dougman4

Whatever experience gain the attacker has over the defender, they both lose as they take reinforcements. The defender remains extremely difficult to kill, and easy to reinforce. There are so many MPP's available, that the defender can reinforce all units with enough left over to spawn new ones for the rare occurance when it is necessary to replace a piece that actually dies. The game is unbalanced in this respect.

EV, I like the way you think. I'd welcome any of your suggestions as toggle-able options! Just, please give us options so that those of us who prefer a different playability and balance have the opportunity to do so! [ October 22, 2002, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: dougman4 ]

Granted that, SeaMonkey, however because of the present game balance - EVERYTHING depends upon removing an enemy unit from the board. Merely beating it down is a waste of time (experience gains notwithstanding). So, everything depends upon careful battle adjudication. Often, the difference between removing an enemy unit and leaving it on the board with a strength of 1 is the order in which you fire your units. It is crucial to have the power to unselect and reselect a unit that has moved and be able to fire it later.

This is so funny! This precisely puts a finger on a major game imbalance. Reinforcements are so cheap that there's no reason not to reinforce all units all of the time! Let's auto do it! Maybe we could code an auto attack for every unit with strength of 8 or more, and an auto reinforce for units whose strengths are 7 or less. Then we could go to work and come home 9 hours later and see if the battle lines had changed. Doubt it!

I guess I bristle at the thought that this is so complex. Given that time and money are constraints, simply pick the low hanging fruit – the easiest or most popular options to code. Don’t sweat playability or balance. The whole point of making them options is that players who choose the options live with the corresponding ramifications. If the options are not invoked, the current game is unchanged. There is only upside in coding these options.

I like all Allied countries having the same turn. In my mind, this is a wonderful abstraction of the A&A rules which makes hotseating & PBEM move more quickly. Good job, Hubert!

Thanks again, Hubert, I gain insight with every posting you make. 1) I understand the added options might not be simple to code. But, don’t let playability or balance deter you. The very fact they are options lets the player decide what conditions he wants to play under are (and he can always play using the default settings!). In PBEM and hotseat, both players play under the same conditions, and our preferred settings may differ significantly from yours. If AI complicates the coding, perhaps start with hotseat or PBEM – which to me is the true fun of SC and the reason many people buy the game. 2) While you wonderfully laid bare the cause effect regarding HQ units and experience, I found over time the logjam doesn’t un-jam. Even successful attackers have to reinforce after a few times of whacking down enemy units. This depletes the experience they previously had gained. Presently, there is no counterbalance effective at unclogging static battle lines – which is why I would be so happy to see the five golden options I described above implemented. 3) This phenomenon happens in France as easily as in Russia. It is by no means unique to Russian territory; I’ve seen stationary battlefronts in France go on for many game years. 4) Naturally, there are many talented players out there. I tend to believe though, that experienced wargamers will find “sticky” battle lines difficult to avoid, and last far longer than they wish. 5) But I hold out hope that none of this need be debated, as this becomes a matter of preference, and I don’t wish to subjugate anyone to my preference. I would just like to be able to toggle on the preferences of my choosing.

OK, though sometimes the squeaky wheel gets oiled. Hubert is unflappable though, something I much admire. He's shown no irritation with me or my choice of words so far. Probably more forbearing than I would be if the roles were reversed! Perhaps he knows I'm passionate about the game, that my heart's in the right place.

Thanks for the info, Hubert. Clearly I still don’t know the game inside and out. However, after banging my head for 3 days (almost continuous hotseat action over the weekend) in a game that is still nowhere close to ending – I believe I can speak authoritatively as to playability. Several dynamics conspire to form the quagmire. 1) You can’t shoot and then move. This prevents reserve troops from swapping with the front line troops and finishing off units. 2) You can easily reinforce to full strength with enemy units adjacent. 3) Reinforcements are cheap, enabling you to max out all units every turn. 4) You can’t move a unit, deselect it, and then fire it later. This prevents proper planning of the battle, to include comparing forecast battle resolution among units. 5) You can spawn troops at will at cities that are contested with enemy units adjacent. I would be FOREVER GRATEFUL if these features were toggles, so that we could customize it to our tastes. I shouldn’t be forced to waste my life for 3 days with nothing to show for it when a minor tweak may have given me a satisfying conclusion in a reasonable amount of time. What’s more, people’s desire to do so will abate quickly. It simply shouldn’t be that I can whack enemy forces with all my strength, perhaps knocking some units down to 1, 2, or 3, and then seeing these units magically maxed out the next turn. Then, the enemy does the same to me, knocking several of my units down. And, then I magically max out my units. The cycle is endless. The front never moves. Believe me, the enjoyment diminishes quickly.

Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Jeff, and I like your Hitchhiker's quote. We're agreed as to the quagmire, it certainly resembles WW1 trench warfare more than the mobile battlefield of WWII. If you aren’t fond of my solution (being able to move after shooting), won’t you at least support a toggle that turns on or off a feature so that others and I could use it? I fear there are only 2 other means that would alleviate this phenomenon (the SC Quagmire): 1) curtail reinforcements as enemy units move to adjacent positions, and 2) make reinforcements more expensive so that it isn’t possible to reinforce all weak units every turn. In my mind, for the sake of game play, I’d prefer a toggle so that I could customize each of these elements. Why should the current setting be forced upon me if I prefer WW2 action as opposed to a WW1 quagmire?

Hubert, Thank you very much for your help. Having such personal attention is very satisfying and much appreciated. I'll have to troubleshoot more when I get home after work. What I do know know is: When the patch is working the version number appears in red letters in the lower right hand screen where the heads of the world leaders are shown. When the patch is not working I don't see any version number there. The place where the version number should be is not off the screen, and would be plain to see if present. When I look at the SC directory after I run the patch, the files are updated with new ones. All the file dates are more recent than they had been. I don't think the link to the application executable file is the problem, as I've tried to start the program numerous ways including clicking on the executable file directly. Thanks, Doug

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t make the battlefield a quagmire by having magical replacements that instantly return the board to the state of the previous turn AND not let units move away from the front line after they fire. If they can move and then fire, why in the world can’t they fire and move? Talk about capriciousness at its worst! The only chance the board has of changing in this game with any regularity is for units to be destroyed completely. Unless the units starting a turn next to a unit can fire and move back and allow fresh units from the rear to come in and finish the enemy unit off, you have a quagmired battlefield that verges on unplayable. [ October 21, 2002, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: dougman4 ]

After devoting another weekend to SC, I’m more adamant than ever that there must be a rule option that can be toggled so those sane among us, who are tired of beating our heads against the wall due the quagmired battlefield, don’t have the insult of seeing units magically spawned with impunity at contested cities. Really!!

After another week and weekend of SC playing, there can be nothing as frustrating as moving a unit and inadvertently clicking off the unit and losing the right to fire it. I want to be able to move a unit and then reanalyze the battlefield. I want to choose the order of firing among my units, comparing forecast combat adjudication before firing. To thwart this is to render the game stunted, taking the initiative and planning ability away from the player. [ October 21, 2002, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: dougman4 ]

I want to love this game; it is precisely the type of game that can become a cult classic. It is an ideal hotseat platform, of which there are few alternatives out there. However, with the current reinforcement rules the playability becomes a quagmire. Corps can often indefinitely hold out against far superior forces. Beaten down units magically bump back up to full strength even when they are engaged with the enemy or encircled. ANYTHING would be better. If you will only concede replacements should be reduced or not allowed when encircled, that would be a welcome improvement. Also, even EV’s suggestion above that replacements should never be higher than a fixed amount such as “4” would be a welcome improvement. What’s more, this isn’t a zero sum game. Your opinion doesn’t have to be the prevailing one, nor mine. Simply make replacement limitations an option that can be toggled on or off. To debate something that can make everyone happy is ludicrous. To imagine the current replacement system isn’t a severe game deficiency is naïve. Several other grognards and myself are putting this game on the shelf until you address it. You can’t possible imagine it to be the slightest bit fun or realistic to have quagmired battle fronts where after every turn the board magically resets to be the same as the turn before. If you don’t address this, we’ll put this game back on the shelf and go back to A&A and PGII which are the two best hotseats out there. And, I had hopes for SC…

Obviously when I sayed I've reloaded and reinstalled dozens of times I meant I deinstalled SC, reinstalled, and rerun the patch. I did so dozens of more times over the weekend, you have no idea how frustrating this is.

Hubert, I know how to do the patch, my buddy and I play. His works, mine doesn't. I don't get any version number in the bottom right hand corner of the MAIN MENU screen, before or after I execute the patch. I did a defualt directory program install. The patch is going to the right directory. And, I verify that the patch files are overwritting properly. However, the version number is not getting updated and my PBEM files are not being saved as the new version. As PBEM is the reason I bought the game, it is worthless to me at this time. I'm running XP, as is my friend. My system's specs are typical - as is my friend's. I see no reason for this problem and really need your help. Thanks!

I've downloaded and run the patch just fine. I can see it has properly overwritten the files in the default SC directory. However, the version 1.04 doesn't appear on the screen after I boot up the game. Moreover, I can't play PBEM games because no one can read my files as they appear as the old version and not 1.04. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM???? I'VE RELOADED AND RERUN THE PATCH DOZENS OF TIMES!!!!!

Also, after you move a unit - but before you fire - you can not see the blinking lights of other units that can be moved and fired. So, unless you memorized the board, you do not know for certain what other units can join the fight if you choose not to fire with the currently selected one. This seem silly. Better to preserve the right to fire units after deselecting!

I take it that this idea has overwhelming support as there are no naysayers?

Ahh, but you make my point exactly. When a unit becomes increasingly encircled then replacements should be harder to get. At the extreme, a completely encircled unit should get little or no replacements. That is what encirclement does, and to model otherwise is silly. But, I don't insist on forcing this on everyone. Please make this an option that can be toggled ON or OFF and everyone can be happy!!

I am a firm believer in making as many of the rules options that can be toggled on or off. This would be a great choice for that. You could even have several increasingly strict choices to select from. But clearly, it is unrealistic for an almost completely encircled city to be able to spawn new units. They must come from elsewhere. [ October 17, 2002, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: dougman4 ]

When there is an enemy unit adjacent to a city hex, that city should not be allow to spawn unlimited units. There should be a decreasing spawning algorithm in place as more enemy units are adjacent to the city. For example: 1 enemy unit adjacent limits spawning to 2 units 2 enemy units adjacent limits spawning to 1 unit 3 enemy units adjacent limits spawning to 0 units Otherwise, there is no consideration given to the siege effect of encirclement and the game bogs down to be a ponderous quagmire where a few lone cities become impervious to attack.

There simply must be an algorithm instituted whereby a unit cannot pop back up to full strength after being beaten down by multiple enemy units. When on enemy unit is adjacent, then reinforcements should be limited so that unit’s total strength is no higher than 7, 8, or 9. When 2 units are adjacent, the limit should be 5, 6, or 7. Otherwise, because of the relatively cheap reinforcements, the battlefield becomes a quagmire. This is especially needed at cities, where one lone corps can hold out indefinitely against a much stronger force.

After HOURS of tedious fighting along a perfectly stationary Russian front line, it became obvious this feature must be modified. Units must be able to fire on the front line, and move back so that units in the back can move forward and attack. Otherwise, since the game allows you to reinforce completely back to full strength, the battlefield become a stationary quagmire reminiscent of WWI instead of WW2.