Edwin P.

Thanks for the short and long answer (which has since been edited out). HC's decision to allow for user created scripts that activate some of the time will make the game more interesting and less predictable.

Perhaps, you could recreate the different governments in SC2 by having government types affect ones ability to DOW other nations. For example Germany, Italy and the USSR have a 100% that their DOW actions are automatically accepted. UK and USA have only a 50% that any DOW by them against a neutral nation is accepted by their government that turn. For example - If the UK attempts to DOW Ireland then there is a 50% that the British parliament does not agree and the DOW must be retried the next turn.

Agreed, if you encircle it then the unit can only reinforce to 5.

Will the event/movement scripts allow for a user defined percentage chance of the script executing? Example: IF (X) Then % (Y). Example: IF (Allies DOW Norway) Then 10% (Sweden Joins Axis) Example: IF (UK Surrenders Before 01/01/1942) Then 50% (US Gains 2 Carriers AND US gains 2 Cruisers AND Popup Message - Roosevelt orders Pacific Fleet to the Atlantic) [ May 20, 2004, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

1) Infantry weapons -Affects SA/SD (soft attack/soft defense) 2) Anti-tank weapons - Affects TA/TD (tank attack and tank defense) 3) Mechanization - Affects APs for Armies and Corps (APs are action points and are used for movement) 4) Naval Bombardment 5) Infrastructure 6) Heavy Tanks - Affects SA/SD & TA/TD [ May 20, 2004, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

The main benefit in surrendering, in game terms, is that it deprives the enemy forces of experience. If Paris is surrounded by the Germans and at Strength 5 then it might be preferable for the allies to surrender France to the Axis instead of letting the Germans earn some easy experience.

I believe that the game has hard and soft limits by "unit type" that can be set in the editor.

That's interesting, perhaps there will be a script template for news popups on certain dates or events (ie Belgium Surrenders) to add some historical flavor to the game. ie Dec 7,1941 - Japanese attack Pearl Harbor - just an announcement of what occurred in a pop-up box, perhaps with a picture (a US GOV public domain jpg image) of the attack in progress. ie Surrender of Holland Trigger - 25% that this pop-up event happens: Queen WILHELMINA escapes to London, with a picture of the Queen. [ May 19, 2004, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

A collection of posts on the script editor to be included in SC2. [ May 19, 2004, 11:04 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Excellent Idea: minor ports, minor cities and impassable terrian. I would also like to see terrain that is impassible to Tank Groups and mechanized units for use on smaller scale maps - don't want any tanks climbing mountains in Korea.

Or a WWI Scenario - US, UK, France/Italy, Russia vs Germany/Turkey and the Austrian Hungarian Empire - using the same map. The key here is writing a script that will allow the Russians to sue for peace without giving Germany control of all of its cities, kinda like a Vichy France option for Russia. Say if Germany takes City X and City X or Russian loses more than x number of units then Vichy Russia Occurs - Russia Goes Neutral, Germany gains territory. Armor units would also see their movement rate reduced to equal that of Armies. In fact, in my mind the Movement rate of armies would be reduced to 2 hexes, armor to 2 hexes and corps to 4 hexes. Aircraft would have their spotting range reduced to 3 or 4 hexes and their ground attack abilities weakened. Carriers, Bombers and Rocket units would not be allowed. Futhermore, the impact of technology advances should be severely limited in any WWI game. Given the reduced impact of air power and recductions in movement rates any non-historical attacks on neutral nations will probably be minimized. Any thoughts? [ May 17, 2004, 11:01 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Agreed, the Axis AI never launched large Amphibious invasions and the Allied AI only invaded France. In my opinion the most important amphibious invasions in general play are: 1. Norway/Sweden - simply put, without their production the Axis AI is dead meat. 2. Greece - so the Italians can take Greece in one turn 3. Vichy - so that Vichy falls on one turn 4. Spain 5. Sea Lion 6. Egypt 7. North Africa -so the allies can take those Italian Cities 8. Italy - so that humans have to guard it.

To get a realistic NA campaign you are going to have to playtest this scenario with and without the various ports used by all sides. The number of ports in North Africa affects strategy, movement and supply of units. Adding another historical port may may be more realistic from a map-centric point of view but adversly affect the historical ebb and flow of combat in this theater that the designer is looking for. This is question that can't be answered without playtesting. [ May 16, 2004, 09:42 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Have a look at the following post for information about the Malta Effect Directory of Major Posts Regarding SC2 - Including the Malta Effect for North Africa Supply

I agree, without knowing about the AI its hard to make a recommendation. I was thinking more along the lines of being able to script a randomly determined bonus that the AI would get at a specific AI intelligence level in a particular scenario so you would not know exactly what you were facing, as the AI (in SC1)tends to follow the same build and combat strategy in a scenario. For example at Genius AI there would be a series of text lines for the AI to select a bonus for the AI in each 1939 scenario, for example: 01 Axis [Ger Subs +3 Units], 02 Axis [spain Joins Axis Turn 23], 03 Axis [Ger Rocket +3 Units], 11 Allied [uS Readiness +10%], 12 Allied [uS Bombers +3 Units], 13 Allied [uS Bomber Tech +2, US Long Range Tech +2] One improvement I hope to see is an AI that will choose between a wider range of comparable strategies and internally track which ones are more successful, so it can adapt to different games. For example if in Scenario 1 a higher level of research (or more armor units) pays off then it will tend towards using that in future games in Scenario 1. If it does better with no research in scenario 4 then it will place a lower priority on research when playing scenario 4. [ May 16, 2004, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I proposed a new AI Level called Genius where the AI receives a randomly determined bonus. Thus not only does the AI fight better but it receives a game changing bonus that varies from game to game and makes a game against the AI a bit more unpredicatable. Axis AI Genius Bonus may include: a. Germany receives 3 Free tech chits or b. Germany starts with an extra 3 subs or c. Germany starts with 3 Rocket units and level 2 Rockets or d. Germany starts with 3 diplomacy chits or e. Spain (or Finland and Sweden) joins Axis after Axis Minors Join f. Italy starts with Gun Laying Radar Level 1 (as they shared tech with Germany) or g. Neutral Turkey annexes Iraq, stopping one lend lease route to Russia or h. Italy starts with 1 HQ unit and 1 Engineer Unit or i. Axis spy steals UK codes, Axis AI spots all UK Naval Units for xx Turns or j. Germany receives a bonus Engineer and Paratrooper Unit at start or k. Germany starts at a full war economy or l. Axis AI receives 2 of the above bonuses. Allied AI Genius Bonus may include a. US starts with 2 bonus HQ Units or b. US enters war with 2 Carriers from their Pacific fleet or c. US enters war with 2 bombers or d. US (or USSR) readiness jumps an extra 10%, so it enters the war sooner than expected or e. UK receives 3 bonus corps in Egypt - ANZAC, South African and Indian or f. USSR Units start three hexes back from the border with Germany or g. Turkey Joins Allies after Axis takes Rostov or h. Ultra - Allied AI Can spot all Axis Naval and Air Units for xx turns or i. UK starts with bonus Engineer and HQ unit or j. Allied AI receives 2 of the above bonuses. Of course, the bonus(es) should vary by scenario. [ May 16, 2004, 12:50 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Not only that, it should lead to an improved AI. In SC1 Russia would research Rockets but never build any, and Italy would research Armor and sometimes not research Anti-Tank. Now in the new game, I can set Italy to only research Anti-Tank and Gun-Laying Radar. Question - Can I add a script that will set the Italian research limit for gun-laying radar to zero and reclaim any tech chits in that area IF Italy has Fewer than X Surface ships? You don't want the AI researching something if it will never build any new units of that type, and Italy could never afford to build new surface ships.

JP Wagner, the editor will allow you to set the maximum build level for each type of unit by country. Thus you can set the bomber limit to zero. You can also set bomber research limit to zero. This will prevent the AI or human players from building or researching this type of unit. In my notes for my Ancient Age of Rome scenario I am planning to set Rockets to Zero, and rename Battleships as War Galleys and disable subs and bombers and airfleets, along with operational moves. As for research, most options will be disabled as technological advances during the era was quite limited. [ May 15, 2004, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I kinda through ideas out, and some stick, others stink on reflection, others veer "far far away" from KISS but others end up starting a most interesting thread. I suggested the scorched earth action option for units as this was a policy followed by many armies when advancing and retreating, from the Russians and Germans in WWII back to the Vandals and Huns during the Decline of Rome. I also needed a voluntary (not automatic) scorched earth option for some of my planned scenarios. As for the SC2 editor I am looking forward to creating a scenario on the Korean War, D-Day modeled after the Avalon Hill Game (with no tech advances), the US Civil War and one strategic level game about Ancient Rome. I will probably start with the D-Day Scenario (the Axis knows an invasion is coming but not where) and then move onto Korea. One problem that I am contemplating is a way around is a way to create mountain hexes that are not passable to Armor but are passable to infantry, for my Korean War Scenario at 10miles per title. As JP Wagner also suggested, I would also like to see the editor have the option to draw rail lines between cities and allowing players to restict operational moves to these rail lines. Why? at large scales rail hubs were very important to the movement of troops and supplies - especially during the American Civil War and the invasion of Russia. [ May 15, 2004, 05:52 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I would like to see the Axis units have the option to conduct a voluntary scorched earth policy in Russia. Essentially, a unit in a city hex can use all of its movement points to perfrom an Action: Raze City. This would essentially reduce the value of the value to the city to 0 and the city would recover at its normal rate of 1 point per turn. Axis units might use this to slow a Russian advance in the later stages of the game. Of course any unit doing this would deprive surrounding friendly units of a source of supply.

At some point in time the Russians will usually go over to a offense and the Axis will need to adopt a defensive strategy on the Eastern Front, either to respond to Allied actions in the West or to regroup. One problem in SC1 is that the AI can't handle this very well. Often times my Russians will go around the Axis lines to cut off units on the Southern front and the AXIS AI will not attempt to break them out. Then the AI will usally see six to ten units surrounded and destroyed, one by one. Units which could have been used to form a defensive line around Warsaw. I think that the AI needs one strategy when it is on the offense and another when it is on the defense. It also needs to be able to select and choose which strategy to employ for each front (Guard, Defense, Build-up, Offense) along with assigning priorities to each front. Perhaps if the Allies invade France adopting a defensive strategy in Russia and a build-up strategy in France. Once built up switching to an offensive strategy in France. Once the allied invasion force is defeated then switching to a defensive strategy in France and a Build up Strategy in Russia. Then from the Russian Build-up to a Russian Offensive Strategy. Guard - Minimal Forces assigned to guard this front Defense - Aim is to contain and slow enemy advance Build-up - Build up forces for an offensive by concentrating airpower and operating in units Offensive - Go on Offense to destroy the enemy.

In WWII the Allies landed at ports on the Western Coast of Morocco. In light of the new restrictions on Amphibious landings would it make sense to add a port along the Atlantic Coast of French Algeria? Operation Torch - Allied Invasion of North Africa [ May 14, 2004, 10:41 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

What does amphibious transports do and how is this new unit affected by the new Amphibious Tech research area?

I strongly agree with everything that you said. The AI's D-Day is very weak. Part of this is because if the AIis landing in France the Axis can strip all other areas, including Italy, of units as it knows that the AI will never attack there. Another issue, the AI does not know how to bluff. It will never move units adjacent to the coast and then withdraw them without landing. Just the action of threating a landing weakens that Axis as it is forced to proceed on the assumption that an invasion is coming. Additionally, the AI never launches a serious effort to liberate the Nordic Countries or even gain experience by attacking any unit in Bergan. This failure on the part of the AI allows the Axis to protect Norway with a minimum number of units. It should be noted that in SC2 the AI will have access to amphibious units that can land on the same turn that they move adjacent to the coast. ------------------------------------ Norwegian Liberation Strategic Options for the Allied AI 1. Bombard Bergan with Ships and Carrier Air if no Axis Air in Area. 2. If have LR2 & Russia at War then move Air Units to Northern UK and Attack Bergan with Land Based Air and Carrier Air and Land Corps to take Bergan. ---------------------------------------- Another Issue is that the AI does not know how to use the Intelligence Reports. If it knows that the Axis has six air units and all six have been spotted on the eastern front then it can confidentialy move its carriers to attack in the west. Nor will it use its bomber unit to spot the location of enemy units prior to invading France. Nor will it use land based air fleets to draw off interceptors before making carrier based attacks. [ May 14, 2004, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Anzio I think the key is that the threat of being able to land divisions/corps behind enemy lines forces the enemy to divert resources from his front lines. If the AI is not allowed to threaten the human player's rear line then the human player is free to concentrate all of his forces at the front lines, something that was not done in real life. In SC1 Human players would never station any troops in Italy or Beglium as they new the AI would never invade there, a most unrealistic situation. Just a threat of the AI being bold and audacious means that the human player must hold reserves in his rear, much as happened historically. This in turn weakens the human players front line and makes for a more interesting game. [ May 14, 2004, 09:51 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]