SeaMonkey

Well Gentlemen it seems we have our wish, Global SC. Now you've got to ask yourself, do you want the purity of history, or do we want to explore what might have been? Cause if its history....ho hum... I believe I have a library full of specifics, debated and discussed over and over, but only a couple of "what if" books. IMO Italy will work well as a minor as in reality Mussolini and Hitler were in constant conflict with each other. If you want the Axis to have a chance, the historical hierarchy will have to be dismissed and YOU will have to bring an orderly strategy to the Tripartite table. Could it really have happened? Probably not as only insane people would have gone up against the array of Allies as was historical, but you can change that alignment, can't you?:confused: Keep America out....as long as possible, perhaps get Vichy and the Soviets to cooperate. Work with the Italians, coordinate the effort in the Med. In reality, Hitler offerred many carrots to Il Deuce, only to be scorned by Mussolini's pride. But you're not them, you're better than those idiots.......well.....there's hope at least. I'm setting out to conquer the world and I see my opponents in this forum, best of luck to whomever that might be!

OK Scott, I'll take care of the Pacific, starting from the Aluetians, but you'll have to do the Asian theater. I also think you should cut down on some of the naval units, probably by half, a CV unit should represent two CVs(historically a Carrier Division), same for BBs, probably 4 CAs/CLs to a unit and more for DDs and SSs. I prefer a lower unit density, makes for faster turns and emphasizes careful use of. I would also suggest that any island without a port should get a Special Forces unit deployment(if garrisoned at all) so that it is able to evacuate if so chosen by the owning player. Have you thought about turning the PT anti-tank unit into a garrison unit(non-upgradable), ala Nupremal's World campaign? IMO an excellent idea.

Like these guys say, its hard to go wrong with the SC purchase, any version, mainly because of the plethora of excellent community made custom campaigns. I'm a naval-air oriented person, so PT is my fav, the world campaigns(customs) with this version are awesome. Its an easy choice for me if you have to pick one, I own all but PDE, go cuttin edge, PT is where SC is at.

Don't mean to sound ambiguous f, but it depends on what you want to do. Its like Rambo told me when addressing Nupremal's World campaign, and I'll pass it on as it is good advice, "you have to have a plan". For me, starting from Fall Weiss, I always plan for SeaLion as the Axis, so that means Airpower, paratroops, special forces. Then if the Allies don't co-operate I plan for Barbarossa which means ground force emphasis. Oh yeah, by the way, welcome to the best grand strategy WW2 game out there, but you'll need to move on to PT for some of the finest custom World scenarios in existence, not to mention the new naval features.

You got the Jap CVs right, but the Wasp was not on the scene. Also the Bismark Archipelago, Solomons(Bougainville) and New Guinea off the top of my head. I'm not looking at the map, but those came to mind right away. IMO June 42 was the greatest expansion of the Co-Prosperity Sphere and that should be the beginning deployments. Also the deployments around Midway, for the initiating strike, should be tweaked so that neither opposing element is within strike range of one another at the beginning. Let them maneuver for the first strike capability, incorporate "The Search" parameter. Scott..its your mod, these are just suggestions. I've got a lot more as I've been thinking about this for awhile, just pick and choose what you want it to be. I would also examine the inter-relation of the various units' CTVs (& strikes)to one another and perhaps the naval movement rates depending on the time length for a game turn.

Not all American Muscle cars have big engines, my Buicks only have a 3.8 liter V-6, that's 231 cubic inches and they are capable of 12 second quarter miles. When they ran on the NASCAR circuit their speeds were in excess of 200 mph. I might add, they get 22 mpg if you can keep from flogging them.

Took a quick peek at both campaigns Scott and the Beta, large campaign, looks mighty intriguing, just what I had in mind for the "Japanes High Water Mark". Scanning the map I see a few initial set ups that I believe deviate from history if your starting point is Midway, June 3, 1942. Not sure if you meant it that way. Do you want historic beginning deployments?

Well Claus I've been waiting for someone to answer you since I don't own PDE and you did post in that forum, but I'll state my opinion as a longtime SC player as it pertains to the most current version(PT). I'm OK with the way HQs work, the cost is justifiable, doesn't inhibit gameplay as they actually do a good job of representing an Army Group leader, allocation of supplies and attachments of assets for offensive and defensive operational emphasis. HQs already provide an enhanced form of attacking attributes and it is not so often in WW2 that an AG commander would be at the point of an operation, and if so mostly for observational and directive actions. Your 4 and 5 are interesting, but amphibious operations require special training and obviously specially adapted equipment for success. Since we don't have the ability to use an amphib tech upgrade yet and SC naval units don't have a capacity to carry a separate supply allocation, its kind of a difficult scenario to apply with the present engine's features. Maybe if a naval unit stands adjacent to coastal tile it could pass on its supply status to local land units much the way HQs do now, paying the terrain penalties and also suffering a degradation per turn of supply capability. This would force a somewhat realistic convoy system as the SC naval units do represent a task force and would have to shuttle back and forth from ports to rejuvenate their supply capacity. It would also make close proximity of supply ports desirable. Equally there would be an opportunity for your opponent to interdict those convoys, a somewhat accurate simulation although an abstraction of reality IMO. I'm still in the court that our SC engineer unit should be able to provide an array of upgrades in certain locals where it was possible in WW2, much like they perform the "fortification" parameter. 6, yes, we need port representation, stacking is OK, but again the current features preclude that action. Superior...I'm OK with either, what about the AI? I'm with you on 7, but naval units fail many times to cause damage just like any other SC units, if you mean they should fail to engage altogether and miss finding enemy naval units on the high seas, I'm on your team with that concept, but again the current engine fails in capturing this very desirable feature accurately. When you think about it perhaps that very scenario (the failure to cause damage) simulates the "two ships passing in the night" although they are adjacent to each other and we do activate the attack mechanism. Hey Claus, come on ...8... discussion is never needless and always has the potential to catalyze new ideas which we see in every new SC release. We are wanton for information and to a certain degree I agree with you, a little more feedback would be nice. Perhaps HC and Battlefront prefer to keep us "in the dark" so that our other senses are heightened as we parade ideas to this forum, just like you did with this post.

If you guys are looking for a campaign type game, ala Panzer General, the new Operation Barbarossa coming out before September might be just the ticket.

Don't worry about the AI Big Al, just get this thing going for h to h play. Glad to see you making progress, take your time...work when you feel inspired.

Kind of reminds me of "Advanced Tactics", anyone else get that feeling? Somewhere in a far off galaxy in another time, perhaps a parallel dimension, the struggle for planetary dominance in a contemporary setting with the 20th century technological limitations. Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent!

Interesting xwood, are you saying that possibly in lieu of taking plunder MPPs you could roll the dice with a "decision" event taking less and hoping for more political clout in the form of diplomacy chits?

I like where you're going with this line of thought Bill. It would be most appropriate that if the Uboat commander didn't have the benefit of reliable intel or support he would be caught transiting the straits by a strategically positioned RN DD or CV or perhaps landbased air's watchful eye.

Enjoy your week MC and I never forget my #1 priority, "the kiss". As far as overestimating you, possibly, but in comparison to most people, sans our forum members, you have a very good grasp of WW2 history, especially the underpinnings. Bill101 I'm sure I'll be most pleased with any new patch, like I always have, just hope it allows more than a few H to H encounters before its novelty wears off. One thing I will have to give credit to our old forum buddy Terif for, is that he knew about replayability, he understood the balance and the nature of providing a playing field for multiple strategies. It would be nice to see his stamp of approval on a "what if" PT campaign, no matter that it strays wildly from what was actually possible. One of the things the Japanese military hierarchy had hoped for was to cause enough casualties and war weariness for the Allies so that they would offer a conditional end to hostilities. Of course with some of the atrocities and especially the "sneak" nature of PH attack that was not to be, but it might be a good set of conditions for Japan to pursue in that "what if" campaign. Not sure how that can be accomplished with the present game engine but eventually I know our SC team will work something out. I have such great faith in you guys, I'm a witness to the progress that is just short of amazing for this series. In 7 years I have yet to be disappointed and I'll probably be around for another seven as long as things continue on the path of the past.:cool:

Hey B101, I think it is a bit more of the Japanese having to make the tough decision whether to spread out into the islands or put heavy pressure on the Chinese, seems a no-brainer for me, its the Chinese strategy. I'm sure that if there was some relevancy to taking New Guinea, Celebes, Bismarks and Solomons, etc. then maybe it would be achievable without the Chinese escapades. Thing is China gives the Japanese player a good theater to get plenty of experience for his combat units, the islands don't. There are good returns for Chinese operations and to a lesser degree, Burma and India, but weather and supply can be such a hinderance it is just not realistic to pursue the India escapades. Don't get me wrong Bill, I think the campaign plays historical, but I know what happened historically and its fun for a few games to play the Japanese until the newness wears off. Then, well you know how us players are, we long for something else, something a little more gamey, something that both sides can pursue in conquest mode, albeit unhistorical, but in the context of WW2 Pacific theater. Course its just my opinion, rest assured not everyone shares it, and you are to be commended for a good historical representation in OpZ. Its just we have the hindsight and its not as much fun knowing you're going to pummeled on the defense for the latter half of the game.

That's a fact Colin, and JJR knows well this campaign also, its a blast playing either one of them. When everyone is at war the turns are heavily involved, lots of fighting everywhere, many minors and majors to manage, great fun!

Ahhh masterclaude you definitely have the attributes of a wargaming master, my compliments on your insight and a very interesting post. Since you seem to know something about programming, in your opinion what is the best language to develop the global wargame with? I'm in agreement with many of your ideas, they are the basis for the wargame foundation and I'm also in your realm of feelings about MWiF. I'm really sorry they didn't take the advantages of the virtual CPU engine and software to make a game that is based more on the spirit of WiF rather than the actual boardgame presentation. Too bad! Anyway I wanted to express my appreciation on your global efforts and also my disappointment that you didn't move on to the PT improvements, but I understand why you didn't, the still looming limitations. One thing though, I think PT needs someone(I wish I had the time) to develop a truly balanced campaign(no matter that its not realistic) for Japan and Allies to game with. I believe SC in its current PT form is fully capable to deliver and I had hoped scottsmm would complete his endeavor as he was on the right track. I know you have a problem with the geographical indiscretions of PT but I'm sure you understand why the islands have to made in their present configuration given there is no stacking and the limitations of amphibious assaults. Still, it seems a man with your abilities would be well served to produce the "Japanese High Water Mark" campaign for us many patrons to test your obvious extensive developmental skills. Sure would be nice if someone would come up with something that would allow at least an even chance of either side's success instead of the presently skewed OpZ campaign. Currently the Japanese player is hard pressed to make the same gains that were historical and the game features make the outer islands irrelevant, best they start as significant with the Japanese already in possession. Anyway good luck with your WaW world campaign, surely it'll be better than the one that came with the expansion.

Japan should not be allowed to attack Eastern(Asia) USSR if she accepts the nonaggression pact in the decision event. Perhaps some diplomacy would be in order that would let the "Pact" end sooner than its four year term, it expired Summer of 45. I've played Japan and intended to attack Soviets as soon as they went to war with Germany so I declined the "Pact" and USSR had some Asian forces. There's not a lot to defend and the weather and mountains make for a commitment Japan can ill afford to make. I would like to see a decision event that would culminate with the deployments of the Siberians in either theater depending on the USSR player choice. USSR decides to redeploy Siberians to west then Asia is not covered with but small garrisons and perhaps an HQ with the option to build additional troops and deploy. USSR chooses to keep Siberians in place, then Japan had better keep Manchukou garrisoned with decent combat troops or the Reds have the option to attack, nullifying "the pact".

Wow! Sorry to hear that Scott, my condolences, I know how much time it takes to do a mod...hey! your not dead yet, later ..give it another try. My Vostro 1700 has been clicking away, spent less than a grand, wife's got a 1500 series, less than $600...no problems for us, this is my fourth Dell.

Very nice, Big Al, looking forward to playing this baby, I don't need the AI. Let me know when its ready for testing........and forum...I will need an opponent.

Can't say I've been exposed to anything better than SC. A few games have features I prefer, but as far as a well rounded game, simple and realistic, SC is head and shoulders above anything else. By the way Scott, what's up with your Midway campaign? Have you completed it, at least as far as an H to H model?

This is of course a good point, but there are some drawbacks, wouldn't be as much combat and lots of losses to air strikes and naval bombardments. Another good point is the time allocation per turn which if you think about it, there is some credence in bringing a unit back to full strength if in greater than 5 supply. This is one reason why we use SAC to reduce efficiency and supply, the interdiction model. I'm going to offer one other comment I haven't heard and that is how units deploy themselves in a real battlefield setting. It is next to impossible or I guess improbable that a commander will deploy all his combat troops forward, remember the size of SC tiles. Our SC units are spread out in various echelon configurations, most likely never more than a third of the combat troops are on the line, they are rotated from front to rear, even in platoon sizes, there's always reserves. What I'm saying is even though a unit suffers a strength loss of great magnitude, not all these men and weapons are killed or destroyed, they just become combat ineffective for awhile. Rotated to the rear, they will be patched upped, reinvigorated, rested and fed with medical attention and will regain their combat prowess. Their equipment will be repaired as their other combat echelons rotate to the fighting, so what you represent is the staying power these large SC units possess by adding replacements. See the logic?:cool:

Just to reiterate, not trying to be redundant, this game has simultaneous movement? Describe the order(player's actions) sequence and unfolding play conclusions.

OK illogicpedia, you did get a chuckle from me, for oldtimes sake!

Hope this works out Al, I'm itching to play your mod.