Edwin P.

I see decoy units as a tool that enhances the FOW if a player decides to make the investment. Decoy units placed along the coast of England in range of German Bombers may deter a German Sealion or draw Air Attacks away from real units. The site of decoy units around UK ports may lead the German unit to increase his garrison of France and Belgium to guard against an invasion. Russia could use decoy units to hide a hole in the front lines until real units can be deployed. The sight of 3 fake corps units might cause the Axis player delay an attack or draw an attack away from the real units. Some players would use decoy units, others would not. It gives players more strategic options and reflects the unpredictability of war. Allied forces created a fake division of plywood tanks and empty tents to hide their Normandy invasion plans knowing this unit would be sighted by German Air Units.

I see decoy units as a tool that enhances the FOW if a player decides to make the investment. Decoy units placed along the coast of England in range of German Bombers may deter a German Sealion or draw Air Attacks away from real units. The site of decoy units around UK ports may lead the German unit to increase his garrison of France and Belgium to guard against an invasion. Russia could use decoy units to hide a hole in the front lines until real units can be deployed. The sight of 3 fake corps units might cause the Axis player delay an attack or draw an attack away from the real units. Some players would use decoy units, others would not. It gives players more strategic options and reflects the unpredictability of war. Allied forces created a fake division of plywood tanks and empty tents to hide their Normandy invasion plans knowing this unit would be sighted by German Air Units.

John I liked your message with its 7 points (especially stacking in ports). I offer another option for convoys with 3 preset routes and weather effects. As for the width of the convoy routes. Why not make it user selectable? With 3 hex and 1 hex wide options for the allied player. 3 hex wide is easier for the Germans to find and if found each sub can intradict about 1/3 of the shipments. 3 subs can intradict about 100% of the shipments. 1 hex wide is much harder for the Germans to find but 1 wolf pack can intradict about 70% or more of the merchant shipments and 2 Wolf Packs about 100% of the Shipments. So Allied Convoy Options Now Include; 1> Which Convoy Route to Use (1 or 2 or 3, only 2 in winter) 2> How Wide Should the Convoy Route Be (1 or 3 hexes)

The UK fielded decoy units to mislead Axis intelligence and miltary responses. The Russians fielded decoy units to mislead the Germans. Decoy units in SC2 would look and move like a corps unit; however, once in contact with an enemy unit it would be automatically destroyed and the enemy unit could continue moving, but can not retrace their steps. They would cost 40mpps to build and could only be deployed/moved in their home country. They can not move out of their home country. Players could build 3 Decoy units or 1 real corps unit. Players would use these units to mislead their opponent about the true disposition of their forces.

JerseyJohn Thanks for the link, your ideas and the comments of others on this thread are great and well thought out with a most insightful view of the WWII historical situation.

Jersey John Great Post, this really accounts for the economic realities of WWII Europe. Especially, the bribes(ie resources) that Soviet Russia gave to Germany to stall off a German invasion and the value of neutral companies to the major powers.

During WWII the Allies often changed their Convoy routes to avoid German Wolf packs. This could be reflected in SC by allowing the Allies to select 1 of 3 routes semi-annually (or annually). German Wolfpacks would have to relocate to stop the merchant ship convoys to the UK and there would be at least 1 month during which shipping could slip past the German subs. 1. North Atlantic Route - From NY to Canada to Greenland to Uk - Not Selectable in Winter Months due to Weather and large ice flows. 2. Direct Route to UK 3. South Atlantic Route - to Equator - to Spain and then up to UK.

During WWII small partisan bands (not Corps) were able to disrupt industrial production. To reflect this ungarrisoned conquered cities should have a % chance per turn to take 1 point of damage from industrial sabotage. The % chance of for this sabotage would depend on the relative tech level achieved in intelligence. Ie Each Point in Intelligence would increase/decrease the Percentage Chance for Partisan Sabotage by 10%. Ie: Germany 1 Point in Intelligence, Russia 4 Points in Intelligence = 30% for industrial sabotage in each ungarrisoned Russian city. If Germany had 2 points in Intelligence and Russia 2 Points = 0% for partisan sabotage. Summary: Intelligence Tech affects 1> Knowledge of wear enemy troops are, 2>Knowledge of Enemy Research Levels and 3> Partisan Sabotage in Ungarrisoned Conquered Cities.

Historically Sweden sold most of its steel to the Axis during WWII. This can be reflected by; 1. Having Germany receives a certain amount of MPP's per turn from Sweden (ie 10MPPs) 2. If Germany Declares Ware on Sweden Germany loses this MPP until Sweden surrenders. 3. If the Allies Conquer Sweden then Germany loses access to this steel. 4. Have a convoy route between Sweden and Germany. If the Allies station a sub in the baltic sea then they can intercept these convoys and stop the shipment of Steel to Germany. 5. I would also have a Pop-up Event Window that would appear if 4 or more German units are along the swedish borders/coast. This would tell the Germans that Sweden is stopping steel shipments to Germany until the German units are withdrawn from our borders.

Liam I like your idea for adjustable MPP contributions by the US to Russia and UK, and its effect on the acitivation of Axis Minors. To make it more realistic I would not allow any MPP transfers to Soviet Russia during the winter months when ice blocked access to their Northern Port. This would be supplemented by a pop-up event window (with a picture of a frozen ocean) advising the Allies that Artic Ice has blocked access to the northern russian port. To reflect the effects of weather, this might be adjusted by a percentage for each winter month - ie November 20% Ice, December 80% Ice, January 95% Ice, Feb 80% Ice, Mar 20% Ice or the game might come with an option for Historical Weather. Thus the US could send the USSR MPPs 7 to 8 months of the year.

DiFool #7 Stacking in Ports, Yes, Yes, Yes. It brings up a chance for a Pearl harbor situation, if each air/land/naval attack on ships in port could damage multiple ships (which are tied up at the piers or have crews on shore leave).

The idea of expanding the map would certainly make things more interesting and boost the importance of strategic warfare in the Atlantic. Allies > It would also allow for LendLease Convoys to Russia, while the US is still officialy neutral and increase the importance of Iceland and Norway. In fact, it could even allow the allies to redeploy air units to Russia, either via Operating the unit or by loading them onto transports. Axis> With an increased chance for sub survivability and more MPP merchant shipping it would make a submarine warfare strategy more important and give then a good incentive to take Iceland/Norway and disrupt convoy routs to the USSR and England. In fact, prior to the US entering the War, and after Russia is at War, I would allow for the US to send a certain number of MPPs per month to the USSR. The amount should increase as US war readiness increases. When the US delcares ware the Allied Player should decide how much MPPS the US should send to Russia for that turn or the next month. Then this convoy would take X turns to reach Russia via an allied selectable route 1,2, or 3. To stop the convoy the Axis player would have to station troops on that route or hold a choke point such as Norway and/or Iceland. Allowing the allies to select the convoy route gives them more control over its chance for success and how fast the MPPs arrive at UK ports. In fact during the war allied merchant ship conveys would often change their routes in order to avoid German submarines. Example: A direct route might take only 3 turns. A southern route through the South Atlantic might take 5 turns while a northern route might take 4 turns to reach the UK.

Question: Would it make sense to give the Attacker a bonus for Flank Attacks against all units, even units in forts. Example - Attackers attacking from a hex to the rear of the initial attack would gain a +? Attack Strength Bonus. Would this bonus be realistic? What effects would this have on combat? Or if a unit is fortified should an attack from the rear reduce the entrenchment bonus by #?

Forts can make things too defensive if they are too easy to build and use. In my proposal only Engineers can build forts, but it takes time. To build a 4 strength fort can take up to 4 turns. Then you have to garrison the fort for an equal number of turns to take full adavantage of the fort. Forts are only effective if you can afford to pull a unit out of the front lines to garrison the fort. So you have a choice, build an Engineer Unit that is useless in combat or build a Corps Unit. Each engineer unit is one less unit that can hold the front lines against the Axis or Allies. To use the fort you have to build another Corps or Army unit to Garrison it. In reality, Germany did build a defensive line along the Western Front that stalled the Allied Offensive, but did not have the resources to fortify and man the large eastern front against Soviet forces.

Both sides in WWII heavily fortified certain areas of Terrain. The French with their Maginot Line and the Axis built the Siegfried Line(is that right?) to hold back an Allied invasion through the Rhine. To allow for this I propose a new type of Unit: Engineers. Max Corps Level Strength of 5. Engineer units could build a fort in the hex they start a turn in. It would take all of their movement points to to increase the entrenchment rating of a hex by 1. The entrenchment rating could be increased by 2 in 1 turn for a cost of 30MPPs. The extra entrenchment rating for a hex would be destroyed if an enemy unit entered the hex. Thus the player can increase the entrenchment level of a hex by 2 in 2 turns for free, or in 1 turn by spending 30MPPS (reflecting the use of additional resources to build fortifications) if an engineer unit is used. Engineer units could increase the maximum entrenchment rating of any hex up to 6. Restricting the building of Fortifications to Engineer units would place a realistic limit on the number of hexes that could be fortified and give both players another option in planning their defensive strategy. The Russian player may decide to fortify hexes behind rivers or city hexes to increase his ability to resist the Axis assault. However, this would take time, both to build the entrenchments and then to position a unit in the hex to take advantage of it. It would also allow the Axis player to follow a more historical defensive strategy on the western front and build a defensive wall along the Rhine to hold back any allied invasion.

Jersey John, I like your idea that Russia start with 4/5 chits in Intelligence. It would do a lot to even the play balance against a human Axis Player and would reflect the strength of Soviet intelligence, from partisans and their secret police network. Why? At 5 chits there would be a 50% per turn for Russia to see 75% of all Axis units in Russia. Thus the Russians would have a better idea (but not a perfect one) of German force dispositions while the Germans would be in the dark (as they historically were) about the deployment of Soviet military units.

In many games the Axis will attack Vichy France and then buildup their forces along the Spanish border or along the coast for a few turns before deciding to invade. In real life, if Franco saw this he would have probably sent the Axis units a warning and if they failed to respond he would have quickly mobilized troops to resist any axis invasion. To reflect this I proposed that; 1. On turn 2 where 3+ Axis units are on the Spanish border that their be a pop-up events window from Franco Asking the Axis to withdraw their troops from the border. This a warning to the Axis player that Spain will begin to call up troops the next turn if the Axis units on the border/coast are not reduced to 2 or fewer. 2. If 3+ Axis units are on the Spanish border for more than 3 turns that Spainish AI mobilizes (1) 5pt Corps unit per turn (up to a maximum of 4 units) that this condition exists. This reflects the emergency mobilization of ill trained troops. 3. The Spanish AI would send a popup message to the Allied player requesting assitance. The allied player would have 3 options; a. Ignore the Request (Franco more likely to Join the Axis) b. Send Franco Minimal Amount of Financial Aid - allowing him to upgrade one 5pts Corps units to a 10pt corps unit each turn. (Cost 20MPPS per Turn) c. Offer Franco Major Amount of Assistance, Upon Arrival of 2 Army Units on the Cost of France, Franco's Spain will join the Allied side.

Progrmaming a totally new version - ie SC2 could take a long time. Have you considered releasing a interim version ie Advanced SC that builds on what you already have? and updates the current game. This would also give SC a second chance to be reviewed in resources such as GameSpot and publications like Gaming World. What could it include? - Improved AI - Modable AI, so players can to a limited extent mod the AI. - Additional/Updated Techs - New Rules/Units - Events (ie Popup from Hungary to the UK player asking for money to delay joining the Axis, if you decline they join the Axis right away, if you accept they delay joining for X turns unless the Axis matches the Allied funding). - Improved Graphics/Graphics that change during Winter. Ie the hexes turn a light white. - Buildable Fortifications - Germany built a line of forts to impede the Allied Advance. - Support for 3 player Online Games - Axis/Allies/Russia - Ability to loan money to your ally for production. - Improved FOW (ie FOW on for Human/Off for AI). - Leaders/HQs that have ratings in Defensive/Offense and advance in each of these areas seperately. Ie if your unit successly defends it gains a in Defense. If it attacks successfully it gains in Offense. Thus you could have a strong offensive leader ie Patton who is weak on the defense. - Popup Stats and Bios on Leaders with a Picture (ie General Patton - Noted for skills on the offense has .........) In general, a stronger AI and more chrome that makes the game more challanging while retaining its simplicity. Any thoughts, Hubert? Many thanks for a great Game.

Condor and Liam, I like your ideas, and here is one way to program it, In case Hubert decides to add it in a future Update (IE Advanced SC or SC2). Intelligence Research gives you three insights into the opponents forces; 1> Location of Enemy Forces - Per Liam making it easier to see enemy forces outside of their home country. 1 Chit = 10% per turn to reveal enemy units for one turn. You reveal 5% of the forces in their home country (due to better security) and 15% of forces located outside of their home country (due to partisan activity and recon activity). 2 Chits = 20% per turn to see enemy units for one turn. You reveal 10% of the forces in their home country and 30% of the forces located outside of their home country. 5 Chits = 50% to see enemy units for 1 turn. 50% of units in enemy's home country and 75% of units located outside of their home country. 2> Research Progress Example - Per Condor reflecting attempts by intelligence agencies to learn about the research areas of the enemy. 1 Chit = 15% per turn chance to see the research screen research screen of each enemy country. 2 Chits = 30% per turn to see the research screen of each enemy country. 5 Chits = 75% per turn to see the research screen of each enemy country. 3> Steal Enemy Technology 1 Chit gives you at 2% chance of gaining 1 chit in a research area where the enemy is more advanced than you are. For example if Germans has Jets 4 and UK has Jets 3 then the UK has a 2% chance of gaining 1 chit in Jets. Once UK reaches Jets 4 (the equal of Germany's rating) they can no longer gain a free chit in Jets as there is no advanced technology to steal. (1 Chit 2%, 2 Chits 4%, ...... 5 Chits 10%). This progression reflects the fact that stealing technology is harder than finding out about it, although not impossible.

During WWII the Allies were able to break the Axis codes and gain substantial insight into their force dispositions. To reflect this I suggest a New Investment Option: Intelligence Each point achieved gives you a 10% chance per turn to see the dispositions of 10% of the enemy forces with whom you are at war with for 1 one turn. Of course, this investment would only be of value with FOW turned on. Example: With 1 point in intelligence the Russians would have a 10% chance to see the location of 10% of the German units each turn. 2 points in intelligence would give you a 20% chance to see the location of 20% of the opposing force each turn. At 5 points in intelligence you would have a 50% chance each turn to see the location of 50% of all enemy units. This formula reflects the fact that no intelligence operation knows everything about the enemy and that intelligence is not always available when you need it. Futhermore, since allies share intelligence, only one allied nation would have to research this investment.

SC2 Better AI, one that can pursue any one of a dozen basic strategies so that no two games ever play alike. In COS the AI would select 1 of of 3 strategies to guide its moves. Now it always follows the same game plan with a frew minor adjustments for the Axis(sometimes it will attack Spain or Greece)

Just completed a game as Allies at +1. The German AI landed a transport with an Army(after waiting off the shores of an Italian occupied Malta for many many turns) at Tobruk and walked over land to take Cairo (which I had left undefended). Then the AI being, not too intelligent, stopped at Cairo and did not move the remaining few hexes to tax the Suez canal and its port. PS: The Italian units in Tobruk never left its starting location, even after I withdrew all British units from the Med.

I strongly agree with the comments made above re: submarine warfare on making them harder to find and increasing their diving percentage. In fact, I would allow surface warfare ships to see subs only if they bumb into them (aka FOW for land units). Thus making it much harder to locate them. This would be realistic as the ocean hexes cover hundreds of square miles. I would also increase, as mentioned earlier, the diving % of the submarines. Perhaps increasing it by 10% per Tech level to reflect the great difficulty of locating the more advanced subs in the ocean after they made an attack. With these two simple changes subs would become a much more valuable element in the war for Europe. I know that no more patches are due for release; however, just maybe Hubert will find it interesting to add these two changes in a downloadable patch, that is if the changes can be made and the program recompiled in under 30 minutes.

RE: France - One strategy that works when playing the Allies against the Axis AI is to disband your French warships and purchase (1) French HQ, and (2) Fleets and an occasional Army. Use the British Corps in Egypt to Garrision the Southern French City, and move all available Allied units to France. Move all fleets in the Med to the area around London. With this strategy you may be able to hold onto France until Russia enters the war at the beginner level and the +1 level. Besure to have a UK army standing by in London to replace the corps in the Belgium capital if it falls.

It seems to me that two of the main features in any SC: Pacific should be a pertual Fog of War and fleets (aka unit staking): 1>Fog of War> Air Units and Carriers would have a % chance to see into adjacent hexes. Other Combat ships (battleships, cruisers, subs) would only see enemy ships if they bumped into them. Thus you could have 2 fleets that pass by each other unseen. Players would never know exactly where the enemy was planning to strike. More free-form than SC where the AXIS and ALLIES are battling on fixed front lines. In the Pacific there are no front lines per se. Futhermore, although you may spot an enemy fleet the enemy fleet may not be able to see you and might not even know that it was detected. 2>Fleets>Players should have the ability to stack units. Creating mixed fleets of Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers and Subs. The more Carriers in a Fleet the greater % to reveal enemy units in surrounding hexes and know if an enemy fleet has seen your fleet.