GumbyDude

Holy crap! That's a pretty good idea. Could this be abused though? Makes Russia a lot easier for Germany almost too easy. Maybe if the unit leaving a garrison loses 5 points, but the garrison has strength of only 2 or 3 and can't move or attack or some other kind of restriction. Otherwise, play balance might be skewed a bit much in favor of the Axis. Also need to be able to kill the garrison at any time so you can march an army into the city to defend it when you need to defend it for real.

Whoah!! I didn't even know that! How is this done? I played an IP match with a friend on the east coast and we were wishing we could switch to PBEM and back again. IP play really needs a chat window! We play Magic online a lot and find that the chat bars are great for chatting whether it's friendly or trash talking Very helpful in just discussing the situation, ideas about the game, exclamations such as "Holy crap!" and so on.

Welcome back JJ and JB. I, for one, don't care who you are IRL, or even if you are the same person. If you have something to contribute, it's all good.

Mmmm, actually paras are necessary to win in 3R or A3R (although moreso in 3R). Maybe you meant to say: not necessary in SC. In 3R, a player cannot crack a double or triple line defense without them and all defenses are set up to defend against them specifically. The main criticism of 3R was that they were TOO powerful (dropping behind the enemy and destroying an entire corp is pretty darn powerful), but it's an abstraction that I understood and accepted over the years. 3R was my lifeblood. I lived and breathed that game for over 20 years and launched the A3R website (I can no longer find it online) with Bruce Harper and maintained the site for a couple years while he developed Global War 2000. He mainly used the website as a vehicle for the development of that game and I ran the forums. I had to give it up in '99 to move and focus on my career and totally lost touch (I did not like the changes being developed in GW2K). Later, everyone accused me of "abandoning" them or something? But that's a story for another time.... Anyways, back to SC: With no stacking in SC, I can understand Hubert not designing a system for paras. As a fellow software developer I can understand that his design might not lend itself to a unit dropping on another unit. Such a mechanic could totally require a revamp of his code (depending on how it's written). Also, as a game mechanic, I can't imagine how it would work unless either the attacker or defender is completely destroyed (as in 3R). Also, there is no restriction on OB based on years or limit on # that can be built, such as in 3R. I can see it now: Germany has 20 airborne attacking everywhere on the map. You would need to limit the number of paras to 1 or maybe 2 for the US. Again, his code probably wasn't designed for force pool limitations like these.

Actually, even in version 1.06 maxing out in jets still practically guarantees level 4 or 5 by end of 42. I don't think that UK can afford this and Russia definitely cannot catch you right away. True, it's a law of diminishing returns (5+4+3+2+1 if you're all alone, better if he's chasing you), but my logic is this: If you put 1 or 2 in like your opponent does, you are almost guaranteed to be equal to your opponent in jet levels the entire game (except where deviations occur). You will not have a sizeable advantage in air combat or air strikes without some luck. If you max out early you will most likely be ahead of him for at least some part of the game. It is during those turns that you can do the most damage. When I see a 9 strength plane disappear fighting a jet, :eek: I have to think it's worth it even if he gets a level or two himself a few turns later with only 1 point allocated. Sure, he gets a free ride to some extent via espionage, but the Allies have a hard time even buying new jets let alone the research points. By the time he gains parity, you've already done your damage and moved on to something else or cashed the points in to buy new jet or armor units or whatever. Maybe I'm way off base with this though... :confused:

As far as research: I think that maxing out in one tech is better than spreading out the points. I'm talking put all 5 in one tech before funding a second one. This will almost gaurantee you get all the levels within a couple years (even with the new 1.06 patch changes to research). Yes, once you get level 5, you lose $$ when you pull the points out, but I think that having level 5 jets in 1941 really makes the difference in Russia and stopping the harrasment from UK/US air in the West. Taking cities: In Russia, place your HQs surrounded by jets so that they can attack more than one city if possible, usually keeping them centrally located. Can you hit either Minsk or Kiev if you want? Kharkov/Smolensk? If youhave to split air up between cities, it's best to take one city than to leave both at level 1 to rebuild. Garrisoning: I use Rumanian, Hungarian, Bulgarian troops to garrison since they don't get HQ benefits like true German troops on front line. I tried Italians, but it looked like they receive the MPPs of the city if I used them (or it seemed like they did). Don't ignore the Pripet Marshes either. Seems most partisans pop up around there (and Caucasus). Attacking with 5 army: someone mentioned it was risky. I was referring to special circumstances like my last game: I was max experience, excellent HQ support, adjacent to weakened unit around 4 strength, was protected from attack on all sides, needed to kill unit, wanted to conserve an air unit and other units for attacking other hexes, enemy had NO HQ support, poor supply, and no experience... whew, lot of favorable conditions there. Just using it as an example of the extreme. Heck, I've even attacked with tank unit with level 3. Granted, it was against a 1 strength corp that had been sourrounded for over a turn, 3 hexes to my rear with no danger of counter attack. I think that's better than using a full strength unit that could be advancing up to the front in Russia. Just don't risk this with units that are exposed to counter attack. Pull back or reinforce in place. Finally, level 5 jets at strength 5 full experience and full HQ support are more powerful than a regular 10 strength air. I've seen this kind of jet unit do 8-9 points of damage and take minimal damage in return.

Maybe the better tweak is IT level 4 or 5 to start with? Makes everything cheaper, but I doubt Russia would build anything but infantry at first, then tanks after they stabilize the front. That would feel about right. I would vote against the russian jets though. Their planes were outdated at the time of the attack. They had the largest air force in the world (at that time) and it was completely destroyed in a matter of three days (albeit many on the ground). The Russian Air Force commander commited suicide by like the fourth day or something, if I recall correctly. I understand they recovered by the end of the war though in production and quality. In fact, there is no denying the factory production inside Russia. When told how many tanks the factories in the Urals were producing each month near the end of the war, Hitler flew into a frenzy saying it was a lie and was impossible and carried on in his usual tantrum. It was a huge figure, but I can't remember (about a thousand per month I think).

I took the 39 mod and added an extra 1000 to the US starting MPPs, set them at IT level 4 with 5 research points, level 2 jets and 2 in just about everything else. This was then only thing I could think of to help the US with their MPP problems. The result? Well, Germany was so aggressive in it's conquests (Vichy, Sweden, all of middle east, malta, egypt) that the US and USSR entered on the same turn in June of '41! I figured Germany would be in trouble, but after the initial building spree, they settled back to the normal money problems the US always has and since Germany had level 5 jets and sealed up France, Denmark, and Norway, there was not much they could do (England lost their navy and all of Med fell to Axis except for Gibraltar and Spain). The allied player is a bit weak, still figuring out certain mechanics, but I was still not that impressed with the spending spree that fizzled after a turn or two. We plan to switch sides after this game is over. I do believe the Med fell and his navy lost because of poor play decisions, but the fact is, the US is not helping much even with the $$ and research boost. I think the US needs to start with 2 HQs and more $$. I wish the editor would allow altering unit forces and setup for nations not yet in the war. More forces would help counter the fact that they are cash poor (unrealistic IMO). I also like the idea of ramping up the US ecocomy the way it does in A3R. Also the USSR economy is modelled well in that game (factories are relocated to the Urals, so they can maintain high production even though a lot of territory is captured). This would help the Siberian Army problem (helps for a couple turns, but then fizzles again).

I've noticed that about the editor too. What you could do is add the 450 or so MPPs to their starting total per HQ you want to add. Danger of that is, the player may choose to use the 900+ points to build 9 corps instead of 2 HQs (which may actually be a good thing for the Germans)

I'm probably not known as a "pro" here, but I was sort of a pro with the old AH games back in the day and have played SC for a few months now. I usually troll around this forum. All your questions I'd answer the same: "It depends." Depends on what forces I have, their positions, the positions I need to be in afterwards, how many hexes can I get on the unit, whether or not I need to attack other cities, and so on. I usually try to keep a unit back that can advance into the city (usually a corp or non-essential unit not needed in another attack like a Balkan unit or minor ally unless I want to attack from it). If you have problems damaging cities with tanks, perhaps you need to get HQ supply and readiness to them. I like armies for attacking, but tanks do great for me too. and are better than corps for sure. Look for defender's fortification levels. Bombing will reduce this level by 1 as will attacks by ground. I think strat bombing reduces by 2 but who builds strat bombers?. Get the level down to 0 or 1 before attacking unless you have a lot of ground units surrounding the city. I like using jets with HQ support to lower the defenders' strength. Each plane should take off a point or two (or more with jets), but sometimes nothing (will reduce fortified level). I also bomb with a mind open to opponent's interceptions. I use my strongest first with best HQ support and experience to maximize his air losses. Isolating a unit is good, but doesn't seem to take effect until the following turn, so keep him surrounded for a turn or more. If you do, he won't be able to reinforce back to 10 (supposed to be max of 5 when surrounded, but sometimes I've seen 8) depending on his supply level. Sometimes I clear out hexes adjacent to city with weaker units so my stronger units can advance adjacent to city to attack it. Even if I have lots of air, I don't take the unit down to 1 with air units. Why use 3 air to take defender from 6 down to 1? Hit him once down to 4 or so, use a tank or army which may kill him out right. If he's still there, re-evaluate. This saves your air for other targets or op moving forward or to other front. I also use the stronger units to attack when defender is strong, and progress down to weaker guys, sometimes using a 3 to clear out a defender at 1, then advancing someone from my rear area to take the hex (I use Balkan units or corps to garrison Russian cities so they're good for occupying cities). Sometimes I don't reinforce even when a unit is at 5. Often time, I keep some units with 5 and 6 strength units at near max experience. You'll find that supply, HQ readiness and experience have more effect than strength, really. I've attacked level 5 armies with level 5 armies at full experience and HQ support and killed the defender without a point back. It's all about HQs. Just be careful to protect your flanks (some good players will selectively counter attack a weak unit if they can get 3 hexes on it.) I reinforce when below 5, but it depends again. If an air is below 5 it won't intercept. If you can only reinforce to 5, you may die on interception. Better to wait until you can reinforce to 9-10 in some cases, but depends on jets level and so on. I think the bottom line is HQ support. Use an HQ just for your air units too. Surround the HQ with 5 air. Use HQs just behind your front line of attack if possible, remember to chain them together deep in Russia for support and supply to front line, and watch those partisans hampering supply.

The Russian partisans are murder when combined with scorched earth. I usually keep an Italian HQ with 1 army, 1 tank, and 2 corps around the marshes. Also, every city and mine is usually garrisoned with Balkan troops (since using Italians gives control to Italy until Russia surrenders). The effects on supply are tough and can stall regional attacks and prevent critical op moves to the front. I killed about 4 or 5 partisan units in Yugo and now only have 1 Balkan army in the capital and haven't seen a partisan in nearly a year of game time. :confused: That was strange. Perhaps there's a limit on total #? They used to happen regularly since turn 1 after conquest of Yugo?

Actually, I have the manuals but was looking in the PDF version printed out on paper. I grepped the .txt file and found this: "25% chance of joining Axis on or after this date depending on status of fascist minors: Spain/Hungary/Rumania/Bulgaria" This was a bit confusing though as it doesn't precisely spell it out. I assume a random number is generated each turn and compared to a summed percentage. Spain is particularly unclear. Is it: Spain attacked: -25%, OR Spain neutral: 0% or +25%? I assume the later since if it was 0% no one would ever enter as it would be 0 all the time. Spain neutral, no Balkans: Chance of entry==25% Spain neutral, 1 entered: entry==50% Spain neutral, 2 entered: entry==75% Spain attacked, 2 entered: entry==50% Is that correct? Seems Russia, Vichy, and Sweden, don't affect entry. If you attack Spain before anyone joins, is it: Spain attacked, 0 entered: entry==(-25%) This suggests none will *ever* enter :eek: Yugo is a bit confusing too considering the different countries and their effects. This is important stuff to know precisely, IMO.

I'm playing random entry for minors, but it's unclear what events affect Rumanian entry. It would be nice to have a FAQ available with exact triggers spelled out. Is this info available anywhere? I've seen others mention this, but it's usually a touchy feely subject without concrete info. I don't see a % level for them like US, Italy, or USSR. I know attacking Spain lowers the chance, but does an attack on Vichy affect Rumania? Does conquest over Yugoslavia or Greece affect entry? I took them both and Hungary entered, but Rumania did not. Does an attack on Sweden affect them (I took both Norway and Sweden)? Does military build up in Poland affect them? If so what are details? Does attacking Turkey or Mid East affect them? Does DoW on USSR affect them? As an old 3R/A3R and ASL player for 20 years now, it's important to me to have exact triggers spelled out (such as # of combat factors within 3 hexes of USSR border). That sort of thing. Actual source code (I'm a programmer too) or the formulas (similar to the readiness formulas) would be great from Hubert.

Agreed. Very frustrating that transports have to stop at the beaches and sit there for a month or more while the enemy builds beach defenses. Then you can't land. I did that to the Germans in my game as the Allies and he's doing it to me now. I swarm the coast with transports, but he easily blocks them. I move and he moves the same units back and forth. Basically have to rely on air to bust open 1 or 2 hexes then land. To make this more realistic: I'd rather have transports be able to move and then unload in the same turn. To avoid a quick "load-move-invade" move, the process of loading should take entire turn and transport can't move the same turn they load. That way, a transport loads and sits in port that turn and enemy knows you are coming next turn, but doesn't know exactly which hexes will be invaded. Also, someone commented on opening up supply path from Moscow to Egypt. I'm playing a game now and I still can't get full supply in Egypt. Germany attacked Turkey (a mistake IMO) in an attempt to attack middle east and southern route to Russian oil fields. I stopped him around the strait and we'v ebeen battling there. I still can't get full supply in my cities but I can op move from Finland to Egypt (controls Norway/Sweden/Finland too). Perhaps it's a version thing? I'm 1.04 right now to switch to 1.06 after this game.

Historically, the Allies built an artificial port after D-Day landings since they didn't hold a port at that time. Mulberries are definitely possible to have at this scale and I think the lack of ports on the map warrant it. There does seem to be some places on the map that should be ports but are not (particularly Spain, Med, Ireland). Try sending troops to Ireland, they'll never come out. Really silly. I'd recommend not a counter but simple map designation of a mulberry to accept supply and transport. Maybe at cost. Just one or two per side. The alternative is fix the lack of ports in the game. You can't convince me that Spain has no Atlantic ports when we all know darn well they do.