Edwin P.

Yes, this is changed for SC2. Bombers damage the underlying resource of occupied tiles.

I agree. Gun Laying Rader is essential for a strong navy, but in SC1 I never really had a reason to invest in it. I was wondering if the playtesters had any comments on its importance to either side in Sc2.

I wonder if any of the playtesters ever researched Ground Laying Radar - to improve the strength of their surface naval units.

I don't think its overpowered. Keep in mind that you must research additional level of Intel Tech, you just can't purchased them (but you have the option to play with that feature). You purchase 1 chit in intel and you have a 5% per turn to achieve Intel Tech Level 1. You might discover it in 1 turn, 10 turns or 30 turns, and you can't research Intel Level 5 until you have discovered Intel Level 1,2, 3 and 4. In SC1 it was not easy to reach Level 5 in any tech.

Do any of the playtesters have any comments on the usefulness of the new Intel tech in actual game play? As I recall, each level of this tech increases your research by 1% and penalizes your opponent's research by 1%.

I like the supply model of SC1 for a WWII European Game. From my point of view it offers a good balance between realism and playability. If I was designing an operational level scenario or an American Civil War scenario I might want something different. Such as? Such as a model that traced supply along a road or rail network and emphasized the importance of controlling major road arteries for both supply and movement. Or even the use of activation chits for units. This is where you use an activation chit to ensure that a unit/units move or you can rely on an initiative roll - aka SPI/Decision Game's Civil War where you had to roll a HQ unit's leadership rating or less to move the units unit its command. Some generals like Grant and Lee had high leadership ratings and their units always moved, others like George B. McClellan had low leadership ratings and one would often be unable to move units under his command. I would like to see an American Civil War game using the SC2 system with Road & Railroad tiles and a more robust leadership system. [ March 15, 2006, 07:27 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Don't HQ units function as supply centers? You decide which units to supply through the placement and building of HQ units.

There are six major powers including Germany, UK, USA, Italy, France and Russia. The UI as you said, from the screenshots, supports six major powers. In my view it would be too much trouble to change the UI to support a greater number of players, and in most cases this is not needed as there are work arounds. If you add too many nations to the UI the interface gets to be too crowded. That said, I would truely like to see the option for adding major minor nations - nations where the MPP production from that nation would be restricted to use by that nation and the movement of that nations units would be controlled by an AI - not a human player.

Switch is a common method of payment used in the United Kingdom. Essentially its a debit card.

I understand. Looking forward to playing the game in 2 to 4 weeks when it ships.

I wonder, with the new printed manual is BF going to replicate the old SSI copy protection scheme - what is the 28th word on page 89. Don't worry - just joking. That said, I like Galciv's system of only making upgrades available to registered users.

Any general comments on the Sc2 AI vs SC1?

Thanks for the idea, Blashy. I never considered making Italy a minor power.

Could you not create the same effect by creating China in a multi-player game and then making it a seperate human player who just happens to be the same person as the US player? </font>

I agree with you Blashy, but for a global war scenario I would like to be able to add nations such as China and Japan without have their MPPs be available to the Allies or Axis. The problem that I see in developing a Global War Scenario is that if I add China (or Japan) as an Pro-US allied (Pro-German) minor power then the US (Germany) can spend China's (Japan's) MPPs on US production. What I would like to do is add a nation, called China and restrict the use of its MPPs to building Chinese units. Of course, the allies could always send more MPPs to China via Lend Lease, but basically China would have to rely on is own MPP production AND Chinese Partisans. PS: Unlike the European minors, China is a big country, and giving its production from 10 cities to the Allies would dramatically affect play balance. China: -Large country covered by mountains and forests that limit opportunities for rapid advances, except in coastal areas. -Many large cities -Chinese partisans [ March 12, 2006, 09:38 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

One aspect that this and many other games of the Genre ignore is the aspect of territorial exchanges, which dominated European politics during the 18th to 20th centuries. As stated in earlier posts, I would like to see Germany have the opportunity to offer; for example, Spain territory to influence their diplomatic leanings - Example: French Algeria. At the same time I would also like to see the option to limit MPP production for a minor country to the building of its own units. Example: Spain Joins Axis - At most 50% of its MPPs can go to Germany, the remainder can only be used to fund the building/repair of Spanish units (no research, no diplomacy). Example: In a global war map, 100% of China's MPP production can only be used by China, not by its allied nations - the UK, USA and USSR. How so, click on the minor nation from the war map and then bring up its production screen. Here you will see the MPPs it has available an the available production choices. You would not see this amount on the main screen (which is limited to the 5 major powers). Essentially, each minor nation would have a field for the % of its production that can be given to an ally. For most minor nations the default percentage for MPPs that would be transferred would be 100% (Romania, Bulgaria, Ireland). For some the percentage might be zero (i.e. China and Japan in a Global War scenario), for others it might be 75% (for Spain and Turkey). The remaining MPPs could only be used to build units of that minor nation. Thus you would need an array storing for each minor nation the % and current MPP balance. [ March 12, 2006, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Good idea. In fact, SC2 goes part of the way there for countries like Sweden will trade with Germany while they are neutral. It would be interesting to have, as you suggested, functionality so that if the Neutral country is more than 50% pro-Allied then their trade with the Axis declines and if more than 50% pro Axis their trade with the Axis increases. More than that, I would like to see other benefits from being more than 50% pro neutral or pro Axis. Example: 80% Pro Allied - Allied ships can be repaired and supplied in neutral nation's port. Attack on Neutral Port requires DOW 80% Pro Axis - Axis ships can be repaired and supplied in neutral nation's port. Attack on Neutral Port requires a DOW.

Yes. Excellent example.

Any chance for an early posting of the diplomacy scripting notes?

Can one use a tracing image to make new maps in SC2? I mean, load an image of the map you want, then place SC2 tiles on it to get a best fit, and finally remove the tracing image background.

Futhermore, I would like to see: 1) Activation chits implemented in some way for operational games. What are activation chits? In some wargames you would either 1)roll an activation result or less for units commanded by a specific genral to be able to move or 2) be only able to activate a random number of units each turn. This better recreates the fog of war. 2) Unknown unit stength until first battle option. In some wargames you did not know the actual strength of your combat unit or HQ units until its first battle. Is that Regiment a 7-4 or an 3-4 (Combat Strength - Movement Allowance)? 3) Unit Icons for the American Civil War period and Ancients Period included. Then players could build could select which icon (without having to build their own), that ships with the game, they want to use in their own mods.

For operational level battle scenarios - Battle of the Bulge, Operation Market Garden - I would like to see a retreat rule, road tiles, bridge tiles, railroad tiles and supply rules where supply lines can only be traced to a road and then to a supply center (on map or off map).

For operational level battle scenarios - Battle of the Bulge, Operation Market Garden - I would like to see a retreat rule, road tiles and bridge tiles.

Against the AI, if you take Egypt you can take Iraq and gain oil & plunder, in addition to entering Russia from the south.