Panzer39

How about making HQ's able to join with another unit. This would keep the prices down for those who don't want to keep their hq's on the front, and allow those who do some fire power. Everyone is Happy...........yah right

I would liked to have added more ships to both the USA and USSR as well as modifing the USSR's order of battle. However, like John stated, once a country is activated it cannot be deactivated in the scenario editor. In my scenario, Germany's enlarged army and navy is countered by an early Soviet declaration of war thus making a early Sea Lion very risky. So far this usually happens before the fall of France which forces Germany into a two front war. The first time I played John, he had a bad go as Russia due to a late Siberian transfer and could not break through my defensive line in France. The second time, I went for a France first strategy which with Germany's more powerful airforce and army ensured his defeat early. Hopefully the latest modifications that I made to the scenario will balance the game out a bit more. For those who would be interested, my Plan-Z scenario is based off of John's except it starts in 1942 game time. I choose to go this route because I hold to the notion that Stalin was preparing for an offensive war and if Hitler had waited to 1942, Stalin would have taken the offensive. At first I felt that the Germans would be at a disadvantage, most likely having not taking out France before USSR prepares for war. However, so far this does not seem the case, unless I am a far better player (or John a far worse ) player than I think. Hopefully the latest modifications will prove successful and I will make my scenario available for download as well.

If we are going with random events, why not add random historical ones? Examples, 1. UK cracks enigma, chance of German U-boats becoming visible. 2. Stalin feels threatened, a General is sent to Siberia and replaced. 3. Assassination attempt is made on Hitler, random general is caught up in the conspiracy. and just because I feel like being silly... 4. Von Braun makes moon rocket and Nazi Moon base is established, Germany can deploy troops anywhere on the map from orbit!

I like the idea of random events and some of the ones you suggested seem good.

I will have to set up my vcr to type it. It should give me some idea on how to handle England after it is conquered in our PBEM

Why not allow the creation of half strength units? Or better yet allow the creation of any strength unit and adjust the price accordingly. Need to defend a large front build 5 half strength corps. Want to begin work on a navy, buy a one strength BB etc.

A single U-boat managed to sink the Royal Oak, given it was at anchor but still.... What if Germany choose to go after the escorts and not the transports? In a similar vein, SC2 needs to expand the role of surface ships. German Capital ships need to be able to commerce raid. The Map also needs to be expanded a hex or two to the North to allow for breakouts by the Kriegsmarine. As it is now the only way to get them anywhere is through the Channel. This includes subs which is totally stupid. If not a map expansion, maybe add some arrows by Norway that would transport a ship to the North Atlantic similar to the Suez route. Allow for random damage to simulate possible interception. Also allow German ships to come back. [ April 29, 2003, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

It is a shame he got shot though, the South was far better off with him than without him after the war. Reconstruction never would have happened the way it did. Bringing it back to topic, what are some of yall's opinions on the Yalta conference. I think it ties in great to this discussion.

Agreed, my statement about FDR referred to a president in peace time. Don't even get me started on the civil war Well maybe one statement, the South threatened to secedeif Lincoln was elected and sworn into the office. Lincoln claimed before being sworn in that he intended to save the Union. Why than did he not simply drop out? It would not have solved anything, the problems would have still been there; however, whoever assumed office might have gone with the other Northern opinion at the time and simply let the South go. We could have ended up with two countries and a Harry Turtledove Novel as fact rather than fiction. Well except I would make Huey president of the South going into WWII To bring the discussion back on train, I have a lot more respect for Truman than FDR, but thats mostly because he put McArthur in his place after the war, so I guess he doesn't count. The decesion to go ahead with the Bomb however was a huge one that took a lot of courage and shaped the post war world. [ April 25, 2003, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

If your talking about peace time too, Roosevelt was the closet President America had to a dictator. He served four terms and wanted to off set the balance of powers by adding justices to the supreme court. I judge this negitivly but than I don't rank Roosevelt in the top 5 American presidents like most people do. His political decisions are either good or bad depending on how you view them. His decision to cut off Japan's flow of oil basically guaranteed a war or at the very least new Japanese aggression. While appeasement would not have been the answer, perhaps a direct stand over Japanese actions in China could have prevented Pearl Harbor from even happening. But as some conspiracy theorists suggest, (I don't agree) Pearl is what he needed and even wanted so that he could get the public support to join the fight. Now if that indeed was true than his politics were excellent but his morality on the same level as his enemies. I just finished reading a 800 page book on Huey Long. I have to wonder what would the politics of WWII have looked like if he had been not been shot and instead elected President in the place of Roosevelt's 3rd term. The King Fish and the IL Duce had a lot in common

Moscow would have been a great blow to Russia but like Shaka said, Stalin was the key. If he was cpatured or killed in the battle for Moscow the war could have been over. However if he fled, the Russian threat would still have tied down most of the German Army at least until the allies had the bomb. You are most certianly right about Moscow being the rail hub for Russia, and its capture would have been a great blow. However, without the south in German hands as well it would not have been the K.O. punch.

Hey, I never said Hitler was a military genius, or that he didn't make mistakes. He played the role of Napoleon but with the experience of a foot solider. coincidently he made the same mistake of invading Russia. Hitler took gambles when playing general, he beat the house for a while but like all gamblers the house eventually beat him. Calling him lucky is dead on target. However, luck plays an important part in war,just look at the tech system in sc Had D-day failed which if luck, and a stupid decision by Hitler,had not been on the allies side could have happened, allied command would look as foolish as Hitler. Had Hitler's luck held out and his gamble paid off by getting control of both Stalingrad and Moscow, Russia could and I stress could, have been knocked out the war. Now John, you know I respect your opinions so don't take offence:D, you make a good point that Moscow could have been taken undefended, so lets put you in Hitler's place. Your Panzers take Moscow, winter sets in, your supply line is just as long. The Russians who you did not have to fight to take the city, now counter attack and all of a sudden you not only have 1 army encircled at Stalingrad, you have another one encircled at Moscow. Germany falls two months sooner and is taken over entirely by Russia after you flee to Argentina in an H-class BB. Now I can't defend a lot of his decisions, nor do I want to. My point is that it is easy to play arm chair general (which Hitler was doing in the 40's). It is my belief that even if you take Hitler our the picture the Soviets still would have won, a little later perhaps, but still would have won. You really should read the Moscow option by David Dowing. I found it a pretty good alternate history that takes Hitler out the picture in the form of a plane crash right at the height of Barbarossa. [ April 24, 2003, 07:20 PM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

Shaka, I agree. It is a lot easier to point out all the mistakes of the loser. The allies made their fair share of blunders. I have read that some of Hitler's hold at all cost orders paid off by allowing the rest of the German army to regroup or retreat. I don't think it was the size of Germany's tanks that did them in but rather the number of variations they made of each. It might have proved more useful to build only 1 type of Panzer (panther or tiger) in greater amounts (production being faster) than creating fewer of them with different variants. Of course the war was lost by Hitler's decision to invade Russia before dealing with England properly. Could North Africa been taken and a southern flank into Russia been opened before Stalin choose to be the aggressor? Had the English army been destroyed or captured at Dunkirk would England agreed to peace? No one can say for certain. Had England and France attacked Germany instead of signing the Munich treaty none of these questions would even be relevant

I liked how they covered the "America" bomber as well. Why Hitler insisted the plane be able to make a round trip (Germany New York and back)still eludes me.

Nazi UFO's attack from Artic Base Alpha!!! While we are on the topic of some of the far out German Stuff, I figured I'd bring up the luftwaffe. Some of their ideas were out there; however, some were copied and developed into the allied powers airforces. I saw a program on the history channel that claims that the designers of the Stealth Fighter went to check out the Horten prototype stored at the Smithsonian while designing their plane.

Or use AOL instant messenger. It would probably benefit to find out which one is used more. If anyone wants to play PBEM I'm game. I'm studying for final exams so I can't gaurntee more than three turns a day but I won't send any less than two. I also just want to play for fun right now since its been a while since I've played against anything other than the AI.

I don't understand the whole retiring thing either. I didn't post here for about 3 months, not a big deal. There really is not a lot to post about. I think that goes for all forums. When Hearts of Iron came out I posted there all the time with suggestions, now I mostly just watch and wait for the next patch. To "retire" is silly, unless your going for a Michael Jordan

Seems like an interesting setup, I will try to play it this weekend.

I forgot to mention that you also have to launch a sea invasion on Italy. Use the corps in Albania and park it next to the Italian city thats directly across from it. This will usally cause the airgroup there to flee and you can capture the city.

I have been able to force a stalemate against the AI. Launch an immideate counter attack on the unentrenched USSR units and push a little bit forward. Operate as many units as you think you can spare to take out the D-day landings and move all your planes to Italy. On the next turn use the Luftwaffe and your southern armys to attack the Americans in Italy, engage the allied landings in france and reinforce the Russian Front. If your lucky like I was, you can push the USA from Italy, I wouldnt liberate it though. When you get them down to one unit in Rome just leave a corps there to keep them in check. Dispand the HQ and move the rest of your troops to Russia. By this time you should have also been able to push the allies back to the port in France which I found impossible to take back because of the Allied air power. Just leave them there and take out any other troops that come across the channel. Retreat all of your troops engaging on the Russian Front back to a new line of defence and either dispand your Luftwaffe or move them to Russia as well. Now it is basically a one on one match of attrition with the USSR. I had no hope of winning but I did not fall in 1946.

I know its all been discussed before but for fun lets discuss the time scale and unit movement. 1. Unit movement, I would like to see units be able move several times during a turn as long as they don't come into contact with an enemy or run out of movement points. For example, you could move your Battleship/sub/Army etc 2 hexes west, stop, 1 hex north, stop, 1 hex west all in the same turn even after clicking on another unit. Since turns represent at least two weeks game time, I feel it is reasonable. That brings me to.... 2. Time Scale. What is everyones thoughts on SC2's timescale. Same time length year round? Weakly turns or Monthly? Personally I would like to see Bi-weekly truns year round with other factors causing the slown down of winter because I feel it would be more realistc. What are your thoughts on these issues?

I think the time scale would also have to be changed for a Pacific SC. Bi-Monthly turns just don't seem to be realistic. If all Midway would be is My Carrier icon bumped into your Carrier icon scoring 5 damage points, jump one month ahead, Your carrier icon sunk my carrier icon jump two weeks ahead etc. Count me out.

Thanks for the links Jeresy John, some interesting reading. If you havent checked out http://www.luft46.com it is a really great site with a lot of info on Germany's jet projects Looks familiar

Jersey John The P class would have carried 11" inch guns like the Pockets so it still would have been a match for any British crusier. For the scenerio I was thinking the balancing factor against Germany having higher Tech is a more prepared Soviet Union. Many historians believe that Stalin was planning a trip towards European conquest himself and that Hitler only beat him to it. In the scenerio, if the Germans do not take France super quick they will be forced into a two front war months after the game begins. The limitations of the SC editor is all that really holds this back. For example, it is impossible? to edit the Russian unit experience levels without activating them first, and once activated they are at War with Germany. All that can be done is up their war rediness so that 1/2 the time they Declare war while the German player is still busy or recovering from France. Maybe forcing the German player to try a "Russia First" approach. I like some of the ideas posted so far so please keep them coming. Does anyone think that Japan could have gone after the UK by themselves? I am about 3/4 of the way finished with a idea like this for Hearts Of Iron amd it has gone pretty smooth. I really hope that SC2 offers a more control with editor.

Fighting Steel is Great game I still play it all the time. If you havent checked out FSP,the fighting steel project head over to this link now. http://www.navalwarfare.org/ They have added the French and Italian navies and made a number of other improvements. Also check out the link to FSNA. It adds a dynamic campain to Fighting Steel that I worked on and still work on ocasionally.