Edwin P.

Excellent point,Korut Zelva. I would also think that the presence of liberated cities should increase the chance of partisan units appearing. Example 0 Liberated City = 15% for partisans 1 Liberated City = 30% for partisans 2 Liberated Cities = 45% for partisans

True, many "Partisans were more or less spontanious and improvised organizations formed often without any central command structures." But the only effective partisan resistance operations such as those of Yugoslavia, China and Russia had a central command structure and received supplies and support from other governments. Those partisan operations that were denied support by the allied withered away and died; witness the fate of the Monarchists in Yugoslavia. The unpredictability of the research tech would mirror the difficulty of building truely effective partisan operations in a conquered nation or preparing for post surrender activities in your own nation (which was done by Communist Albania, Yugoslavia, Cuba and China).

Reading through the developer notes I admire how the costs, unit limits and research options are designed to interact. With build limits on units the USA may find that although it cannot build more units it can strengthen those few units it does have with technology. I like how the strike range of strategic bombers increases at 2 titles per long range tech level vs a 1 title increase for fighter aircraft. I wonder if they, strategic bombers, will be able to strike at cities even if the city has not been spotted? I say this because cities are always at a fixed location and can't move like fleets or combat units. I wonder if enemy air units will have any effect on your air unit's ability to spot enemy land units if they are adjacent to an enemy air unit. - Essentially; Enemy units next to an Enemy Fighter air unit can't be spotted by friendly air units. Any thoughts? That said, I still would like to see Partisan Development added to the list of research options. This would reflect the expenditure of resources to establish partisans in an occupied country. Essentially, each level (max 1 level) in partisan development would allow a nation to activate partisans in one conquered country. Now supporting partisan units in a country would be risky, aka research, as one could never be sure how long it would take to develop such an organization. It might take 1 month or it might take 2 years of hard work, all dependent upon how much resources (research chits) are allocated to the effort. This research area would also increase the importance of maintaining a minimal garrison in conquered countries, as you could never be sure if partisans will appear. Example: UK could select from: Norway, Sweden, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Russia, UK Germany could select from: Finland, Spain, Turkey, Iraq [ February 26, 2005, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Interesting, perspective. Perhaps a reason to reduce the value of the port to zero? Port = Zero = Readiness or Max Strength of Unit in Isolated Port Only Tile Declines; ie Malta, Gibraltar and Gibraltar while Spain is Neutral or Axis Aligned.

Good to hear, in many SC1 games the Axis does not make any attempt to contest Allied control of the Atlantic.

In SC2 Subs have 2 movement modes: Silent and Hunt. I believe, that in Silent mode they can move but can't be spotted or attack.

Naval blockades are never perfect. Weather is always a factor. Consider the scale of each Atlantic hex in S2. Consider the ability of Japanese and US Naval Forces to evade each other in the Pacific, look at the ability of German subs to reach Long Island in New York during WWII. [ February 22, 2005, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

From the SC2 Main Page: "Expanded unit models for Air Fleets (Auto/Intercept/Escort/Ground), Submarines (Hunt/Silent) and HQ's (Auto/Select/Deselection of unit attachments)" "Enhanced diplomatic model that will not only be driven by game events and player pressuring but will allow opposing sides to engage in active counter diplomacy" I believe that Diplomacy is limited to using Diplomacy Chits to affect the Allied/Axis diplomatic leaning of selected neutral countries. [ February 21, 2005, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ February 21, 2005, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Will the Axis AI occasionaly wage a Battle for the Atlantic or will players only experience the Battle for the Atlantic in HvH games? i.e. Will there be a stronger Naval AI in SC2 for both the Allied and Axis forces? I would like to see the AI occassionaly, but not always focus on the Naval War. Example: What if the Allied AI occassionaly sent its navy to the Meditterean at the start of the game to sink the Italian Navy when they enter the war?. Or what if the Allied AI withdrew their ships from the Mediterrean before the Italy entered the war instead of leaving them to sunk by the Human player using the Italian navy in an aggressive manner. [ February 21, 2005, 08:16 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I think it would also be interesting if the German player moved a submarine to the Horn of Africa and X turns later a Japanese sub appeared in the South Atlantic. If this Japanese sub reaches an Axis port then the German player would receive a bonus tech chit or two.

HC, many thanks for your reply. I look forward to reading your answers when the time is right. In the meantime, here's an idea to think about: So, why not have the status of Japan influence the game? Thus Germany might want to expend diplomatic chits to encourage Japan to attack Russia. The Allies might want to expend diplomatic chits to encourage Japan to attack the USA. And why not have the USA player able to select a strategy for fighting the war? Once the war begins the US player might choose to historically focus his forces on the war in Europe. Or the USA player might choose to focus his efforts on the war in the Pacific. If he selects this option then the Russian Siberian transfer occurs early but production available to the US player is reduced by 50% until Japan surrenders. Or the USA player might select peace with Japan. This would eliminate the chance for a Siberian Transfer and increase US production by 50%. Of course, the Russians might be defeated in the East and Japanese units might appear behind their lines in the Urals.

Question: Will the "Malta Effect" work against Allied forces in Sicily if Malta is controlled by the Axis?

This will be possible in SC2. "Multiplayer will include Hotseat, PBEM, as well as Network (TCP/IP) play allowing for up to 6 different players to be connected and play at once."

Many thanks for taking the time to answer, and I understand why the answer is soo For those new to the forum, the last comment on the intelligence tech was that it would likely allow you to know if an unit was in a city hex and/or its surrounding hexes. Such a feature coupled with the ability to make landings with amphibious units will make for a much better game vs AI (and Human opponents). Imagine, you leave Cairo unoccupied to focus all Allied forces on taking Iraq, believing that the Axis AI will not advance into Egypt. Surprise! On the next axis turn Italian Amphibious Corps land in Cario and the hexes flanking this ancient city. How did they know Cairo was unguarded? Superior intelligence. Of course, this is wishful thinking until the powers that be make a final decision on what benefits this tech will confer.

Any updates on what the Intelligence Tech will do?

Cool

I would like to see the placement and size of neutral armies depend upon the actions of their perceived enemies and their diplomatic leanings. Example: If Axis attacks Switzerland and Norway I would like to see Sweden mobilize an extra corps some of the time, with a news popup saying - Sweden Mobilizes Reserves to Defend Neutrality. The news popup reflects the fact that the mobilizaion and disposition of Western European (Non-Soviet) neutral military units was public knowledge. Essentially, Sweden couldn't moblize a corps sized unit in secret. [ February 18, 2005, 06:51 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Many thanks for the information. One more question. Is it possible to link several events to the occurance of one event? Example 1: Today the foreign ministers of the USA and Japan signed a trade and cultural exchange treaty to encourage trade and promote better relations between these two countries. (10% August 1941 if USA is Neutral) --- If USA / JAPAN Trade Treaty then War in Siberia Activated, no Siberian transfer. This reflects a decision by the Japanese to invade Russia as they do not have to worry about a war with the USA. --- If USA / Japan Trade Treary then USA gets bonus Carrier, bonus Cruiser and bonus HQ Unit (McArthur). This reflects the redeployment of assets from the Pacific to the Atlantic due to reduced tensions in the Pacific. Also, in GalCiv, another game that allowed for player created random events, players had the opportunity to select one of three responses to a random event. In fact, all events had to allow for 3 player selected responses. Is something along this line being considered for SC2? In SC2 terms this would be similar to: The Turkish Ambassador has informed us that his government has come into possesion of information that would help our war effort. They would be willing to share this information in exchange for proper compensation. a. Send him away. (No Effect) b. Offer Turkey 50MPP in economic aid. (25% you see location of all enemy air and naval units during your next turn) c. Tell him that we will give his country 200MPP in financial aid. (90% you see location of all enemy air and naval units during your next turn) [ February 17, 2005, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I like SC2s potential for player created randomly selected game changing events that will prevent players from always using a single strategy to achieve victory. Example: Event 1: What if the Baltic States joined the AI controlled Axis? (5% when Poland Surrenders) Event 2: What if Turkey joined the AI controlled Allies? (5% After Allies liberate Brest in France) Event 3: What if Iraq revolts to join the AI controlled player? (5% after France Surrenders) Event 4: What if Spain joins the AI controlled Axis? (5% after France surrenders)

Good, this feature should not change. I would like to see the AI relcaim tech chits to take advantage of this feature as needed - i.e. if the Axis has launched a Sea Lion and the UK needs Corps to defend the London and Manchester then the AI should consider relcaimiing tech chits. In Sc1 the AI would never disband units or research chits. [ February 16, 2005, 07:18 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Normally, before war with Russia erupts I aim to conquer Denmark, Norway and Sweden for the plunder. Sometimes I also destroy the port of Gibraltar and send my Italian fleet through to the Atlantic. You can send naval units through an enemy port hex if the value of the port is Zero! At the same time I use the Italians to conquer Greece in one turn via seaborne invasion. The plunder is most useful.

Can you still disband units and reclaim research chits in SC2? Occassionaly, when my opponent launched an early Sea Lion, while the UK navy was returning to England after sinking the Italian Navy, I would be forced to reclaim all of my reseach chits and disband a few naval fleets in order to contain the Axis beachhead by purchasing corps until Russia could enter the war. Though some might think this as being unrealistic, I think that it reflects what happens when one needs to draft every available sailer, cook and bottlewasher into the army. Futhermore, thou you might gain units in the short run it costs you far more to rebuild the units you disbanded.

Looks like major changes in strategy and tactics will be required to secure victory.

Wait until Yugoslavia joins the allies. If you attack it first Soviet war readiness will increase.