Panzer39

Very true John, it would be cool to take a page from Hearts of Iron and have elections in the USA and other Free Nations with the random chance of electing a pacifist. Of course for this really to have an impact we would need a 1936 scenerio and a world map

A real war in the Atlantic and a world map for me please.

If we could list Admirals, I would go with Doentiz. Had Germany gone with full out sub production and not tried for a balanced fleet, Doentiz's u-boats would have owned the Atlantic from the onset. As for generals, I like Model, I don't think he gets as much credit as he deserves. As a side note, can someone please tell me why so many people love McArthur? He never came across as anything great to me.

Who's to say that SC2 will use the same turn scale system?

I think the reverse. Opereating units should take more time depending on distance.

also hunting warships and warships escourting convoys are two different battles.

I would much rather see Hubert spend his time working on SC2. If anything this new "bug" will get players to spend some more mpps on AA research. I've never bought a 25 dollar game and received this much enjoyment nor this many patches. I just hope Hubert starts releasing some more info on SC2 as it becomes prudent.

Most of my naval reading involves the war in the Atlantic not the Pacific. Did the Japanese go after convoy escourts or warships in general with there subs?

More options for all units would be nice. I would love to be able to decide if my aircraft intercepted or which ones did. I think it would help naval combat as well if combined with new spotting rules. I think it would also be fun to have the allies forced to work for there lend lease money. A mpp transport could be spawned in an American port every turn. In order to cash the MPPs the transport would have to make it to the UK and be disbanded. As the war progressed more transports could be spawned. When the USSR entered, these transports could also be disbanded there to give them more money. Maybe it could be an option and those who did not want to be bothered with it could use the abstract method like it is in SC. Subs Vs Warships. The only BB I know of being sunk by a sub alone was the Royal Oak while in harbor. However, I have read some interesting articles concerning strategies bounced around by Germany before the war. What if the U-boats had gone after the escorts and not the cargo ships at the out break of war? Sub counter measures were pitiful in the beginning and escorts, having to travel at the same speed as the convoy, were potential targets. With a lager sub fleet, there is the slim possibility that something like that could have worked at least for a while.

I've got 50$ that will most likely be wasted on a game of lesser quality. Give me both!

I see your point. However like you said earlier, most players are interested in the Land warfare aspect of SC. While I would love a huge Atlantic Map, having one the size of the current map now would be great ) I'm not sure if many players would be interested in playing the cat and mouse game of finding Axis ships in that large of an area. Plus, I am sure SC2 will have some sort of size limitations as well. My idea would allow the same thing to be covered in a smaller area. To me it is the best of both worlds. Unit stacking You might be right about me looking more for units advancing after combat. However, this idea would also allow for better sea based invasion abilities by ground units and the taking of islands if SC goes worldwide.

Shaka, Once again good points all around. I wanted to allow stacking for naval units because I feel that it better represents Naval combat. I do not really consider it "stacking" because the units are from opposing sides. Warships would not be detected by other warships unless they landed on a hex occupied by and enemy warship or were passing "through" it. Gunnery radar could increase the chance of detection or avoidance. Aircraft carriers and land based aircraft would be able to spot war ships from a distance. How does this effect naval warfare in ways expanding the map cannot. 1. Allied warships could pass over or even land on German subs without detecting them. The higher the anti-sub level the better chance of detection. If a sub is in a "raiding" zone that reduces UK mpps, than it would have a better chance of being detected. 2. Ships outside of Air spotting range would have a chance of bypassing each other. This would all for break outs etc. 3. Naval combat in the Atlantic was an up-close and personal affair. Only allowing fleets in the same hex to engage portrays this. Carrier strikes of course could be launched by planes in range.

Thanks for the input Shaka, I can see where you are coming from. While I don't post a lot here I have been around long enough (some time in 2002) to have heard all the arguments a number of times as well. I try to post ideas that I don't think have been brought up before and most of the time they are in reference to SC2. Back to the Atlantic. Another idea that crossed my mind was sub detection. A possible way of fixing the war in the Atlantic would be to all naval units from opposing sides to occupy the same hex. For non-carrier units this could be the only way combat occurs. There could be the possibility that subs could remain undetected even with an allied ship occupying the same hex. When enemy ships occupy the same hex, the hex is spilt in half with the attackers unit on one side and the defenders on the other. We could take this hex idea one step further to include land units as well. Land units could still attack from all six surrounding hexes, however if the attacker wished, he could move a unit into the enemy's hex for an over run or blitz attack. This attack could result in higher casualties percentages for the attacker if it fails. If the attacker destroyed the defending unit, the attacking unit would now occupy the space. If the defending unit was reduced below 3 strength it would retreat into friendly territory leaving the attacker control of the hex. If the defender is not destroyed or severely damaged the attacking unit would move back to its original hex heavily damaged and low on supply.

I disagree. I like having control of sup fleets and ships in general. I think abstracting it is just giving up on a part of SC that could be a lot fun if done properly. I do agree that Capital ships should not be used in the role of hunting down subs, in real life that would have only resulted in several hundred thousand tons of steel at the bottom of the Atlantic. Cruiser fleets should have bonus at spotting and sinking subs and BB's should have very limited anti sub capability. I was really hoping for some comments about my idea of operating naval units.

I think most would agree that the war in the Atlantic needs a lot of work. I'm not sure if anyone has thought of this before so I'll go ahead and put forth a few ideas here. 1. A sub flotilla in an Axis port could be "sent on patrol" for a small cost of MPPS. This sub would disappear from the board and be placed somewhere randomly in the Atlantic one or two turns later. There the sub would operate until it ran out of supply or was sunk. If a sub is still in supply and not adjacent to any Allied warships the Axis player would have the option of "operating" the sub back to an Axis port for a small cost in mpps. The same could be used for German warships and they could also disrupt Allied mpps. There could also be a random chance of interception where in the Axis ship either shows up in the Atlantic damaged or returns to the Axis port. Any ideas? [ November 16, 2003, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

HOI now is not all that bad guys. If you haven't tried it with the new patches and CORE mods than your really missing out on some fun. As far as management goes, that's a personal preference. I can handle HOI very easily but would be lost in some of the more complex turn based games. btw how real can any game be? Real time just means that both you and the AI/human player are making moves at the same time. That's a lot more real than the chess game played out in SC. I'm not knocking SC, I love the game to death. But don't knock "real" time games because you can't handle them. Try Medieval total war for great turn based/real time fun. Rome Total war comes out next year and ranks number 1 on my must buy list. [ November 13, 2003, 12:39 AM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

Well if you don't mind trying real time combat (You can slow it down to a crawl), Hearts of Iron is starting to shape up into a great WWII simulator where you call all the shots. From picking your ministers to research its all up to you. It has a very strong fan mod group and with every patch it gets closer to perfection. In a Real time perfection sense.

I really like this idea, I hope it makes it in as a feature.

Good point, I was thinking one or two points of damage max. I also was thinking of some of the smaller fighter wings that are to small to represent that would make intercetpions along the route.

I think when an airfleet flys over an enemy controled hex/hexs on its way to target it should have a small percentage chance of being reduced in strength because of anti-aircraft fire before it reaches its target. The percent of getting damage could increase with anti-air tech. Any thoughts?

Who cares?! We all know you two are feuding but all this mud slinging is worse than a Louisiana political campaign. If it ever gets to the point that I am trying to translate another language in order to see if an SC opponet of mine is talking smack, than its just time for me to take a break and come back to the real world Now Don't take this personal and get mad at me, I just think its going a bit overboard. (edit) I wrote this post before Terif posted, its good to see an olive branch being offered. [ November 03, 2003, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

Maybe the Axis could be charged some mpp's to change codes.

I have to agree with the limited aspect of this idea. Otherwise it is great. Another possibility would be to get faulty intelligence. The allied player sees a corps that might be an army or sees something that is not there at all. Maybe a percentage counter could be provided on the unit to tell how sure what your seeing is correct. Also, changing codes should cost something but not the reavealing of all Axis units. I don't follow how chaning codes automatically means they are broken. [ November 01, 2003, 05:17 PM: Message edited by: Panzer39 ]

Yeah I don't want to wait till I'm as old as some of you guys to play the game

An option to start in 1936 with Fog of war off to war is declared would be great. Should the allies be allowed to declare war on the Axis first?