Edwin P.

I would prefer to go with the all or nothing possiblity. Why? In WWII attacking aircraft sometimes attacked with full surprise before the AD forces were able to respond. In other cases coast watchers spotted the incoming craft and called/radioed ahead and the aircraft ran into prepared AD fire. I think that the 50% chance captures this better than the 0.5 point AD bonus.

JerseyJohn Most Interesting Thread. Thanks for the link to it. What makes the invasion of Canada possible, as mentioned much earlier, is the fact that the US can't operate units to Canada, nor can the UK build units in Canada. Futhermore, Canada should stay independent even if the UK falls to the Axis.

After reading the posts here are the changes I like the most which could be added to SC so they could be playtested prior to being incorporated into SC2 . 1. "If England surrenders, a good amount of its navy can continue to fight (it ostensibly transfers to Canada)." - Free Brits (aka Free French rules for UK and USSR Navy Ships) 2. Random starting location of 2 Axis Subs in the 1939 Scenario North Atlantic so that they could appear in the MidAtlantic or the SouthAtlantic 4. Add post surrender partisans to Russia / Spain / Turkey / UK (aka Yugoslavia) and allow them to appear in Mountain, Swamp, Forest, and City hexes. [ Due to Size of Russia - 2 chances per turn for partisans? ] 5. "Don't reveal the launch position of rockets/airplanes when attacking if these units are out of enemy LOS. An enemy wouldn't necessarily know where the attackers are based" 6."Transfer of Siberian Army should fall under FOW." 8. "Never show size [ie Strength] of a sub pack to the enemy. Player should not necessarily know the exact size of a sub he's dealing with. The info on subs is usually not perfectly known." 9. Have a chance (about 3%) for a mass uprising if most (51%) of Russia's surrendered cities are not garrisoned. [A partisan unit would appear in every ungarrisoned city. If one of the three Russian capital cities was liberated then Russia would be activated and a random number of reinforcements would arrive from Siberia again along the border hexes closest to the liberated capital city.] 11. Even though its not in this thread, Allow the UK to build units in Canada (usually only infantry to stop an early axis invasion) [ May 25, 2003, 01:42 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ May 15, 2003, 12:13 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Wolfe I forgot to mention I also like your FOW rule: Also, FOW described before still applies; wherever opposing air units have overlapping LOS, average the two so they can't see into each other's territory, enhancing FOW. The only change I would make is to say that only air fleets and carrier fleets can limit LOS, opposing bomber fleets can't.

KDG I am thinking about what you said, and I although I understand your point of view I still think that AD would not have extended beyond the 50x50 (250) miles covered by each hex. Even more so when this is extended to cover all six surrounding hexes at the same time (an additional 1250 square miles). Perhaps you could say that the AD bonus is 30% (or some %) likely in a surrounding hex and 100% likely in the city hex. Thus units adjacent to a city would have an increased chance of getting air cover, but it would not be guaranteed. Any thoughts? or am I totally off-base?

Wolfe I really like your idea to have air units stand down status. Perhaps air units that are in status stand down could have a slightly different tint so that you could tell their status at a glance. As for evacuating via a Mulberry, I would have the evacuating unit take a substantial amount of damage if an opposing unit is adjacent to it, reflecting the fact that in evacuating under fire it would have to leave a large part of its combat equipment behind. Also, Armor units should take more damage than infantry units during such an evacuation. [ May 14, 2003, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Rambo, I know that its a hard strategy, but it has worked for me occassionaly with FOW on, provided its done before France falls and when the axis air is occupied elsewhere. Then the axis has one turn to move/operate air into range. As for moving the transports to Finland, its got to be timed just right, ie when the axis does not have any air or just one within interception range. The hard part is moving the carriers through and then if the Germans take Sweden, as you said your forces are trapped in a kill zone with no where to run. Against the AI it works all the time, against humans, its far more dicy as you said and your naval losses might be too high to prevent a sea-lion. For it to work you have to know where the Axis Air fleets are. [ May 14, 2003, 09:52 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Night, I agree with your Iraq strategy, which I also follow. The advantage of the Baltic run is that; 1. You can fly the planes into Russia, thus saving on the operating MPP cost. 2. You can move the troops (not the HQ, they move too slowly so you must operate it) into Russia, also saving on operating costs. 3. It opens up the possiblity of also taking Sweden later in the game or contesting a German attack on Sweden and allowing you to use the UK carriers to support the Russian defense. Regarding Sea Lion - Against a human who knows you have a weakened defense of the UK this could be very dangerous, depending on how many ships are left behind to guard the British Isles. I use the plunder from Finland to purchase more corps to help defend the UK, except if I am facing the AI which never does a sea lion. (at least not yet, but who knows what lurks in the mind of Hubert, the game's designer.) [ May 14, 2003, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Here's a strategy that some might find interesting as it allows the UK to quickly reinforce Russia when Germany attacks. Step 1: Clear the Baltic of German ships Step 2. Evacuate free french units to the UK Step 3. After France falls run 4 Land units, 2 Battleships and 3 Carriers through the Baltic to the shores of Finland. (if possible 1 UK HQ) Note: You must do this before the Germans can redeploy their air to guard the Danish straits. Step 4. Attack Finland and conquer - 2 turns Step 5. Operate air units to Finland (since UK or French Units conquered it this is allowed). When Germany attacks Russia move/operate UK air units into Russia and operate/move French/UK infantry from Finland into Russia. Benefits 1. Frees up the 2 Russian armies that guard the Finish border 2. Gives Russia access to 2 or 3 additional air fleets. 3. Gives russia air support from 3 carriers. 4. Gives russia ground support from 3 or 4 UK/Free French Units 5. Battleships block landings from German Transports Cons: 1. Invites a Sea Lion 2. Ships/transports can be damaged when transiting the Danish straits [ May 14, 2003, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

1. RE: ASW I do not think that the spotting range of ships vs subs should be expanded. The Atlantic hexes are 50 miles miles+ accross and I believe that sonar in WWII had a relatively short range. Personally I would like aircraft to have a chance of seeing subs that would improve with a greater ASW tech. Now aircraft can see all subs within range all the time. Example for Aircraft - ASW: Tech 0: 50% to see a sub, Tech 5: Detect Sub 100%. Also remember that attacking a sub is a free attack, the sub can't shoot back, so I would not increase any ability to attack subs. The best way to find and destroy a sub in the Atlantic was more ships and more aircraft. During WWII the Allies stationed ASW aircraft in Canada, Iceland, and Greenland. Convoy routes were altered to maximize the time they spent in zones covered by ASW warfare. The ability of a sub to evade an attack is historically correct and often times destroyers could not find the subs which attacked their fleet. SC Tip: Station an Air Fleet in Ireland and the US if the Axis player has a large sub force. Also, in WWII the allies often changed the routes of convoy ships. As was stated in an earlier posts prehaps a future game would allow the allies to change their merchant ships routes by 1) plotting new routes or 2) selecting from a set of predefined routes or 3) varying the width of the route (1 to 3 hexes). A narrower route would be harder to find but offer increaed MPP damage to an intercepting wolf pack. 2. Partisans I favor a tech / aka allocation of resources / that would reflect a country's invesment in supporting local resistance units. The UK expended resources in supporting these resistance units. The US and USSR did not. The result was that it tied down Axis forces, destroyed enemy resources and gave the UK valuable intelligence on the location of enemy troops. A tech that increased the chance of partisan units occuring in most conquered nations would do this. Partisan units would cause the Germans to devote more resources to garrisoning conquered nations, could attack resource hexes, isolate cities, and provide limited intelligence on the disposition of Axis forces. For the UK it might be a worthwhile to invest 1 chit in this area especially if it also created partisans in a post surrender Russia. They may even get lucky (ie TECH 5) in developing a system of reliably smuggling in supplies to support larger partisan units, buts its highly unlikely. 3. I like the concept of a command and control tech which would affect the readiness of HQ units and the number of armies which they could effect. 4. Although many people complain about air power, I agree with the games restriction of AD benefits to cities and resources as one normally did not place AA guns outside of the cities. To do so would have limited the number of AA guns that could be concentrated in defending the city. If a unit wanted protection against air power it had to be within a city or under the protection of a nearby air fleet. - Remember this is WWII. [ May 14, 2003, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

As Shaka said I am amazed not to see a suggestion for Prop tech, so to get everyone thinking, here's another tech to consider; Fortified Cities - Represents investments of time and materials in preparing a country's home cities for the invading army with barriers, bunkers, underground tunnels, minefields, buildings rigged to explode, etc. Think of it as a higher level of entrenchment. Tech 1: +1 Soft Defense Bonus for units stationed in a home country city Tech 2: +1 Tank Defense Bonus for units stationed in a home country city Tech 3: +1 Air Defense Bonus for units stationed in a home country city Tech 4: +1 Soft Defense Bonus (ie +2 SDB) Tech 5: +1 Tank Defense Bonus (ie +2 TDB) This is a defensive tech so it does not add much to game play, but it should provide some fuel for thought. [ May 13, 2003, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Shaka, You are right. These two ideas approach the same issue from a different perspecitive. One affect movement during the winter months, making for some interesting possiblities, and gives Russia a historical advantage during winter campaigns unless Germany invests in preparing its troops for the Russian winter. The other affects the readiness level or cost of HQ units in general.

I presume that Military Intelligence allows a percentage chance per turn per unit to see units that are beyond the range of your Long Range aircraft. Ie 20% per turn to see that German transport approaching Canada. Long Range Aircraft gives you a 100% to see units within range. ------------------------------------------------ JerseyJohn, Combining techs of Partisan, Espionage and Counter Intelligence would be interesting. How would you do it? Personally, I like the idea of being forced to decide between supplying partisan units with smuggled weapons (via air drops and night time freighters) vs focusing on military intelligence vs counter intelligence vs all of the other tech options available. [ May 13, 2003, 07:05 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Thanks JerseyJohn Now here's another idea that could really affect game play during winter months; Winter Preparedness This tech is only effective during the 3 single turn winter months and reflects the allocation of additional resources for campaigning during winter months. This tech affects only land units on land and grants them bonus movement points not to exceed their original number of action points minus 1. Russia and Finland should start the game with Winter Preparedness Tech 1. Tech 1: 1 Extra Action Point per Unit Tech 2: 2 Extra Action Points per Unit Tech 3: 3 Extra Action Points per Unit (max +2 for Army Units) Tech 4: 4 Extra Action Points per Unit (max +2 for Army Units, +3 Max for Corps) Tech 5: 5 Extra Action Points per Unit (max +2 for Army Units, +3 Max for Corps, +4 Max for Armor) [ May 13, 2003, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

If three techs were allowed I would go for; Partisans and Military Intelligence and Counter Intelligence . Partisans - Its fun to see new units pop up. Military Intelligence - Great for FOW Play, Equalizer for less experienced players. Counter Intelligence - A counter to the other two Counter Intelligence would reflect the large investments made in secret police forces (aka KGB, SS) to control the population and disrupt enemy espionage efforts (MI5). Each tech level in Counter Intelligence would reduce the opposing side's effective Partisan Tech by 1 and Military Intelligence by 1. Note: German counter intelligence tech advances would only protect German units from Military Intelligence & German conquered nations from partisans. Example: The UK with Military Intelligence Tech 2 might have an effective intelligence rating of 2 vs Italian units, 2 vs Bulgarian units, and 0 vs German units. Now, lets see some more tech ideas. So far the contributions are; 1. Partisan units 2. Military Intelligence 3. Counter Intelligence (to counter 1 and 2) 4. Intelligence and Espionage (combines 1 and 2 and 3) 5. Partisans effect on cost of movement. [ May 13, 2003, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn, you listed two ideas, so I will cover the Partisan tech and let you cover the intelligence tech. Partisan Support Tech Summary: Reflects the investment in resources and manpower that countries devoted to supporting partisan/guerrilla movements in occupied countries - France, Yugoslavia, Greece. Effect: Allows creation of Partisan units in all conquered nations except for: Belgium & Denmark & Poland & Baltic States & Portugal & Switzerland & Yugoslavia (Yugoslavia already has its own rules for partisans). These units would appear in a random hex within the affected country according to the following priority: (1)any unoccupied city, mountain, swamp or forest hex, or 2) any clear hex not adjacent to an enemy unit. Tech 0: Base 1% for a partisan unit per turn per country with a Str 1. (about 1 unit per 4 years of occupation) Tech 1: 5% per turn per country for a 2 Strength Partisan unit to appear in a conquered (not liberated) country. (about 1 per year per country) Tech 2: 10% per turn per country for a 3 Strength Partisan unit to appear. (about 2 per year) Tech 3: 15% per turn per country for a 4 Strength Partisan unit to appear. Tech 4: 20% per turn per country for a 5 Strength Partisan unit to appear. (about 4 per year) Tech 5: 25% per turn per country for a 6 Strength Partisan Unit to appear. (about 5 per year) Note: If the country with the Partisan tech surrenders the chance for partisan activity in occupied countries returns that of Tech Level 0 (1% chance for a 1 strength partisan unit). Benefit to Gameplay: Simple wars of conquest could become wars of controlling supply lines if the opposing side decided to support guerrilla operations. The thrill of seeing guerrilla units liberate a conquered city or stopping production in the oil fields. The thrill of seeing a French Partisan sabatoge German mining production. The agony of seeing Russia or Italy liberated by a lone guerrilla unit that occupies the capital city. Not Unbalance the Game This tech would benefit the Allies and Axis powers. The allies would gain the benefit of partisan units that would force the Germans to garrison conquered countries (including Norway, France, Spain and even Russia) after their surrender. Although the partisans might not be able to take a garrison city they can create zones of control that will reduce the MPP that the city provides. The Axis powers would gain from partisans that would oppose the usuall Allied targets of conquest - Iraq, Norway, Finland, Portugal, Spain, Vichy France, Italy and Greece and reduce the readiness of invading Allied forces. Thus forcing the allied powers to garrison any countries they conquer. At low levels of Partisan Tech these guerrilla units can easily be destroyed by a corps unit and are not strong enough to destroy a full strength unit unless they are allowed to mass in large numbers. The partisans would also enable the garrison forces of each side to build up their experience, thus making any future liberation of that country more difficult. Not too difficult to program I am assuming that the same routine used for Russian/Yugoslavian partisans can modified to handle this. [ May 13, 2003, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I like it. Nice and Simple (well almost simple) Three questions though; 1. How can strategic bombing cripple the German economy? I assume you mean targeting the mines in France and Western Germany with long range bombers? 2. Re: Iraqi Oil, If the UK, Italy or Germany held Iraq and Egypt would a would be a convoy route through the Med to Europe be created? or would Italy/Germany have to trace a land route thru Turkey or Russia to access the oil? 3. If UK had only 1.0 MPP and 0.5 OP would UK production be 200MPP or 0? or is their a minimum production level? [ May 13, 2003, 12:47 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I agree, all excellent points. As you said, if Hubert implemented all of the ideas he's heard he would surely have a mess on his hands. I trust that he will draw from this forum selected ideas to make for a better SC2.

JerseyJohn I strongly agree , at the same time I think that SC is similar to Chess in the same manner that you mentioned. 1. There are a limited number of opening game strategies. - What do you do with the UK Med Fleet? - Attack Denmark at the same time that you attack Poland? - How do you attack Belgium if Belgium is still neutral? - After France, what next? I think that the SC AI needs a much larger library of opening game moves. 2. The hardest item to program is the middle game. 3. There are a limited number of end game strategies. - IE What can the US do when France, the UK and the USSR have fallen? - IE What can the UK do when the USSR has fallen? - IE What can the Axis do when D-Day strkes in France (Concentrate France / Concentrate Russia / Fight on Two Fronts) Just once I would like to see the AI respond to an allied D-Day by operating in large number of troops,HQ, Air and crushing the invaders and staging a limited withdrawal in Russia. When the invaders are defeated operating these forces back to the Eastern front. [ May 12, 2003, 09:03 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn Thanks for the link. As for the Partisan Tech I was just trying to think of something to fill up that empty space on the Tech Screen. Without having to change the layout of the screen Hubert has room for one more tech. The question is: What tech if any would benefit gameplay the most, not unbalance the game and not be too difficult to program? A few suggestions: Partisan Support - Reflects investment in supporting partisan groups in conquered countries. CodeBreaking - Reflects investment in intercepting enemy communications. Higher levels of tech give an increased chance of removing FOW for units - ie Tech 1: 5% to see a unit, Tech 5: 50% per turn to see a unit when playing with FOW ON. Training Programs - Reflects rigorous training programs provided to Infantry Units. Tech 1: Units start with 1/3 Medal, Tech 2: 2/3 Medal, Tech 3: Units start with 1 Medal, Tech 5: Units start with 2 medals. Fortifications - Reflects investment in fortifying cities in the home country against attack (tunnels, bunkers, ammo dumps, etc). Tech 1: Increase entrenchment value of cities by 1, Tech 2: Increase entrenchment value of cities by 2, etc. Quartermaster Corps - Reflects investment in the supply train. +5% HQ Unit Readiness per tech level or could reduce cost of HQ units by 10% per tech level. Commando Squads - Reflects use of commando squads to scout the terrain in advance of the main army. Tech 1: +1 Spot Range for Infantry Units on Land (ie +50 miles), Tech 3: +2 Spot Range for Infantry Units., Tech 5: +3 Spotting Raqnge for Infantry Units. Counter Intelligence - Counter to Partisan and Codebreaking Techs. 1 Level in Counter Tech reduces Partisan and Codebreaking Tech by 1. [ May 13, 2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn They key in the chess programs that you mentioned and other games with a good AI is that they are constantly evolving and being updated with new routines and fuzzy logic as the developers and users discover weaknesses in them. This takes lots of time and money, unless it is designed as an open source program (aka Linux) where user groups contribute to the program's development. That said I think that their are several layers of AI and that some part of the AI can be opened to player involvement. Of course this is just my off the top thoughts on the subject and this would need to be further developed if Hubert decides that this is the path that SC/BattleFront/Fury wants to follow. Example: Research Strategy, Production Strategy, Opening Moves, Resources required for securing specific objectives, Conquest Roadmap To elaborate; 1. Research Strategy - A Text File that outlines the research strategy of a nation UK: 2LongRange,1Jets US: 2AntiTank Russia: 2AntiTank,1Jets 2. Production Strategy - An production strategy for utilizing plunder Example: German:France:2Air,1Research German:Poland:1Air 3. Resources Required for Objectives - A text file that gives the AI the desired resources for an objective and the AI executes the plan. Example: Iraq Hex (xx,yy), 6Land,1HQ,1Air 4. Conquest Roadmap in a text file Example: Germany: PolandxDenmark, Belgium, France, Norway, Sweden (where x is same time as) Italy: IF (ALLIED NAVY in MED = 0) Then Greece > AlgeriaxSouth France > Beruit > Syria > Egypt

Santabear, You mean a chance for partisans to appear in ungarrisoned captured cities? I definitely agree. I would also like to see a chance for partisans t to appear in a conquered Spain, Greece, Russia, Turkey, Norway, UK, France and Ireland. But perhaps the Norwegian, French, Irish and Greek partisans should have a strength of 2 or 3? Or here's an idea for a Partisan Tech/Investment that would reflect various degrees of support of partisan efforts in occupied countries. In the minor countries there is base 1% for a partisan unit per turn with a Str 1. Partisan Tech 1 would increase this to 3% per turn per country and Str 3. Partisan Tech 2 would increase this to a 6% per turn with a Str 4. Partisan Tech 3 would increase this to 10% per turn with a Str 5. Partisan Tech 4 would increase this to 15% per turn with a Str 6. Partisan Tech 5 would increase this to 20% per turn with a Str 7. Of course, if the country with this Tech was conquered the percentage chance for partisans would return to normal. [ May 12, 2003, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn I am trying to highlight ways in which the AI could be improved at the tactical level by sharing my observations on the progress of three games vs the Axis AI during the 1939 Scenario. The key element thus far seems to be that the AI needs to better concentrate its forces against an objective and support them with HQs and Air Fleets. (ie in attackig Russia the HQ's and air fleets need to continually advance behind the German armies as they push the front forward. All too often the German units push forward while the HQ units remain far behind the front lines.) Other issues such as bombarding empty city hexes which are about to be occuppied, not taking the Rock, targeting French Ships with Air power as opposed to British ships or French Infantry, and avoiding unnecessary operating of units are also issues for fine tuning of the AI. [ May 12, 2003, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Game 3> Expert - Axis AI - FOW OFF The Allies plan to defend France with Armies stationed along the borders. The Germans reply with a DOW on Belgium and the destruction of the Belgium corps north of Brussels. Two turns later the capital city of Belgium falls following an extensive air bombardment and the French fall back to defend Paris abandoning the Maginot Line. The Germans pursue. The advancing German armies are supported by 3 German HQ units and 4 Air Fleets which advance in the wake of the German advance to give full support to the German Army. The Air Fleets concentrate their fire on one unit at a time and the French are quickly destroyed. The French manage to evacuate 1 Army and 1 corps to England. No human could have done better. Meanwhile the British Navy has concentrated all of its forces in the Med to combat the Italian Navy, which was quickly destroyed with minimal damage to the British Fleet. Yet you have to admire the bravery of the Italians whose Ships advanced into combat in the face of a air unit on Malta, a bomber unit in Algeria, 3 Carriers, the entire French Fleet, and most of the British Fleet (except for 2 naval units off the port of Manchester). While the Naval battle was going on East of Malta the Italians sent a corps transport to sieze an undefended Gibraltar. The UK fleet commander seeing this rushed a canadian corps from off the coast of France and a Fleet was diverted from the naval battle to attempt an interception. Alas, the Canadian corps beat the Italian corps to Gibraltor with minutes to spare. Following the fall of France the AI executed a 2 turn conquest of Denmark supported by German Naval, Air, Armor and HQ units. Most strangely the Germans in France also made a run for an ungarrisoned Gibraltar. They reached the shores of Gibraltar and were attacked by one UK Battleship. Reduced to a strength of 7 they had a choice, land on Gibraltar and seize the Rock or retreat. The German commander decided to retreat towards America. The Axis attack on Russia was well planned and supported. With 6HQ, 3 Air, 8 Armor, 16 Armies and 5 corps it was an overwhelming force that could only have been improved with the addition of the the 3 German air fleets stationed in France and the German Armor guarding Belgrade. --------------------------------------------- Notes: In this game the German AI executed an almost perfect attack on France and Belgium. They could have conquered Belgium in 1 turn instead of 3 if they had focused their initial air and land attacks on Brussels instead of the corps north of the city. As for the Italian fleet, in the face of such overwhelming odds most humans would have moved the Italian navy to the safety of the northern Adriatic Sea where they could be protected until air fleets could be summoned to Italy and the French fleets are disbanded with the Fall of Paris. Rushing the Italian Corps on Salerno to Gibraltar while the UK fleet was engaged around Bari was quick thinking on the part of the AI. If the Canadian corps was not already off the coast of France the Allied fleet would have been bottled up in the Mediterranean Ocean for the duration of the war. The AI also took advantage of an ungarrisoned Gibraltar later in the game and reached it shores with a German Army transported from France; however, it decided not to occupy Gibraltar after suffering minor damage from a UK ship that recently arrived in port. A human player would have seized the Rock and thus permanently seperated the Allied Naval fleets. The German attack on Russia was also much stronger this game; however, the AI still did not advance his HQ units into Russia to support the advancing troops. ----------------------------------------------- [ May 12, 2003, 08:57 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]