KDG

A balanced scenario is one where Terif plays Terif and it ends in a draw. :cool: I wish I could answer that question. Perception plays a big part, and each player may be more confortable with either the Axis or the Allies. One thing I'd like to see is allowing the AI to play itself, thus these scenarios could be made, then play tested while you sleep. This wouldn't be perfect, but it is a start. Hopefully they will have this for SC2. What could be done in the future is allow each competitor to bid on which side they would prefer, thus if a player thinks it is unbalanced, then they can bid accordingly. This suggestion is only for future tournaments, which I hope that you continue to sponser. My suggestion on the 30 day was so that we could have even more tournaments, thus allowing me to play in them more often since I'll have less time waiting between rounds after losing in the first round. :cool: Any suggestions I've made you have listened to, and I've appreciated that. I'd make the suggestions whether I'm winning or losing. I'm playing one of your modified scenarios right now that I tweeked slightly vs two different players. These scenarios keep the game fresh. Thanks again for your contributions, they are appreciated. [ July 01, 2003, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

I'll end up losing in the first round, and I've made some suggestions on what I feel would make the scenario slightly better, but I wouldn't advocate changing anything in the middle of the tournament. I'm also hopeful another is held. For the next tournament I would suggest allowing everyone a couple days to tool around with the scenario to get a handle on which ever side they will be playing. I personally made a number of mistakes playing it the first time through which has led to my downfall, which has led to a less than competitive game, which is the only thing I hope for. Thanks for the scenario and tournament, look forward to the next one. P.S. Any chance for a balanced Scenario that could be decided in 30 days(which would give a min. of 35-40 turns)

We might be dreaming if we think we will get an AI editor. I've used AI editors that use Pct. points for chances a certain action will take place, so maybe we'll get something. I would like an editor that allowed us to change units costs, unit stats, as well as techs. Make sure we have the ability to make each countries units cost diffently and have different stats. Thus you could make Russian Corps cost 100, while Germany's cost 130; but tanks for Germany might be only 300, while russian planes were 450, etc. Also allow a sliding scale so each additional unit would cost more, if wanted. Maybe even a map editor so someone could add cities, forts,etc, and even try to make the eastern U.S. for a civil war game. It would also

Ok, the U.S. has just entered the war to aid the allies, although the Axis owns everything (yes, I said everything) except for Ireland and England(oh, and Malta). Russia will enter the war in 1 or 2 turns. The good news is England has level 5 jets. The bad news is so does Germany, and they outnumber us 11-2. More bad news is rumors are abound that Germany is massing for a great amphibious attack into Russia from both the south and the north. Additionally subs populate the Atlantic, so the U.S. will have difficulty crossing the ocean for any attacks. Besides that things are going well....ha ha. [ June 27, 2003, 04:07 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

Oh no you don't. I'm stuck at work, and you guys are keeping me going. I feel like its an old episode of batman.... Will Terif lose his first game?????? Is the end in sight for Terif????? Is Zappsweden going to finish him???? Same SC time, same SC channel....... Now get back playing and continue this AAR.....

Thanks again guys for the AAR's. You two play all the time. Could you try a Russian readiness bid instead of MPP's and see how that goes for comparison purposes (around 50% maybe?).

Gavrok Here is a free download of American Civil War. http://www.adanaccommandstudies.com/IntroACW.html The zip file is acw28.zip(this has been updated frequently). There is a tutorial, as well as a PDF for instructions. Each turn is 10 days. (SC game engine with 2 week turns covering the American Civil war, yes, that would be great). http://www.adanaccommandstudies.com/IntroACW.html

I noticed that the game is real time as well. I did see that their are random events, which is a nice addition.

You hit it right on the nose with the time and brain power comments. Having a 1 1/2 year old daughter, a new puppy, the wife working from home at odd hours on the computer, SC is the perfect game to play. Good strategy, but not so detailed that changing a quick diaper or telling the dog to quit chewing on the rug ruins your complete concentration. With the ability to do a turn in about 10 minutes, this allows me to play 4 or 5 PBEM games at once, with one turn a day. You were also right on with the comments on changes. More balance between units, a better editor, more randomness in each game, as well as enhancements, while keeping the time factor to what it is now is very important. I'd love to see a civil war game based off this system(supply, generals, capitols, corps and cavalry, some states entering the war at later times, etc) would be great. [ June 24, 2003, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

I agree getting the tech is the key. Invest one chit and let the dice roll as they may. A little luck, rockets can be your sledgehammer. A rocket only moves one space less than an army, attacks with greater force(at higher levels), can attack from a distance, gains experience faster, and doesn't take any losses. Since you aren't reinforcing them, you can afford to operate them as needed. They also do the same amount of damage to ships, tanks, armies, and corps, thus they can inflict very high MPP damage, all while not taking damage themselves. Use two rockets to attack cities, hexes that are surrounded by rivers and marsh, and hexes that can only be hit from 1 or 2 sides. With two rockets, at 2 exp., level 3 and above, you can do 6-7 damage with those two units, while not taking any damage yourself. Get level 4, with 3 exp. and you can sometimes destroy a unit outright with two rockets. I agree with you that Cruisers and Battleships are units you might never buy, then possibly tanks if your opponent gets level 3 or 4 AT.

The game (v1.07) features a complete graphics overhaul (interface, map and units) as well as a number of unit and terrain mods on CD. It is now available from all major European retailers for a recommended retail price of EUR 29.99, as well as directly from www.mostwantedgames.com. The german version of the game had some features we didn't have. Does the official 1.07 patch include the above mentioned items? Thanks for the patch. Hope things go well on SC2. [ June 24, 2003, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

Level 3 and above rockets, combined with air equality, makes rockets a better choice than an additional jet. Ex. You have 7 jets, your opponent has 6, both the same level of tech(we'll say level 3). You have the MPP's to add another unit, so you can choose a Jet or Rocket. The jet does 2 ground damage, while taking damage from a counter attack as well as damage from the unit it attacks. This leads to additional costs as you reinforce the jet, and makes it more difficult to gain exp. The rocket(level 3 for this example) will do 3 damage from two spaces away, while taking none back. No additional costs for reinforcement, plus gains exp. quickly. The main disadvantage is similar to HQ's in that they have 0 defense(most of us agree both these units should have a 1 AD), so protect it with jets. Please note if you are behind in jet tech, range, and/or have less jets, then purchasing wouldn't be the best time for a rocket. Also note that a level 4 or level 5 rocket is devastating in its attack on ground units when compared to jets.

I gotta agree with you on the bid on readiness. I've mentioned it before, and have wondered if anyone has tried it out. Bids could be just on the Russians, or also on the U.S. Axis might find things a bit more interesting if Russia is bid at 50% readiness to start the game.

Try the following house rule: 2 chit max per research. Slows down research a bit, makes level 4 & level 5 more difficult to reach, and leads you to try new tactics when you gain tech in rockets or subs instead of jets.

Plunder is raw materials that the country has built up over time? Whoever controls that country should be able to use those raw materials. MPP's are only raw material and/or manpower. One option is to penalize the Allies even more with a penalty in war readiness(maybe also effect Russia). This should be tied in with a multiplier that effects the Axis if they DOW multiple nations. Another option is make a scenario with the lowlands belonging to the Allies at the beginning of the war?. Germany will still get its plunder. Just remember to bump up war readiness since Germany won't declare war on the lowlands. Or make it that the Allies can't DOW until the 3rd turn - both by starting the carriers farther away, as well as a couple of armies. Or just make it a house rule.

Question on the rocket equation. The equation has been listed as follows in another thread: L3 rocket attacks corp 3 hex's away. L3 SA is 1 (base)+ 3 (tech) for 4 (total) but - 3 (distance) = SA of 1 on that corps at that location. So if you had 0 tech and were attacking a unit 1 hex away(min. range) you would get the following: L0 SA is 1 (base)+ 0 (tech) for 1 (total) but - 1 (distance) = SA of 0 on that corps at that location. Please explain or relook at you equations. I would guess that the equation is giving an attack that is 1 less than actual, if this is the actual equation. Update from Hubert would also be nice. [ June 23, 2003, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

Question on the rocket equation. You listed it as follows: L3 rocket attacks corp 3 hex's away. L3 SA is 1 (base)+ 3 (tech) for 4 (total) but - 3 (distance) = SA of 1 on that corps at that location. So if you had 0 tech and were attacking a unit 1 hex away(min. range) you would get the following: L0 SA is 1 (base)+ 0 (tech) for 1 (total) but - 1 (distance) = SA of 0 on that corps at that location. Please explain or relook at you equations. I would guess that you equation is giving an attack that is 1 less than actual. Update from Hubert would also be nice.

I think that when an allie moves to the capitol of a neutral, it should take over the MPP's from the eliminated country. Thus in Tigleths example once England is eliminated, and Russia has moved onto the capitol of Iraq and the oil wells, it should get the MPP's for Iraq.

How about an actual screen shot of your current SC game along with all the other info you provide. Thanks

Hey Terif & Zapp, have you thought of trying a bidding system using Russian and U.S. readiness numbers in lieu of MPP's? An example might be Axis bidding 35, thus both Russia and U.S. would start at 35% readiness, all other factors stay the same. By the way, thanks for the AAR's; they make nice breaks from the ho hum of work.

I had mentioned this above: I like the idea that new tech advancements should only affect new units purchased. Thus a player might have the following at any one time: 4 ea level 0 jets 2 ea level 1 jets 2 ea level 2 jets 1 ea level 3 jet 1 ea level 4 jet I don't think that once level 2 jets are achieved, level 0 jets should still be available. My intent would be that existing units don't get the upgrade, only new units purchased. An alternative to this would be to allow existing units the chance to pay an upgrade cost back at the capitol(retrofitting of the unit, so to speak) to bring up to the current tech.

I think that any aid given to neutrals should be lost if that neutral is never invaded. Example: Allies think Spain is going to be invaded sometime in the next year, so they give 2 corps for their defense. Axis leaves Spain alone for the rest of the game, Corps are lost to the Allies. Additionally if Spain is invaded by the Allies, then both donated units are lost. [ June 20, 2003, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

Come on Edwin, haven't you seen the snow in Egypt, it swirls all around you, blocking your view, sometimes covering things completely(oh, wait, thats sand, sorry). All kidding aside, yeah, we would only want to apply winter in certain countries like Finland, Sweden, Norway, Russia. It would be interesting to buy certain levels of tech, the only problem being we might not know what level each unit was (unless of course we add 0, 1, 2, etc. to the unit itself - which isn't a bad idea in itself for our current game, if someone could have the levels show on the units). I'm also not sure what Hubert could do programming wise, but it would be a nice option.

Edwin P. OK, if we are only talking 3 turns, this is what effects I'd like to see. 1) No amphibious assualts 2) Supply reduced by 50%, which should take care of #3 3) Movement reduced by one point for all units. 4) Jets reduced in attacks by 50%(or grounded completely) 5) No operation of units 6) Reduced FOW sight This is pretty dramatic, but then again it is only for 3 turns total (1.5 per player). CorsairBlue I like the idea that new tech advancements should only affect new units purchased. Thus a player might have the following at any one time: 4 ea level 0 jets 2 ea level 1 jets 2 ea level 2 jets 1 ea level 3 jet 1 ea level 4 jet Another option is to allow the unit to reinforce to its max, at which time it moves up to the current tech level. If we wanted, we could require that this be done in a city(or even a capitol), which would take a unit out of commission for a couple turns while its being upgraded. This would also reduce a units experience when the upgrade is made. Why should a level 1 jet with 8 strength & 3 exp. become a level 3 jet with 3 exp. just because tech has advances. The player would now be forced upgrade the unit, which would require it moving back to a city, waiting until the next turn to upgrade, then move back towards the front lines on the third turn. Additionally that 8 st. 3 exp. level 1 unit is now a 13 st., but with 1 exp. point, level 3 unit. This would mean that tech advances are nice, but you need the time and MPP's to make that unit advance as well.

You have touched on one of the big things most of us overlook. We all would like winter effects. I think we agree this would slow Germany down in Russia during these months. The key question then is how do we speed up Germany in the non winter months to make up for the delay in the winter months. The two options for turns are: 1) Keep existing turn scale. If we keep the existing turn scale, and have winter effects only hit in the Winter, this only affects 3-4 total turns. This would be a minor inconvenience and probably wouldn't require any great rewriting of the game engine. 2) Switch to 2 week turn scale. This gives us more turns in the winter(6-7), thus a greater effect of winter effects. We would then need to balance this out by improving the Axis in the non winter months. Since this would be a total of 19.5 turns, the change would just have to be minor, but would still require a change to the game engine. [ June 19, 2003, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]