Night

Just leave the unit strength as is and put the bars of experience on top of the icon or next to the str.

I've said many times the A.I needs a complete overhaul. Esp. in the sense that the Axis A.I. never attacked Norway and launch operations in the med. as well as other things that the Axis did historicly and made them harder to beat.

Here is the good part guys, if the full game is comming out Q4, then the demo should be done before that some time

I have to agree with hugo here, unless there is a technical/logistical reason why HC can't add more countries then why the hell not ya know? Just because the SC2 editer is based on SC2 doesn't mean you can't go the extra step to make a better game. You know if there is ever a SC3 he will probally add more countries or make it unlimited anyway since you usally improve as you go along, so why not just skip a step and do it now?

Can we take certain units out of the force pool? For example if I wanted to make a WWI scen. could I remove paratroopers and strat. bombers all together since they were not part of that war? Also, what about new technology in terms of the actual units being invented and not improved. Countries in the beginning of WWI did not really have tanks, but surely enough by the end they had started building and using plenty, will there be a way to simulate this?

Whatever is done I am almost positive SC2 will be better then SC1. Esp. if post release changes/patchs are put out like in SC1.

Thats true too Edwin

It would be cool if there was a surrender option for surrounded units, esp. since in real life very few unit's were ever totally destroyed in combat, ie. fight to the last man. If there was some kind of bennifit to surrendering as oposed to letting your unit be destroyed. Maybe if a friendly unit that is surrounded surrenders you gain back some MPPs and so does the country who surrounded the unit. Or it could have an effect on units in the area in terms of supply/morale etc.

Very nice idea, and I think it could work if we could find good triggers like you were saying, also it would be more realistic since as you pointed out most countries took a lot of time to gear for war. if you gave countries like the U.S. and Russia 20% production before entering the war it would accuratly simulate pre-war build up without making them super-powers before entering. It would also allow for pre-war strategy and force structure for these countries so you can get a specific custom force on it's way to being built before war is declared. Of course you should have to do this with Italy also to make it fair, even though they have fewer turns out of the war then the rest.

^ what he said.

Hmm this is interesting

The A.I in SC1 was not to good at all. I have played it many many times and always get the same "D-day" landings. Almost always the Allies don't land an HQ on the first turn of the invasion, and often wait until they take Brest to do so, meaning many of their forces are choped up peice meal with no supply or readiness. Repeling an A.I. launched D-day assult is a joke, they never use tanks, air power is mis-allocated, HQs are under-used, additional landings behind the lines (if the allies are traped in Brest with a shrinking pocket the A.I. never seems to releave this preasure with a landing elsewhere in France) Also, how come the Allied A.I. never lands in Italy? It would be so much more interesting. All these things should be fixed with SC2

Paratroopers played an important role in WWII and should be included in SC2 as normal fighting units with the ability to do airdrops with restrictions. the 101st in the battle of the buldge did not act like soviet partisans, they were a normal infantry unit just like all the others and fought just as hard if not harder.

I still think the idea of setting some to no retreat so you can customize is the best choice if you are going to put in a retreat opition

I used a lot of those thinks just improvising in my games too. I dunno about the A.I. doing it though :/

The A.I. should be able to lay plans for encirclements and traps so that it will be able to destroy enemy units, not just go after cities and whatever is in the way.

You could add more units but lower their readiness down to 25% or so and prehaps even supply down a point or two in order to simulate Germany "running over" these units.

It has been said before about how units being totally destroyed is unrealistic. A retreat opition would be nice. I think the player should be able to set certain unit's to no retreat, like a check box on the side or bottom when you have that unit selected. Since in some cases retreat would serve to hurt the unit more. For ex. If you are on a front line and only 2 units can hit you and they do but make you retreat, then tiles open up for more units to come in and finish you off as well as breach the line and hit other units, whereas they would just hold with 2 or 3 str until next turn.

I don't know about that one :/

It means that The Germans won't have the advantage of bringing a massive army over to the west almost overnight and will actually have to fight for years. Consider having an opition where the USSR surrenders the western half of the country after the Urals and Caucasus fall because it does seem a little ridicilous for Germany to have to march across Asia

That's a good idea also.

I'm for stacking in ports and limited stacking on land def. Since now we have units like engineers and more HQs. etc.

I think there should def. be an opition to increase training at a greater MPP cost for ground units so they start with increased experience.

I guess you could give the North no ports. Or prehaps reduce their ports to Zero so that by the time they recharge up to 5-10 (where they can load transports) the U.S. should have arrived.

Why would N Korea have to be stoped from building transports? All you really have to do is give the U.S. it's navy and historicaly N Korea has little or no Navy so any transports they do send would be blown out of the water.