Edwin P.

I would like to see the intelligence effect give you a chance to spot the location of enemy air, land and ground units that you could not normally see and give you insight into the breakdown of an opponent's armed forces along with their research piorities and giving a bonus to the use of diplomacy chits. For example: Tech Level 1 - 1% to spot each enemy unit & number of Army units Tech Level 2 - 3% to spot each enemy unit & number of Army and Corps Tech Level 3 - 6% to spot each enemy unit & number of Army, Corps and Armor Tech Level 4 - 10% to spot each enemy unit & number of Army, Corps, Armor and Air Tech Level 5 - 15% to spot each enemy unit & number of Army, Corps, Armor, Air, and Carriers Thus at Tech Level 1 you would know how many Army units your opponent has in the field and you would also have a 1% to spot each unit that they have deployed.

Question: Will the "Malta Effect" affect Allied forces in Italy if Malta is controlled by the Axis?

This post is a collection of ideas for Italian Naval Strategies for the AI based on what we know about SC1 and the new map. First, the Italian AI should have a general idea of how many Allied warships are in the Eastern Med and the Western Med as they can easily be spotted by spies in Spanish Morocco, Vichy Algeria, Malta and Egypt and the numerous fishing boats that were scattered about the Med. The strategy it selects should be influenced by this. For example - The AI should know whether there is 1 allied warship in the Western Med (West of Malta) and 10 warships in the Eastern Med (East of Malta). Second, The AI should have a greater tendency to attack with a consolidated fleet. Too often the Italian Naval AI will attack with half the fleet one turn and then the other half the following turn. Third, The Italian Naval AI should know how to use the Adriatic as a safe harbor until reinforcements can arrive or be built if they are outgunned in the Med. Fourth, The Italian AI should have a greater tendency to conquer Greece as it needs the plunder and and production boost. Furthermore, it should do this with a seaborne invasion and avoid fighting through the mountains to the North. Tactic 1: Italian Corps observes Malta. The corps in Salerno should move to observe what unit is in Malta. Strategy 1: Malta Target Practice. If there is a land unit in Malta (spotted by the corps in Strategy 1) and three or fewer Allied warships in the Med then the Italian navy gains experience by bombarding Malta while the sub interdicts allied shipping. The goal here is to gain experience before engaging the British Fleet. Strategy 2: Preserve the Navy. If the Allied Naval forces outnumber the Italian Navy 2:1 then the Italian navy will seek shelter in the Adriatic. Strategy 3: Head for the Atlantic. Italian Fleet bombards the port at Gibraltar to Zero so it can sail into the Atlantic. Strategy 4: Blockade the Straits Strategy 5: Hunt Down Allied Shipping. With this strategy the Italian aggresively hunts down the British Naval Units in the Med with a fleet that assures at least a 5:3 superiority (ie it does not commit one ship at a time to combat). Strategy 6: Surprise Strategy. The objective of the fleet is to hide from Allied view and allow Axis air units to spot the Allied Ships. Then the Axis Navy pounces. Strategy 7: MidEast Conquest Strategy 8: Turkish Surprise. This rarely used strategy involves bombarding the Turkish port to zero so that Italian transports can sail through the straits to the shores of the Caucaus Mountains in Southern Russia. Forces the Russian player to divert forces from his front lines to guard the rear. Requires 2:1 Italian Naval Superiority in the Eastern Med. Strategy 9: Malta or Bust. The aim here is to conquer Malta. Strategy 10: Vichy or Bust. Support Axis conquest of Vichy France. Strategy 11: Madrid or Bust. Support Axis conquest of Spain. Strategy 12: Defend Italy. Strategy 13: Strong Naval Defense of Italy. Strategy 14: Hide and Hunt. The Italian Navy stays close to Italy unless it has naval superiority in the MEd. If it has Naval Superority (ie 3 to 1) then the fleet consolidates to hunt down enemy ships. [ May 01, 2004, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I like to vary my attacks - in one game go from Germany as Kuniworth says, then in another while going from Germany hit the Turkish straits and sail a force through to the Russian rear, and in another try landing a few corps in Finland and racing through the forest to the Russian rear. It forces the Russians to weaken their front line.

A second KDG's motion for some randomness in the placement of minor country units, especially if the country has reason to suspect its about to be attacked. Example - If Axis invades Sweden before attacking Norway there should be a chance that the Norwegian Corps in Bergan will be recalled to guard Oslo - say 50% - and a 50% that Norway mobilizes another Corps after 3 Turns (based on its MPPs from 2 Cities, 2 Ports and 1 mine). Now Norway has 3 possible setups for the Axis to deal with. Or perhaps the Allies could use a Diplomatic Chit on Norway to encourage its leadership to mobilize another Corps. Simarily Spain should have a chance to moblize another corps (after 3 turns and 6 turns) and reposition its units if the Axis has attacked Sweden and Vichy France as such actions by the Axis may cause the Spainards to believe that they are next. [ April 30, 2004, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I would like to see the AI use more than one strategy to defend France. Currently it will never disband units to purchase an HQ, additional corps, or an armor unit. It will never evacuate units to England or Egypt. Its carriers will never attack Ireland to gain experience before engaging the German army. Nor will it ever have a land unit waiting offsure of Bergan to take the city with Norway falls to the Axis. It will never use the UK and French Fleets to destroy the German Baltic Fleet or the Italian Fleet while the Axis is engaged elsewhere. Perhaps it needs to choose from a selected group of strategies: 1. Destroy Italian Navy - All Allied Ships sail to the Med prepared to engage and sink the Italian fleet before returning to the British Isles ---IF Italian Fleet Destroyed > THEN 2 or 3 Ships remain in the Med to sink any Axis Transports approaching the Middle East the remaining ships return to guard the UK Isles. [ April 30, 2004, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Yes, but ... It's going to be a while before much happens. Not clear at this point what exactly that may be. I'm sure Hubert has his programming ideas, and he's fully aware of the demand for a more robust AI. It's just too soon to say. As I see it from my limited perspective, there are at least three parts to the AI puzzle. One part is the generic multi-level fuzzy-logic AI that is more or less hardwired into the code and needs to be flexible enough to accomodate not only SC2 but all of those other custom games folks are going to create. So there will probably be some tradeoffs between the "ideal" for SC2 and "other" games. We'll have to accept that. Part two is the new scripted AI events we will be able to edit, and that is the biggest planned improvement. What format those will be and what capablities/limitations there may be between our scripts and the generic AI engine remain to be seen. I'm hoping we CAN include many of the various proposals to get the AI to behave in cunning and nefarious ways. Part three would be the various FoW game options that help the AI behave smarter (or at least help compensate for known weaknesses WITHOUT cheating or unfair advantages like +2! Experience). There are probably other aspects to consider as well, like how to get the AI to "think" about long-term research and diplomacy and such. Rest assured these are all on the radar screen. Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope for the best. </font>

Excellent idea.

Perhaps the British Fleet can find shelter in the Red Sea out of sight of the Italian Navy. It appears that the sea hexes south of the Suez canal are enough to shelter several naval ships. With a Bomber in Cairo they can spot any approaching Axis transports. Then they can venture forth thru the Suez Canal to sink them to the surprise of the Axis commander. [ April 29, 2004, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Why was Iran added to the list of countries? What effect will Iran have on the game? Also, the new map includes most of Saudi Arabia and the Red Sea. What effect will this have on the game? [ April 29, 2004, 06:11 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I believe the reason is that that symbol can't be shown in certain European markets. If they included it then SC2 could not be sold in those countries.

The more I hear the more I am impressed by SC2. These changes, and those mentioned in other posts, mean that strategy is much more important in SC2 and that no longer will there be one cookie cutter way to secure victory or starve off defeat. Now the Allies and Axis have a reason to fight over North Africa and the Axis have a reason to wage war in the Atlantic. With the map so much larger there is more opportunity for surprises for both sides. Not only that, it also looks like games will have a fair chance of lasting into 1944-1945. When the Allied offensive comes in the West the Axis will have much more territory to trade for time as they attempt to defeat the Allied landings in the West. [ April 28, 2004, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

A directory of the major posts on this forum dealing with features in SC2. Related to Game Play & Strategy Battle for the Atlantic Amphibious Units and Amphibious Tech How will the Size of Russia Affect Game Play The Malta Effect Weather & SC 2 Urals Industry Effect Minor Country Production - In SC2 Minor Countries can build new units Research in SC2 Related to the Editor Script News Political Capitals and Industrial Centers Editing Exisiting Maps Interviews with Hubert Cater, the Game Designer May 10, 2004 Interview [ May 19, 2004, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

In the new map Russia is a lot larger. What advantage will this offer Russia? How will it affect German strategy? Does it mean that Russia has more cities? Does it mean that the Russian Capital will relocate farther back from the Main lines? Will it offer the Russian player a choice of where his capital relocates to if Moscow is taken? Will the USSR now have 4 alternate capital cities, 3 in the western part of the USSR and one in the Eastern part?

That's a good idea, but how would you handle the large amount of MPPs that is freed up. The Axis would use it to purchase even more units.

I agree. Although I would also like to give the Russians the opportunity to shoot bad HQ units (ie shoot the general in charge and permanently remove this HQ unit from the force pool) and get a free replacement a few turns later. Thus the Russians would be able to replace poor picks but at a cost of not having a HQ unit available for a few turns, and they might end up getting a new unit that is worst than the one they disbanded. This would differentiate Communist Russia from the other Allied nations and reflect Stalin's tendency to shoot poorly performing generals. I would also give each nation at least one HQ with a known value to select based on their reputation and position when the war first broke out. For example - for the United States it would be Eisenhower. Then a player could decide between Eisenhower at 540MPP and a randomly determined HQ unit at 400MPP. For Russia the known HQ unit would be Timoshenko (5). [ April 27, 2004, 08:10 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ April 27, 2004, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

Idea for the Game Start PreGame Start Phase - Choice Boxes for deployment choices made prior to attack on Poland, and then a similar turn for the Allies before the Normal turn starts. Axis Choices: 1.) Allow the Axis player before his first turn starts to select one of 3 starting positions for his subs in the Atlantic. (North, Mid, or South Atlantic) 2.) Also allow him to select before his first turn starts whether he starts the game with 2 subs in the Atlantic or 3 subs in the Atlantic (and one less in the Baltic). This would make the sub hunt in the Atlantic more interesting and no longer the easy kill it currently is while preserving game balance. Allied Choices 1) Selects initial convoy route [ April 27, 2004, 01:44 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

I like the concept of HQ units and how SC implements them. But as Rambo says, who is going to buy the sorry German leaders. The issue is how to create the uncertainty of war when you did not know for certain how well your commanders would perform in battle. Perhaps a system in which a HQ units Commander is selected randomly. Then a player can replace that HQ leader with another one at a cost. What cost? - Say 100MPP - The HQ effectiveness is negated for 2 turns while the leader is replaced - Depending on the government the replaced leader might be Shot (Russia) or put back in the pool as a know commander. - Also political considerations might prevent you from always replacing generals, the chance of this occuring is higher for Italy and France. - Also if the HQ unit is attacked their should be a small chance (say 1%) that its leader is killed and replaced by a randomly selected general. Just a few thoughts on the issue.

Excellent list, much appreciated.

I would like the ability to stack ships in port; however, if the port is attacked only one ship in port should be able to defend and all should have a chance to take damage. Futhermore, only one ship should be able to counter attack from a port hex. Only one ship in a port should be able to attack out of a port hex. Perhaps only the strongest one. Much like Pearl Harbor, get caught in a port and you are a sitting duck, you are likely anchored and can't all manuever at once.

JerseyJohn, I agree that it would be hard to get information on all of the leaders, but one should be able to get information on the outstanding ones or the ones that were really bad. Whose is the General that landed at Anzio and did not try to advance off the beach until Kesselring had it surrounded? But a key feature of any war is that you do not know who your good generals are until they have a few battles under their belt. I would much prefer a game in which you might know the ratings of the top few but below that its a matter of luck with a chance for really bad generals or really good ones. I also liked your earlier proposal for rating HQs on Offensive and Defensive ability. But of course all of these proposed changes might not be worth it in terms of enhancing the playability of the game.

I would really like to see an initiative and a speed rating added to each HQ unit. The speed rating would be a penalty to AP assigned to units commanded by that HQ. Thus units commanded by that HQ would have AP = AP - Speed Rating (either 0 or 1). An Army unit might end up with AP of 3 -1 = 2 if commanded by a rather cautious general. This would reflect the nature of some generals to be cautious and thus prone to advance units at a slower pace. The initiative rating would reflect the fact that sometimes orders got fouled up and units did not move when they were supposed to. This would be on a scale of 1 to 10 with a 10 = 100% to move or attack and a 1 a 55% to move or attack. Thus for an HQ unit with a Initiative Rating of 9 the Units commanded by it would have a 95% to move during a players turn. This also reflects the fact that sometimes, those perfectly planned and coordinated attacks don't go so well.