Night

Great game I have been playing it for 2 days. Simple yet effective, would like to see a large map and possibly some diplomatic opitions? I've been having fun with it though.

Well it is more historicaly correct this way since it was the soviets that "liberated" Poland. Basicly they really didn't Liberate poland they just changed who was occupying it.

Prehaps Germany will have to start planing and executing the invasion of Russia eariler then normal due to the fact that it will take so much more fighting, time, and resources to fight and win in Russia, that doing it later in the game when Russia is stronger AND the western Allies are more geared for offensive war (Specificaly the U.S. joining and preasure being taken off England.) This would make a late or even historicaly on-time invasion near suicide since even a relativly sucessful campaign in Russia will still take too long and allow the western allies far to much time to use their larger MPP income and reduced expendatures due to battle loses (compared to Germany, which will be heavily engaged, thus spending tremendous amount of MPPs on replacements etc.) So basicly even if you are close to destroying Russia, you will still face a massive D-day or other form of massive invasion/engagment by the U.S. and U.K. that Germany will find nearly impossible to win.

Honestly guy's, I couldn't really care less about Quebec. Not to be rude but start your own thread, because all I know is that Quebec is in a country that happens to hate mine for no reason, so I really don't want to hear about how bad things are run or whatever. Thank you.

hmm Honestly Edwin that doesn't make any sense. If the game ends then what would be the bennifit of surrendering? Unless your playing for points or something and there is a bonus to surrendering as opposed to being utteraly destroyed.

Liam lets not start a political thread plz, they get very very ugly.

Well as long as they are comming along I can wait. I'm sure you're doing a good job.

For ethier the Demo or the game itself? Any way to let us know how far along things are roughly? like 30-50% or what, i'm dying for news.

Night

Not a bad idea, and who is to say you can't attack to port and hex that the axis troops are in.

Lars, just because peace is made doesn't mean it has to stay for the whole game. I like this idea, but it should have a limit to how long before you can rejoin war against the same country you had peace with. In Civ3 they have this system (even though you could break it at a great diplomatic cost) and i'm sure the same could be done in SC2

You never invaded russia before? I don't get it.

What Exel said.

I dunno seems Iffy. Maybe some differnt choices or something would do it.

I would Agree but for only one reason, it is already extremely easy to stop U-boats without destroyers in-game. In SC1 the "battle of the atlantic" was a joke. Fundemental's have to be changed to make destroyers more useful and U-boats harder to stop so that you would have a reason for destroyers.

It's been a while now since the news of SC2 and the first SSs, it's about time for new ones and some updates to the site itself.

Hmmmm really good point I didn't even think about that with the new system. 8 is too many IMO, 8 corps to surrond just 1? Gonna make laying traps and battles like Stalingrad much harder to see.

I guess he's a noob, give him time

I have to agree with Blashys points, but I do believe SC2 will be vastly improved.

I can't wait

Im glad you responded on this Thread HC since the buck stops at you on what the AI can and cannot do. I feel that if you can make the AI do some or all of the things we mentioned, then it should be given a shot. If it can only do it decently, then let's beat up on it til we can figure out how to make it do it well. It can always be changed. However I think we all agree the AI for SC1 atleast is far less then what we need in terms of strategic planing and execution. Of course we will run into the problem where people will become familer with the AI's complicated planing and can reconize the signs, thus avoiding them or turning the situation into the Humans favor, making even more problems for the AI.

I didn't argue that they were historicaly inacurate or unfeasable but I just think that it is starting to strech things at this point, esp. in the case of Tank Destroyer groups since if we fix the problems with Tank Groups we can just use those as well as higher A/T tech to combat enemy tank groups. The only real need I could see for Tank Destroyer groups is early in Barbarosa if your the Russin's and need to blunt the spear of the German Armor groups before they drive to far or cause to many losses. But then you will find yourself in a fix when the tide turns and you have all or nearly all Tank Destroyer armies, which basicly should not be made effective vs infantry or attacking other tank destroyers, and won't be able to launch your own Armored counter offensive like it was in real life. The 2nd need would be for the Germans post-stalingrad or pre normandy to hold off the historical masses and masses of allied tanks, both T-34 and Sherman. For this cause, since Germany would be on the defensive for an indefinate period of time, it could be very useful, but only if the Allies have large numbers of tank groups and not so many infantry units which would of course beat up on Tank destroyer groups and leave holes in any defensive line. Rail Artiliry while historicaly used in WWII and effectivly I will admit in many cases, is just to small scale for a game like this, how many could you possibly buy the whole game? 1 or 2? and only if you are Germany or even a strech Russia will you need them. You might as well just make a Artiliry unit since it is more Generic and has more uses. But as we all know Artiliry is part of Corps and Armies in SC.

I agree with everything but am a little iffy on 4 and 8. However I think 1 is a must and thought it was a draw-back of SC1 that tank groups were so weak, when I field tank groups I want them to be able to breech enemy corps and push hard and fast with little worry about anything else but enemy tanks, aircraft, and being cut off. In SC1 tank groups were nearly useless vs higher anti-tank weapons infantry units. This is esp. ridicilous in Russia were the Russin's NEVER have to buy any tank units and can rely on corps/armies to destroy german tank groups. I started asking myself what the point of tank groups were after a while since corps can move just as far and are much cheaper.

I agree on all points and have said it before that the AI's main problem is what you described in your 2nd to last point but in reverse, the AI lacks the strategic foresight to try large scale maneuvers to destroy enemy forces, this is esp. bad for the AI when it is basicly the best/fastest way to win the war in russia from ethier side, and more-so for the Russians. I conduct operations like the one you describe on the AI often and with devestating results, making the game very unbalanced. The AI should realize that destroying mass enemy units is often more important then just trying to take/defend cities and resources.

The turn you do the DoW there should be little or no entrenching, but the next turn the cities, esp. the capital should be made full entrench, this way we can simulate surprise attacks AND preperation.