Terif

Denmark: reinforce it until it is dead. If Germany has to use its air in Denmark, it cant be used in LowCountries or France. Ireland: Depends on Allies strategy. If you see that Allies defend France, then you have to reinforce the corp. When you have conquered LC and parts of France, so that you are sure you will reach Paris, then you can let the corps die. If UK gets the Irish mpp too soon + their carriers are free, it is possible that they crush Axis in France (depends on your experience). Only reinforce the corps if necessary, its a good training object for UK carriers...

Rambo: First: you got Lv11 jets 2-3 turns after the fall of France, where I had Lv0. I had 2 chits since Ireland at the beginning (turn 3 or 4) and no tech. After France it increased to 5 chits jets and 4 chits LongRange. So it was not much of luck with tech (1942:Jets Lv13,LR Lv11). That Axis is 2-3 tech advances behind UK happens very often. They dont have the time and chits to develope it. I also faced this situation in many games, but this didnt prevent me from doing my job. What was wrong: -Giving Italy Vichy and Iraq is a waste of mpp, Germany needs them. Especially if you research jets with both countries: you pay twice for the same tech. -You had a total of >=11 airfleets. If you use them in Russia you dont need much mpp to reinforce and can advance there. But you retreated your forces from Russia and started an air war in France. You didnt have the mpp to replace the losses against UK air. Doesnt matter how much airfleets you have there, if they are at low strength, doing nothing and no mpp to reinforce... Giving Russia the time to build up their forces is another thing, resulting from the airwar in France. -to buy only air is not a good idea. Axis need also ground forces in Russia. Only some airfleets are needed for the breakthroughs, but the main forces should be ground units. Air against ground is very expensive in the long run, its better to use ground against ground. Your 6 or 7 tanks and 3 armies are clearly not enough, especially since tanks become obsolete very soon with antitank tech. Zappsweden: Correct. Map: all the usual neutrals taken, except Spain and Portugal, they stayed neutral. But Vichy and Iraq have been taken by Italy, so very low mpp income for Germany. [ May 18, 2003, 09:02 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Rambo: First: you got Lv11 jets 2-3 turns after the fall of France, where I had Lv0. I had 2 chits since Ireland at the beginning (turn 3 or 4) and no tech. After France it increased to 5 chits jets and 4 chits LongRange. So it was not much of luck with tech (1942:Jets Lv13,LR Lv11). That Axis is 2-3 tech advances behind UK happens very often. They dont have the time and chits to develope it. I also faced this situation in many games, but this didnt prevent me from doing my job. What was wrong: -Giving Italy Vichy and Iraq is a waste of mpp, Germany needs them. Especially if you research jets with both countries: you pay twice for the same tech. -You had a total of >=11 airfleets. If you use them in Russia you dont need much mpp to reinforce and can advance there. But you retreated your forces from Russia and started an air war in France. You didnt have the mpp to replace the losses against UK air. Doesnt matter how much airfleets you have there, if they are at low strength, doing nothing and no mpp to reinforce... Giving Russia the time to build up their forces is another thing, resulting from the airwar in France. -to buy only air is not a good idea. Axis need also ground forces in Russia. Only some airfleets are needed for the breakthroughs, but the main forces should be ground units. Air against ground is very expensive in the long run, its better to use ground against ground. Your 6 or 7 tanks and 3 armies are clearly not enough, especially since tanks become obsolete very soon with antitank tech. Zappsweden: Correct. Map: all the usual neutrals taken, except Spain and Portugal, they stayed neutral. But Vichy and Iraq have been taken by Italy, so very low mpp income for Germany. [ May 18, 2003, 09:02 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Rambo (first game as Allies): Why do you attack with Lv 11 jets my Lv 13 (5 chits)jets + 3 carriers in France ? Use your air in Russia, there you had tech superiority. By the way, you also had 3 Italian airfleets with Lv 13 and I am pretty sure you didnt have 4 chits for Italy... Anyway, the key to success in a war is to adapt your strategy to the battle situation and the tech levels. If you are inferior in jet tech, then stay away and use the air at a more healthy place. The russian front needs air in every case. [ May 18, 2003, 07:22 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Rambo (first game as Allies): Why do you attack with Lv 11 jets my Lv 13 (5 chits)jets + 3 carriers in France ? Use your air in Russia, there you had tech superiority. By the way, you also had 3 Italian airfleets with Lv 13 and I am pretty sure you didnt have 4 chits for Italy... Anyway, the key to success in a war is to adapt your strategy to the battle situation and the tech levels. If you are inferior in jet tech, then stay away and use the air at a more healthy place. The russian front needs air in every case. [ May 18, 2003, 07:22 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

88mm: It is a good idea to give players a place to find their opponents again if there are problems. But I think its too much effort to write every game in this extra thread. If every game is reported, then there is a flood of replies and its difficult to find the right ones. I fear its getting a bit chaotic then. Usually 95 % or more of the games are finished without problems and then there should be nothing written in. If someone cant find an opponent, then he should post in your thread. In this case it is very useful and everyone that cant find his opponent should make a complaint there and/or read this thread. Then after a certain time period the one that complained can claim victory, if the other player doesnt answer.

Concerning the game Condor mentioned (Condor = Axis, Terif = Allies) Yes it was a very close game. Axis got Poland and France early. France surrendered in May 1940. The UK scientists were celebrating with the money from government, but not researching. Axis reached Lv 4 jets soon after France, but UK remained at Lv 0. For over a year it was Lv4 against Lv0: one carrier lost at Norway, the ports at Scapa Flow and London reduced to supply lv 0 from german airstrikes and UK airfleets were hiding in Ireland . Fortunately UK managed to catch up until Russia entered the war. US entered early, cause Axis attacked and conquered every neutral except Turkey. So it was possible to launch a strong invasion. Russia had no chance to survive, they only were able to build a lot of corps, but still they lost Moscow soon. The siberians delayed Axis advance a bit. On the other front, things went better for Allies: France and Low Countries had been liberated, US forces invaded Africa and entered Spain. As Allied forces conquered the first 3 german cities and marched towards Berlin, Axis made the deciding fault and operated their airfleets from Russia back to Germany. In the huge airbattles that followed, Germany lost most of them, but 3 UK air + 2 carriers survived. Without airfleets in Russia the advance stopped. After the remaining airfleets retreated and operated back to the russian front, Ural and Stalingrad fell after the death of many russian corps . All three russian capitals were Axis, but the last russians still fought in the Caucasus. Meanwhile US, UK and french forces liberated Spain, Portugal, Norway and Sweden. The italians fought a last battle in their homeland and surrendered in 1944. Russia would have surrendered in 2-3 turns, but it was too late. In the turn Berlin was captured, german forces conceded. [ May 07, 2003, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Concerning the game Condor mentioned (Condor = Axis, Terif = Allies) Yes it was a very close game. Axis got Poland and France early. France surrendered in May 1940. The UK scientists were celebrating with the money from government, but not researching. Axis reached Lv 4 jets soon after France, but UK remained at Lv 0. For over a year it was Lv4 against Lv0: one carrier lost at Norway, the ports at Scapa Flow and London reduced to supply lv 0 from german airstrikes and UK airfleets were hiding in Ireland . Fortunately UK managed to catch up until Russia entered the war. US entered early, cause Axis attacked and conquered every neutral except Turkey. So it was possible to launch a strong invasion. Russia had no chance to survive, they only were able to build a lot of corps, but still they lost Moscow soon. The siberians delayed Axis advance a bit. On the other front, things went better for Allies: France and Low Countries had been liberated, US forces invaded Africa and entered Spain. As Allied forces conquered the first 3 german cities and marched towards Berlin, Axis made the deciding fault and operated their airfleets from Russia back to Germany. In the huge airbattles that followed, Germany lost most of them, but 3 UK air + 2 carriers survived. Without airfleets in Russia the advance stopped. After the remaining airfleets retreated and operated back to the russian front, Ural and Stalingrad fell after the death of many russian corps . All three russian capitals were Axis, but the last russians still fought in the Caucasus. Meanwhile US, UK and french forces liberated Spain, Portugal, Norway and Sweden. The italians fought a last battle in their homeland and surrendered in 1944. Russia would have surrendered in 2-3 turns, but it was too late. In the turn Berlin was captured, german forces conceded. [ May 07, 2003, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Probably he lost every month a game against mostly higher ranked players, so he wasnt donwgraded by the time penalty...

Probably he lost every month a game against mostly higher ranked players, so he wasnt donwgraded by the time penalty...

DalmatiaPartisan: I just looked over the April statistics and there is no game with you reported. Therefore you had officially no game played and this means at the beginning of the new month you lost 10 places in the ladder (the number changed for May, next month inactive players will loose 30 places). If you had a game with Gandalf and he didnt report, please remind him and if he doesnt react post a complaint. If he declares that the game was in April, probably you will regain the 10 places, but this depends on 88mm. By the way, we both have to play our WWI tournament game . I have time this weekend, usually from 4am - 4pm forum time. I hope CvM will answer the open questions soon and reopen the tourney. [ May 02, 2003, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

DalmatiaPartisan: I just looked over the April statistics and there is no game with you reported. Therefore you had officially no game played and this means at the beginning of the new month you lost 10 places in the ladder (the number changed for May, next month inactive players will loose 30 places). If you had a game with Gandalf and he didnt report, please remind him and if he doesnt react post a complaint. If he declares that the game was in April, probably you will regain the 10 places, but this depends on 88mm. By the way, we both have to play our WWI tournament game . I have time this weekend, usually from 4am - 4pm forum time. I hope CvM will answer the open questions soon and reopen the tourney. [ May 02, 2003, 09:15 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

NIce joke 88mm Rambo is still at place 5 with the time penaltys, no victory for him so far. And hopefully not in the future The victory was against Wachtmeister, not me.. [ May 02, 2003, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

NIce joke 88mm Rambo is still at place 5 with the time penaltys, no victory for him so far. And hopefully not in the future The victory was against Wachtmeister, not me.. [ May 02, 2003, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Thread is closed now. Please post the new results in the May 2003 thread from 88mm.

Brian Rock: I totally agree with you. SC is far away from reality and history, but a good strategical and tactical game. [ May 01, 2003, 05:09 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Fortunately 88mm is willing to continue the ladder. Since he is new to the SC Ladder dont beat him if he makes some faults in the beginning Many thanks in advance for the work 88mm [ May 01, 2003, 05:05 AM: Message edited by: Terif ]

To make it (hopefully) more clear: You need LR as prerequisite to use the better, high level strategys for UK and only UK (not Russia not USA and not Axis). There still exists a lot more strategys and you also can win with them as Allies, but not against very experienced players. To beat them you need the best and most advanced strategys. But if your opponent doesnt use the best strategy, you also dont need to use the best one to win . LR is only necessary for the westfront and for UK. The eastfront and Russia is a totally different thing. There LR is unimportant and there you can play like if LR wouldnt exist. Ground units and tactics decide there. A totally different approach and war. Thats also the fun of the game: you dont have to wage the same war and use the same strategy. If you dont like UK air killing your units in France with LR, then look to the east, there is a totally different picture . Each country needs its own strategy. UK needs perhaps LR, but the other 4 major nations do not. There you can choose every possible tactic. Its also a problem of mpps: with more (a lot) mpps, UK wouldnt need LR too. [ April 29, 2003, 05:41 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Iron Ranger: It depends on the strategy: Allies can also fight for France with everything and after France sacrificing everything to kill german units and reduce its mpp. Then they dont have mpp for research and it isnt needed. I used this tactic during my first 20 games or so and it worked. But now against experienced players it wont work, cause they know how to protect their units and mpp base. Perhaps I would have luck and could turn the tide in Russia, but a second front is not possible with this tactic. Axis dont need LR to win the war and if they have it its a bonus but no guarantee for victory. For them research in LR is quite unimportant. But Allies need a cheap reconnaissance method to take a look across the border of their Isle. Attacking with airfleets and hoping no enemy airfleet is there or using transports is too expensive for them. LR is the best one, everything else is expensive and Allies lack of mpp. Also LR increases the value of the carriers, especially important with 1.07b, where they arent protected any more by ports. Additionally LR is usefull to kill enemy airfleets that move in range of England to defend airsuperiority. UK needs airsuperiority over France if they want to establish a second front. Without LR Allies have only a very small choice of possible tactics. They need LR to plan attacks and to develope a bigger, long term strategy. Short term they dont need LR, they only need it at least when Russia comes in the war. So they have 20-30 turns to invest in LR and normally they can spend 3-5 chits. Its no luck to get LR Lv 2-4 by russian war entry. I cant remember to have less in my last 100 games if I invested in LR. Therefore luck doesnt play a role. If you get it earler then your attacks can start earlier, but only small ones cause german airfleets are still superior in number. Usually the real attack can only take place when Russia enters the war and german airfleets are needed in the east. Tip: if the other player has a higher jet Lv, then dont attack as Allies and move your airfleets out of range as Axis until you have reached equal or higher Lv (wont take long with the catch up system).

Yep, SC is a very good game in my opinion. Lets wait for an even better SC2

Zapp asked me to take over the ladder in May. As I am the champion I would prefer someone else to do it - it has a strange taste if the champion runs the ladder... But If nobody else wants to do it I will continue the ladder. If anyone decides later to take it over , I would be happy and we can change at the beginning of the next month. Hopefully Zapp will return with fresh powers and take the ladder back in the not too far future

Zapp asked me to take over the ladder in May. As I am the champion I would prefer someone else to do it - it has a strange taste if the champion runs the ladder... But If nobody else wants to do it I will continue the ladder. If someone decides later to take it over , I would be happy and we can change at the beginning of the next month. Hopefully Zapp will return with fresh powers and take the ladder back in the not too far future [ April 29, 2003, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Liam: You are right. There are a lot of ideas how to make SC more realistic, historical and more complex. But someone has to program it and we only have one(?) manpower: Hubert. If you change one thing in the current system, you also have to change a lot of other factors too, or it will become unplayable and imbalanced. This is a lot of work. With unlimited time he could program the perfect game... Only one problem: e.g. If you dont allow airfleets to kill units you need another longrange unit that can. Or you have to change the map, with the current hex system you need another unit type than ground units to finish a unit. Yuo propose bombers to do so. Then you have the problem that you have to buy both bombers and fighters, but in the game mpps are limited and if you have the same amount of mpps but need to buy twice as much units, you have a problem. And the other player (e.g. Russia) can only concentrate on fighters, so he can stop your offensive with half of your mpps... only some aspects of the problems that will occur with such a change. I didnt thought in depth, but if you want to change one thing, you (and Hubert, if he has to change it)have to think about the long term affects, how it affects gameplay and so on... An easy solution can become very complicated But SC2 will come and perhaps some ideas from the forum are implemented if possible. For SC1 I think its too much effort now to change it. And I dont think its bad as it is now...

KDG: I agree with you. Hqs can also be moved into mountains, forests or cities. If they have some entrenchment they barely take damage from airattacks. Especially mountains are a very good place for a Hq. There its very hard to destroy them ( OK, with 10 airfleets or so, they are dead...). To increase the airdefence for Hqs could be a good idea, but its not a must. [ April 29, 2003, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]

Liam: You are right about certain areas where you cant protect your hqs from beeing killed. But this only occurs in some special and rare situations - usually the game is already decided when this happens, so it doesnt matter. Besides this: every unit has its advantages and areas where they can be used best. In some areas armies are very good, in some airfleets, sometimes battleships can be a real threat for ground units. In France Germany dont have enough airfleets to kill a Hq at the beginning and its also more important to kill units, if the enemy attacks my french Hq I am happy, cause I dont need to reinforce it for the short battle in France and this saves mpp - the airfleet could have also attacked an army which I had to reinforce immediately. In Russia I also kill Hqs when they are in the Ural and Caucasus and cant hide any more. But thats how it should be. Only few turns before a country is surrendering everything is attacked and destroyed. You were also comparing SC to real life and that jets in the 1940s were impossible and not historical, so they should be changed... Sorry, but this is another discussion. SC is simplified and abstracts. It doesnt mirror the reality exactly. To make it more historical should be discussed for SC2, if it should be or not. SeaWolf: Which of the nations grows and becomes a superpower depends on the player. This is the choice SC gives you. If someone has 12 or more airfleets he decided to invest more in airfleets and less in other things. But this can be a bad decision, depending on what the opponent does. In ground war, one army is as strong as 2 airfleets. Too much airfleets dont make sense, only if you have too much mpp and dont know where to spend them. But If someone has such an advantage that he can afford many more things than the other he will probably win anyway. Doesnt matter if he buys airfleets or armies for his mpp. In a normal game everyone is short in mpp and has to think about where to invest them best. And airfleets are not the best, you need a certain number, but too much is not good as well as not having enough. About tanks: perhaps they are in a disadvantage against armies. At least in the long run when antitank is researched they are. But their main purpose is not to attack units, but to march through breakthroughs, encircling the enemy and cutting them off from supply and Hq support. Sure, they could be changed to serve also other, more "historic" purposes, but for this there had to be changed a lot more, cause it changes the game balance. Shaka: You got the idea reality and the game is something different Tanks and airfleets are strong in some situations and if they are used for certain purposes. But all in all I think the game is balanced and no unit type has such an advantage that you can only build this one to win. There is also no unit which will never be built. (ok, rockets are only used during trench warfare, but that makes it even more interesting if you only need them for special situations. Its like a special force ). [ April 29, 2003, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Terif ]