Edwin P.

JerseyJohn, Thanks for your feedback, I was worried that tactics might not be appropiate in a game dealing with Armies and Corps. Now the attacker could use rules such as; 1. Attack (current default) 2. Advance After Combat - Attack at -25% strength but advances into hex the defender leaves. Attacking unit attacks at reduced strength as the unit is advancing while attacking. 3. Hasty Attack - Attacks at -50%% strength, but defender can not retreat after combat during this or any following combat rounds. This reflects a unit launching an immediate attack on an enemy unit upon coming into combat with it. The enemy unit does not have time to organize a response and is pinned in place for attacks by flanking units. 4. Deliberate Attack - Attack unit attacks at +20% readiness if can attack without moving from starting hex and was not attacked in prior combat phase. This reflects a unit moving into position and then preparing its forces to attack after a period of rest and reorganization.

I do not think that experienced units are too invincible. Combat veterans fight better and smarter than green-horn units that have not been exposed to battle. As for the equalization of techs, often times in war weapon systems are found and then reverse engineered by the enemy. I do agree that you can now play SC and totally ignore the Med. Ocean. [ March 27, 2003, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I was thinking about how different armies respond to combat and was wondering whether tactics have a place in SC. Example - The player would have a default defense tactic for all land units that could be overridden on a unit by unit basis. - Hold the Line (current default) - Delay the Enemy: Unit would retreat 1 hex after each combat round. Unless the enemy has a follow up unit available to continue the attack the unit would have an increased chance of surviving. - Retreat before contact: Unit would reteat 2 hexes after first attack, defensive value of unit reduced by 50% for first attack.

Jersey John I agree that this chrome should be offered as mandatory on/off options. Sometimes I want to play a quick game, and other times I may want to learn a bit about history (ie Rockets LvL3 - ie, V2 rockets with a range of xxxx and capable of carrying xxxx. Faced problems with .) It might also give palyers an incentive to conduct research in areas that are often overlooked, just to see the pop-ups on the new weapons systems.

- The screen border changes based on whether you are playing the Allies or the Axis. - Nation related popup screens when a new tech level is reached with a picture of the new weapon and a description of the technology discovered - ie Tanks LvL5 - Picture (Tiger Tank) - Descrption: (The Tiger Tank .........) - News Reporter announces the surrender or liberation of a country to [overwhelming(if more than 3 ground units are in country) enemy forces] or [a carefully orchestrated (if less than 3 ground units are in country) attack supported by (enemy air forces)(enemy air and naval forces) (enemy naval forces) (superior combat tactics of the enemy forces).] The term [Enemy forces] would change to the name of the national unit that occupied the capital - ie Russian forces, Italian, British, American, German, Free French, Bulgarian, etc.

You may be able to break this cordon by disbanding a corps or two and replacing them with an army or armor unit.

Jersey John Getting back to the historical game, would it make sense for the US to receive a large MPP bonus in Sept 1945 (if it is still alive) to reflect the end of the war in the Pacific? And secondly, how large should this bonus be?

Jersey John I like your thinking; But how would Hubert program this. What do you define as a weakly held enemy area? and a more productive region? A weakly held enemy area is a hex with no enemy units closer than 2 hexes, and no more than 2 units within a 5 hex radius? Hubert, any feedback? (see I am trying to get him interested in making at least one change - the FOW On for Human, Off for AI option)

Another item, that was mentioned in other threads, would be increasing the productive capacity of US cities by 1 every six months after it enters the war. Thus by the time that Russia fell US production capacity would be about 1.5x its starting capacity (1.2x Jan43, 1.4x Jan44, 1.6x Jan45, 1.8x Jan46) This would vastly increase the chance for a allied comeback and more accurately reflect the growth of the US war economy. It would also vastly increase the importance of building naval units to escort/sink transport units. My only concern about doing this is that the AI is not programmed to handle this, being fixated on the UK/France, ignoring Iberia & Italian front. ---------------------------------------------- PS: Another Item to consider is that after Japan falls couldn't the US have sent reinforcements to Russia via the Siberian Railroad, think of it like an off map route to Suez, and imagine the shock of the German generals when US units start to appear in Russia and not the Western Front. (this option would only be available after the historical fall of Japan, and after Japan falls souldn't the US MPP double? if the US is still in the war at that point in time). ie: Sept 1945 - US MPP Doubles, US Gets 1500 points of plunder reflecting troops & naval ships in Pacfic Theater that are now available for use. Oct 1945 - Off Map Route to Russia via Pacific and Siberian Railroad is activated. Transit time is 6 turns reflecting presence of troops already in the Pacific. "General, you said the Americans were coming, you didn't say via Russia!" Just an interesting What If? [ March 26, 2003, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

JerseyJohn and SantaBear Thanks for your comments. I agree with your assessment of 100 MPPs. Reducing Russian plunder to 100MPP and adding the rules for Post Russian Partisans would also make the end-game more interesting. No longer would Germany gain such a lead in MPPs that its victory is a foregone conclusion. It would also be forced to garrison Russia or risk the chance of facing a revived Russian bear.

Shaka Regarding production/training I really like your concept of limiting tech benefits to new raised divisions. You can no longer increase all of your Jets to L4 or your tanks to L5. Each unit is different. You now have units with older equipment and units with new equipment. (in fact, I wish that Hubert would add this feature in a patch/update ASAP) -------------------------------------------- "This way, as you gain new tech, the newly raised divisions would benefit, but the older units would not. Would also allow the Corps and Armies to be unique, since the combat power could vary based on the various divisions assigned to the formation." - Shaka -------------------------------------------

Shaka Your analysis makes everything alot clearer for me. Based on it I can now understand why ship building should be limited. Your concept of limiting production to already started ships is good. Another idea to consider is to follow the historical time delays that you mentioned. This means that if the Axis wanted to build carriers (which they now do to aid in an invasion of the US) it would take 24 months. It also means that the Axis player would have the opportunity to build a large sub fleet, but it would take them 8 to 10months to launch each new sub.

I know that Hubert has said he is not releasing another patch, but if he changes his mind here is my wish list for those who play against the AI; 1) FOW Option - On for Human, Off for AI 2) AI Reclaims Research when Higher Research Levels are reached. ie: 100% at Tech5, 60% at Tech4, 20% at Tech3 3) AI Reclaims Research to buy units when capital is in danger. 4) Allied Navy is More Aggressive - ie Hunts down German Subs or Hunts Down Italian Navy 5) AI will sieze undefended cities 6) AI will consider Sea Lion if UK is largely undefended 7) Axis AI will consider invading Norway and Sweden, Allied AI will consider liberating Norway and Sweden with US Units (occassionaly) or attacking to gain MPP and air link to USSR. 8) AI has better D-Day Invasion Execution and will evacuate France if losing battle. 9) Allied AI occasionaly disbands UK Bomber to finance purchase of 1)Brit HQ, Brit Air, or Brit Tech 10) Allied AI occasionaly goes for Dutch Gambit 11) Allied AI occassionaly goes for Italian Gambit 12) Allied AI occassionaly goes for Double Gambit 13) Allied AI will consider Invading Italy at Same time Invasion of France is launched. 14) Allied AI will consider taking Iraqi Oil 15) Allied AI will counter Axis Naval Strategy if Any - ie If Axis builds subs then Allied AI builds fleet and attacks in mass, not one at a time. 16) Axis Takes Greece in 1 Turn Tactics via Sea Invasion, not usual overland march. 17) Allied IE Considers evacuating some French Units to UK and replacing Corps in Maginot Line with Corps Units. 18) Axis AI will build larger Russia invasion force (ie Humans can often build force consisting of 3-4 HQ Units, 7 Air Fleets, 6 Armor, + Infantry and Corps if Humans takes Nordic Countries and Yugoslavia). 19) Axis AI will not allow one corps unit to pull large amounts of Axis units from Russian front to Western Front after it declares war on Russia. (ie if I land 1 corps unit in Northern Germany/Belguim/France Axis operates Armies and Armor from Eastern Front to deal with problem, weakening their attack in the East.) 20) AI should move French Fleet to UK Ports prior to fall of France 21) AI should Disband some French Ships if not planning to attack Italian Navy with UK Ships 22) Occassionaly Allied AI should attack Germany Navy with French Fleet, British Fleet, and Carriers. Then station ships out of range of Germany Air, but in range to attack and sink any German transports planning to invade Norway or Send Carriers through Baltic to Russia to support Russian Units against German Invasion when it comes. 23) Preset Research Strategies for Russia if not already in system Strategy 1: 2 AntiTank, 1 Industrial Strategy 2: 2 AntiTank, 1 Air Strategy 3: 1 AntiTank, 1 Armor, 1 Industrial 24) Russian AI to take Finland Occasionaly in a more aggresive manner. Ie Move Air Unit North, Use British Carriers, Land Unit Behind Finish Units. 25) If Allied AI takes Iraq then Operate UK air units to Russian Front and move UK HQ to Egypt, then Operate to Russian Front. 26) Axis Pre War Strategy - picks 1 of several Strategy 1 - Poland > Denmark > Belgium > France > Norway > Sweden > Yugoslavia > to Russian Front Strategy 2 - Poland > Belgium > France > Denmark > Norway > Sweden > Yugoslavia > to Russian Front Strategy 3 - Poland > Belgium > France > Denmark > Suez > Egypt > Iraq > back to Russian Front Strategy 4 - Poland > Belgium > France > Denmark > After Minors Join Axis > Spain > Back to Russian Front [ March 26, 2003, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Perhaps one way to account for the production/Training time is to introduce delays for the appearance of purchased units; Infantry - 1 Turn Armor - 2 Turns Air/Navy - 3 Turns Although this is not historically accurate, it is more accurate than the current situation where Armor units appear exactly when you need them and you can produce naval units on the fly. It would also introduce more strategy into the game without overly complicating it. I do worry however, that it would make the German opening moves alot harder since they would not have extra Air Power units available after taking Poland and Denmark. Another concept would be to allow each nation to select an area of production emphasis (Infantry/Armor/Air/Navy). Units in this area would appear 1 turn faster than normal. Thus Germany might select air and have air units appear in 2 turns instead of 3. Russia might select infantry and produce infantry units in 0 turns instead of 1 turn. To reflect the superior US economy the US might be able to select two areas of production emphasis. Production Emphasis Points by Nation: Germany: 1 Italy: 1 France: 0 UK: 1 Russia: 1 US: 2 The next question is should nations be allowed to change their selected area of emphasis? If so, how often (once every twelve months) or should they have to cash in their current Prod Emp point and buy a new one (costing them 100MPPs). The key is to balance reality with a playable game. If Hubert introduced this change as an optional feature in a patch players could playtest it against each other and against the AI to see if the idea is workable and "fun". Based on this test it could be included or excluded from SC2. [ March 25, 2003, 11:30 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Shaka, What you have compiled is amazing and most detailed. The only aspect I differ with is the ability to build new ships. During WWII the US produced new ships quite rapidly. Perhaps this was because of resources available to the US that was not available to Germany or the UK, which allocated their limited resources elsewhere? How would you account for these limitations in a SC/SC2 environment while keeping the basic system simple? It seems that your analysis points to three key aspects: Manpower Limitations, Production/Training Time and how production resources were allocated across(Air/Armor/Navy) production capabilities. [ March 25, 2003, 08:36 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Disorder, Thanks for the news on the Russian rockets, I have always seen the Russian research rockets but never buy any to use in combat. I was was thinking what a waste of MPPs and what a stupid AI. Bill Macon, I agree that the AI is not aggressive in pursing/managing tech investments and that it could use some fine-tuning. Example: Sometimes I will disband the UK strategic bomber to finance Jet Research on turn 1 and the AI never does this, even if it sunk my subs (which it never goes after unless they move). I would like to see AI rules where; 1. If X Units approached within X hexes of its capital and it was outnumbered X to Y it would reclaim its tech to buy units. 2. If Tech Level 5 is reached (which the Russians occassionly reach in Industrial Tech), the AI sould reclaim its industrial tech points. Now it appears as if it does nothing when tech level 5 is reached. You could fine tune this with a 100% to reclaim at tech level 5, 60% to reclaim at tech level 4, and 20% to reclaim once tech level 3 is reached. I say this because I often reclaim my tech investments later in the game if I have a tech advantage over the opposing force. This would give the AI more MPP points with which to buy/reinforce units and it would mimic winning human player strategies. In addition, it would be a shock to the human player who is used to seeing that the AI only has 400 points to spend only to see it suddenly rise to 650 before being spent. [ March 25, 2003, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Agreed, and somtimes the allies will move a Strategic Bomber down to Malta or Algiers. This really hurts the Italian Fleet if they come in range, as the bomber has a high anti-ship strength. (although I usually disband the UK bomber for MPP credits so I can buy another UK Jet or a UK HQ unit or start researching Jet Techs on Turn 1)

Dropping an A-bomb on one hex would be devasting if: "An A-bomb dropped on the capital city of a nation has a 50% to cause the immediate surrender of that nation." You might also say that an A-bomb dropped on non-capital city has a 20% of causing their surrender. However, this option should be open for playtesting and debate about what degree of destruction would cause the UK and Russia to surrender. Perhaps dropping an A-bomb on a non-capital city should cause that nation to offer you a Peace treaty 20%(cumulative) of the time , which you could accept to end the war on that front, but you would not gain any plunder or future income from cities that you do not hold at the time the peace treaty is offered. Thus if you managed to drop an A-bomb on London or Moscow they have a 50% to surrender and you gain their plunder and they disband their armies. If you drop an A-bomb on Machester, the UK has a 20% to offer you a peace treaty. If you drop 2 a-bombs then this percentage increases to 40%. ------------------------------------------------ As for the concept of multiple A-bombs and a 150 mile blase radius. The US only had 2 A-bombs when it bombed Japan and each of these A-bombs had a blast radius of about 1 to 2 miles: ------------------------------------------------- U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey THE EFFECTS OF THE ATOMIC BOMBINGS OF HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI CHAIRMAN’S OFFICE 19 June 1946

I can't seem to figure out the AI Tech Strategy, or if it even has one. 1> I played a Game against the AI and the Russians had Rockets Tech2 but never built any rockets. Why did it invest in rockets? In other games it appears that the human gets advances faster than the AI. Does the AI invest only 1 chit in a research area, or will it invest 2 or 3? I would also like to know if the AI picks its techs randomly or does it pick from a set of canned tech strategies designed for that Nation. 2> Also, when seriously pressed - ie Moscow about to fall, Axis units surround London - the AI will never cash in their research chits to buy more units. Am I correct? Any insight from Hubert or other players would be greatly appreciated.

Why Not Other WMD? I think because the A-bomb was an era defining weapon and required a major research program to turn it into reality. Chemical weapons used a proven technology and affected only soldiers on a limited front. It could not be effectively delivered in mass quantities over long distances to a city like London, Moscow or Tokyo and occassionaly a strong wind blew the gas in the wrong direction. If one side used it then the other would respond in kind. There was no long-term advantage to using this weapon on the battlefield. [ March 24, 2003, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I agree, most excellent idea. 1) Fog of War Option: [ON] for Human, [Off] for AI 2) Improved AI 2.1 - AI selects different strategies for each game 2.2 - AI can be modded at the strategic level 2.3 - AI can be modded at the tactical level 2.4 - AI has library of opening tactics 2.5 - AI will consider Sea-Lion 2.6 - AI considers invasion of Norway/Egypt/Syria 2.7 - AI tech strategy can be modded. 2.8 - AI Reclaims Tech Investments when threatened. 2.9 - AI Reclaims Tech at higher tech levels - 100% at Lvl5, 60% at Lvl4, 20% at Lvl2 2.10 - UK AI will sometimes disband starting Bomber for MPPs and use to ? 3) Diplomacy Chits 4) Russian Post Surrender Rules for Partisans 5) Russian Scorched Earth affect on Plunder 6) Neutral US Lend Lease Program to UK and USSR 7) Selectable Merchant Ship Convoy Routes 8) Spanish Post Surrender Partisans 9) Free Brits Option 10) Levels of Neutrality 11) Naval Supply - Ship must return to a port after X turns or gradually lose strength 12) New Techs/Investments 12.1 Intelligence/Espionage 12.2 A-Bomb 13) Selectable Government Ministers - Germany/Russia 13.1 Production Minister - Affects Production 13.2 Foreign Minister - Affects Diplomacy 13.3 Chief of Staff - Affects HQ Readiness +/- % 14) HQ Units with Strengths & Weaknesses 14.1 Gen. Lucus (Anzio) -1 attack/-1Movement 14.2 Gen. Pattion +1 attack 14.3 Gen. Eisenhower +1 Units Commanded 15) Oil limits on Movement of Oil Guzzling Units 16) Random Events affect by Diplomacy Chits/MPPS/Decision 16.1 Plane Crashes in Turkey with Troop Plans (1 in 10 games) - Use Diplomatic Chit (Remove FOW for 1 Turn) - Use Spies to Access Crash Site (5% to Remove FOW) - Offer Turks 50MPP to See Crash Site (50% remove FOW for 1 Turn) 16.2 German Sub Sinks Americaqn Ocean Liner - Use diplomatic chit (No increase in US war Readiness) - Tell American the ship was in a war zone (+5% US war readiness) - Stop all Merchant ship attacks for 1 year (+30MPP Bonus for UK while in effect, +15% US War readiness if Axis breaks agreement and attacks merchant ships) 17) Spanish Mobilizes if Axis builds up troops on Border 17.1 Turn 1- Sends Axis A warning 17.2 Turn 2- Mobilizes 1 5 str Corps per Turn (Max 4) 17.3 Turn 3- Requests MPP Assistance from US 18) Spanish Production can be used to reinforce Spanish units. 19)Sweden mobilizes if Axis buildup on border 19.1 Turn 1 - sends Axis a warning, shares FOW view with Allies 19.2 Turn 2 - Mobilizes standing militia - Add 1 Corps Str 5 19.3 Turn 3 - Mobilizes standing militia - Add 1 Corps Str 5 20) New Sub Rules 20.1 Surface ships can only see subs if they move into a sub occupied hex. Carriers can see in a radius of 1 hex. 20.2 Greater dive percentage 21) Production Delays to reflect Training/Production Time 21.1 Infantry Units Appear in 1 Turn 21.2 Armor Units Appear in 2 Turns 21.3 Air Units Appear in 3 Turns 21.4 Naval Units Appear in 4 Turns [ March 25, 2003, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Oh, and I forgot to say that the explosive range of an A-bomb blast should include any port hex attached to a targeted city. Why? In reality, the port is usually located close to the city center.

KDG I agree with your view that all nations should be allowed to research it under the current game system. I would also program the AI to never select this tech option as it would be too much of a gamble for the AI. JerseyJohn You view on the blast radius of a WWII era A-bomb is dead-on. The bombs dropped on Japan only affected the targeted city itself and many buildings on the outskirts of the city were still standing after the blast. These early bombs were had explosive power measured in kilotons, not megatons. As for the US targeting GB or France with the atomic bomb, historically it never would have happened, but I don't see any way to prevent a US player from doing it or how to penalize the US for doing it.

Great, another strategy for Hubert to consider if he decides to release an AI update.

santabear I agree with your take that only the US and Germany should be allowed to invest in A Bomb research. ---------------------------------------------- JerseyJohn. As for the direct effect of an A-bomb, it would permanently destroy any city or resource it was used on and any unit in that hex. If this was a port city it would also destroy the port and any unit in that port. (and have a 50% of causing the country to surrender if it was dropped on a capital city) ----------------------------------------------- As for the US achieving the A-bomb, there are two ways to handle this; 1. Allow the US to develop the A-bomb automatically in the historical context. 2. If SC2 is a true Global WW2 game then give the US more Tech points at the start of the war and allow them to use it how they see fit. Perhaps, the US decided not to fund atomic bomb research but to use these resources & scientists & enigneers to develope better tanks or faster fighters or better intelligence? -------------------------------------------- As for how to handle interceptions, perhaps: 1. Say that the A-bomb is on a Bomber in an air fleet, If that bomber attacks and is reduced from a strength 10 to a strength 5 then there is a 50% that the A-bomb reached its target. PS: The bomber would take damage from AA and Defending Fighters before dropping its bomb. If the bomber carrying the A-bomb is shot down then show a pop-up message on the screen saying that " Allied Air Defense Forces Shot Down the Bomber carrying our A-Bomb before it could be delivered" ----------------------------------------------- Also, due to the difficulty of refining the uranium I would only allow 1 A-bomb to be built every six months after the technology is discovered. This would limit the number of A-bombs that could be produced in any one game to a realistic level. ------------------------------------------------