphere landmass to a single row of tiles? You could also cut down the eastern Pacific a bit. Condense the central USSR and India where there was not much action.

Customization of unit values when attaining each research level.(like Boron's tank example) Like when Heavy Bombers or AFs reach level 5 their soft and hard attack values go up 1 to 2(SA and TA). This would simulate the real life byproducts that are sometimes created when doing specific research.

But Yogi, this is a game for "what ifs" IMO. Its boring to simulate things that you already know happened, we want to experiment. Imagine that the USA had a very large war despondent contigent of the populace. Isolationists and peaceniks with political power are not so farfetched for this period. How are you going to control that, not even the President can. Pretend they were adamant about staying out of the European theatre, voila, you have the "luck" factor. They didn't want to ramp up the military industrial strength of the USA. There was a depression to contend with. This is why I made my earlier comment in this "Balance" thread. A game with vast replayability, many variables, and yes luck, undermines predictability. Isn't that what we all want? Balance will come, but it is a mighty far piece down that road before fruition.

Blonde and Beautiful is interesting at first, but later as time fades the attributes of the surface we will all be hoping for the intellectual depth of the soul. Let's hope the first patch has the latter.

Well I believe Sombra has got a good handle on the USA priorities. Might be a lesson for the other participants also. I've hinted numerous times about the IT/PT advantage of obtaining the upper levels, especially USA which has the 20% multiplier. Add in the intel 1% help for advancements and its not so hard to figure out how to get a large military force together. Of course, a little luck helps also. :cool:

No worries DD, It takes one to know one. Just mine have been kicked, slapped, and punched into submissiveness. My take is life, liberty, and the pursuit of, not the entitlement to food, shelter, and healthcare. Diced, to early to conclude that SC2 represents an easy Axis victory, no matter what Terif concludes, he's an atypical player. I'm pursuing a very conservative Axis strategy against Blashy presently, along the lines of the old cookie-cutter. We shall see. Don't let SC1's Axis bias dictate the present sequel's, it will take time to unfold, the new patch will clear the fog.