Edwin P.
-
Posts
2,956 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Edwin P.
-
-
I agree, a Naval Production tech that reduced the time to build a ship by 1 month per tech level (max 3 levels) would be appreciated.
Germany was turning out subs in only 3 months by the end of the war as opposed to 9 months at the war's start.
Why? Germany switched to using mass production techniques for submarine production. The subs would be manufactured in sections which were transported to the shipyards and assembled there.
Being able to turn out submarines or destroyers in only three months would dramatically change the naval war in SC2 - making it easier to counter the opponents strategy - if you had researched Naval Production Tech.
-
Assaults Against Beach Garrisons
If implemented I would expect that corps (and only corps) could assault the beaches at 50% of normal readiness.
Perhaps, reducing the penalty by 5% for each turn they spent in amphibious training before boarding an amphibous transport.
Example:
A corps selects mode: Amphibious and each turn while in Amphibious its penalty for its next Amphibous assault is reduced by 5%.
When the corps attacks, it has a chance to force the defending unit to retreat one tile.
-
The problem I see is that new players don't use Naval units cautiously. They use them like replaceable corps. They don't wait to engage the enemy on their own terms.
That said, I would like to see Naval Units have the option of using Tactical modes that can give players more control over a battle.
Example:
Mode > Avoid Combat - a naval ship under orders to avoid combat has a chance (based on Experience Advantage, Speed Advantage, and Weather) to avoid combat, and cannot counter attack in this mode.
Example: Destroyer unit is attacked by a Battleship. If the Destroyer is in Avoid Combat Mode it has a chance to avoid combat that turn.
The Chance would be based on its Speed Advantage (+10% per AP advantage), Experience (+10% per Experience Advantage), and Weather (+20% if Stormy Seas).
This would simulate the naval fleet sailing away once it sights the enemy fleet, and not staying around to engage them.
A faster and more experienced fleet has a greater chance to evade combat.
-
1. Italy - I would like to see Italian build limits for submarine units increased by 1, and the American build limits increased as they did not have the losses to men and materials that the European powers had.
2. UK vs Sealion - I find that the UK is strong enough already, the key is knowing how to use your air units to spot the enemy transports and surface navy to sink them. Futhermore, an early sealion means increased USA and Russian readiness.
3. UK vs German Navy - The biggest mistake I see players making is not researching ASW tech, Naval Doctrine, or LR tech for spotting the Axis fleets or building Destroyers. All of these together can make for a most powerful Royal Navy, if the Allied player has the patience to wait and engage the German fleet when he has the advantage.
4. HC mentioned adding a morale penalty when a capital city fell and the capital was moved to another city. I like this idea as it gives the players an historical incentive to defend Moscow.
5. I would like to see the experience advantage give a player's unit a chance to avoid the surprise penalty - as a more experienced unit is less likely to be surprised.
6. Italy is weak, if you don't allow Italy to conquer additional countries. You have a choice, a stronger German economy, or a weaker Germany and a stronger Italy.
[ November 06, 2007, 11:42 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]
-
One idea to consider is not allowing major power neutral fleets to move further than 5 tiles from the closest city of that neutral nation until war readiness is greater than 80%, for example.
Thus Italian units could freely move between Libya and Italy while Italy is neutral but American naval units can't move far from the American coast.
-
Excellent point Liam.
Quality sometimes counts more than Quantity. And if you don't have enough pilots planes sitting on the ground will not do you any good. It took time for the allies; including GB, to build up their air force. One reason why they (GB) prevailed in the Battle for Britain was that the Axis divided their fleets by sending air units to other fronts.
-
I like the changes re: Loss of Capital city and the loss of units in production.
That said, I also don't think that the UK is too weak at the start. Historically they were weak at the start until their build up their forces and received ships from the USA. The weakness in air units could be countered if the UK player purchased AA units, which they don't and which in my mind represent short range fighters dedicated to protecting a specific ragion of the country.
That said, I think that it would improve the UKs ability to wage a naval war if;
a. USA (only USA and Germany) could transfer destroyers (or subs) to allied nations at a cost of a slight loss in combat strength (i.e. 1 to 3 points). Thus the USA could build destroyers and transfer them to the UK as they are produced. This would recreate the lend lease situation of WWII.
Mechanically, you would right click on a unit select Transfer and then select one of the list cooperative allied nations listed (you could not transfer units to a non-cooperative ally).
[ November 02, 2007, 06:41 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]
-
Surprise Encounters.
I would like to see the chance for a surprise encounter in destroyer meets submarine and submarine meets destroyer based on the relative experience of the two fleets.
An experienced destroyer fleet meeting an inexperienced submarine fleet should have a chance to avoid a surprise engagement since its fleet commander is more experienced.
Example:
20% per experience advantage to avoid a surprise encounter.
Case 1: Destroyer Exp 0 encounters sub Exp 0 = 100% surprise encounter (100% sub strikes first)
Case 2: Destroyer Exp 2 encounters sub Exp 0 = 60% surprise encounter (i.e. 60% sub strikes first)
Case 3: Destroyer Exp 2 encounters sub Exp 1 = 80% surprise encounter (i.e. 80% sub strikes first)
[ October 31, 2007, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]
-
The one change I would make is to increase the default USA build limits, as the USA did not face the production and resource limits that affected the other powers.
-
As the Axis I would like Intel to tell me how much the enemy is receiving via merchant shipping convoy routes, and as the Allies for Intel to understate this reporting.
-
I have not seen any game breaking bugs yet and find the game's AI much improved at a tactical level.
The few bug related posts I have read referred to 1) running a game designed on PCs on an iMac and 2) items that are really game design issues, not bugs.
-
The extra port in France means more choices for the invading armies, and increases the chance for a spirited campaign for French liberation.
More importantly, with rail lines limiting your ability to operate units I found that 1) AA tech becomes more important for the Axis if they want to operate units through Paris (as I have found that if I can operate units to Paris I can usually defeat the Allied invasion force, but if the Allied disrupt the rail lines through Paris it takes longer for the Axis to reinforce the front lines) and 2) taking Vichy is more important as it allows you to operate units via Southern France.
-
Too bad there is not a "Combat Engineering" Tech that would;
1. Reduce the time to build fortifications
2. Allow an engineer unit to build a temporary port that lasts for 1 turn per CE tech level
Example:
At CE tech level 2 an engineer unit can build a port that lasts for 2 turns, just enough time to support the landing of additional troops
At CE tech level 0 an engineer cannot build a tempory port (Build Port mode is greyed out)
-
I like SeaMonkey's concept for a CAP - Combat Air Patrol mode.
Perhaps, CAP patrol would block spotting by air units in adjacent tiles, unless the unit performaing CAP was attacked.
This would allow players to secretly mass for a counterstrike if they maintain control of the air over the assembly area with air units flying CAP.
-
Press the F4 key, and end your turn. Then the AI will play against itself.
Or press the F4 Key while the AI is making its move.
Note, that it may take a few seconds until you see an F4 text message in the upper left hand corner of the screen indicating that AI vs AI combat has been turned on.
-
You can surround a unit and cut it of from supply in SC2. An out of supply unit can't be reinforced, its morale drops each turn it is out of supply, and it can't be rebuilt at half price if it is destroyed (as no survivors escaped to form the nucleus of a new unit).
Of course, some players don't focus on cutting off a unit or units from supply before attacking them. They prefer the more costly brute force approach to combat.
In SC2 there are several ways to do this;
a. Bomb the city or port that is supplying the unit(s) so that it can no longer serve as a source of supply.
b. Destroy the HQ unit that is supplying the units and giving them a combat bonus.
c. Use a pincer attack to isolate them from the the nearest source of supply.
In fact, cutting off the Soviet army's supply line is the key to a rapid victory in the East.
Many players overlook this facet of the game.
-
The Canadian plane can't move out of Canada.
Otherwise, right click the American plan and select operate. You can move it to any highlighted tile in the USA or Europe at a cost in MPPs.
-
Perhaps, its a surprise attack? The defenders had no warning and no time to prepare.
-
FYI - Most Lend Lease supplies arrived in Russia via Iran.
-
I like this concept, though I would have it apply a percent of the time - with the percent based on the rating of the leader.Originally posted by Commander Darken:But if Rommel, Guderian, Montgomery or Patton (...) are caught, these named leaders should not return. You should only be able to rebuild a nameless leader (with low value) instead of a "destroyed" named leader (with values of 6-9).
Higher rated leaders that lead from the front such as Patton and Rommel would have a higher chance of being killed in battle. Lower rated leaders that direct supply operations from the rear would have a lower chance of being killed in battle.
Example: Rommel (rating 8) has an 80% of being killed (and being replaced by a lower rated HQ unit) if his HQ unit is destroyed in battle. There is a 20% that he escapes death and his HQ unit can be rebuilt.
-
True, but HQ units should have a chance to be permanently replaced by another randomly selected HQ unit if they are eliminated in combat.
Example:
Eisenhower (Rating 8) HQ is destroyed in combat.
There is a 10% that the Eisenhower unit cannot be rebuilt and is permanently removed from play, but you can rebuild another randomly selected HQ unit whose rating is hidden from view until it is rebuilt. It may be a HQ unit of a higher or lower rating.
[ September 11, 2007, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]
-
I ran into the same problem and resolved it by:
1. Right clicking the shortcut,
2. Selecting Properties
3. On the Shortcut tab selecting advanced
4. Then selecting the run as administrator checkbox.
-
Oil from South AmericaOriginally posted by Timskorn:Interesting, why was the Caribbean so high? Bermuda Triangle?
-
Carriers and Special Forces
in Strategic Command 2 Blitzkrieg and Weapons and Warfare
Posted
Timskorn, I like your concept of additional modes for carriers, and would like to see this concept extended to other naval units as it would add more strategy to the naval war.