xwormwood

An yet I've never played a single ladder game in my entire life, and still had plenty of great pbem games all around the world.

Hi AlexFerdz. You're right, to run AoD you only need Global Conflict, the Gold expansion is not nescessary for AoD, even though it offers some nice features too. But if you missed everything since the original SC 1, than I would like strongly to suggest that you look into SC WW1 (with the Breakthrough-Expansion). This game comes with a dozen of great games and maps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj0x87_gn-Y, a game about the Russian Revolution (with a LARGE map), a game about the Franco-Prussian War, and an entire WW2 game as well (Europe, just like SC WW1, on a LAAAARGE Map).

Hi Falkenhayn. Here a link to a mighty helpful help for new players, you should find many answers to your question within this thread!

Alliance of Evil is truly a great fun campaign, like the one from Patton drives east. Try SC WW1 with the Breakthrough expansion, it is loaded with great campaigns, and it plays equally great, just like AoE.

You should always tempt with a decision. Do or don't. Offer temptations for both decisions. Promise good things, and mention bad side effects if you let yourself tempt to decide the one or the other way. “Make your choice, adventurous Stranger, Strike the bell and bide the danger, Or wonder, till it drives you mad, What would have followed if you had.” (C.S. Lewis, The Magician's Nephew)

The UK should face a NM drop from delivering a Dreadnought BB into the hands of a German minor, which probably soon will enter the war on the CP side. In this case the CP would get the opportunity do offer the UK a great naval battle, with the goal to kick the now weakened enemy (less NM, weaker navy) out of the war. Something like that.

Great news! I wish you Happy Easter!

Chris, do you play in windowed mode? Does changing the mode help with the tick-tock?

Strange! In my game there is no tick-tock at all. Only a single "tick" if you click on a unit.

Uh-oh. Thanks for the info! Should be solved by now, please try again! Thx Claus

You're right, Stratos!

Yeah, Bill is most definetly the best! I cant await what might be coming next from him. And that is no lie at all.

Great feedback Bill, and worthy information for the "New Player" thread, too!

Stratos, you can't do anything wrong with the Strategic Command WW2 + Gold Expansion combo. AoC is a single theater expansion, featuring the russo-german war (Operation Barbarossa 1941- 1945). AoD offers the largest Global map yet, and the most advanced game engine. My personal favorite is SC WW1, followed by SC Global Conflict with the Gold Expansion. AoD is for my personal taste allready to large, while AoC is to dry. But i tell you what: don't trust my personal taste, when you can check out the demos. Take a look and decide on your own!

Patch 1.03 ist komplett, es ist daher also nicht notwendig, zuerst Patch 1.01 oder 1.02 zu installieren. Das war meines Wissens nach bei Strategic Command bislang auch nocht nie anders.

I was aware about the railway disruption, but not about the supply effect all over the near east!

Maybe it would be better to remove the decision event and give destroyers an option to destroy harbors (damaging both the port AND the destroyer). Or the event should fire quickly, or should be lost once the UK gets conquered by the enemy. I would favor a change in the game system for raids like this one. Some kind of research system for random events. If you invest, you have the chance (no guarantee) that something good will come your way. Something small like this raid. Or U47's attack on Scapa Flow. Minor diplomatic things. A little this, a little that.

No need to install old patches, you alway need only to install the latest patch!

Not if there would be mine fields and coastal guns, just like in history.

You could place a decision event before the deployment phase (do you want to ...). Mabye you could even ask the player how many of the possible units he would like to move in the pre-turn 1 deployment phase. And depending of the answer you could give the Entente some minor help, like one or two detachments, some more money, improved morale, changed diplomatic values, or maybe even a free diplo chit. Just hang a little (!) price tag at the CP deployment phase. He who wants to change history should have to pay for that, as this would have meant a quite a bit of work to do it during the very last days of peace.

Sapare, what i suggested was that the USA send its own money to the UK, and the money stays US money. The USA collects the convoy money (the income that made it through the oceans) in the UK. With this money the USA buys its units and places them in the UK (or Australia, or India, or China, ...). I agree that this is only a partial solutions, because it doesn't help to move naval forces (BBs, CAs, CVs, etc.). But it would help to avoid to send troop transports, which would have to be moved manually.

1 & 2) I agree completely. It is annoying (if you have to watch it during the turn replay). It is ahistorical. But you do it because it is free. And it is not dangerous to do it. If every shot would cost money (imagine a model like the second strength value for carrier strikes), than you would think twice about when and where to fire with your battleships. If enemy controlled level 5+ ports would cause damages to adjacent enemy naval units, you would think twice before you would end your turn next to such a naval port. If there would be a coastal gun tech (like there is an anti-air tech for cities, towns and ressources) firing at passing enemy naval units, than you would thnk twice before passing these tiles. I can imagine a scenario where a battlefleet destroys enemy units and supply lines. If it has enough ammo, and enought time to shoot. But usually there was a response from torpedo / PT boats, from mines, from coastal guns. At least near major countries ports. 3) There is no wall, no, but there are minefields. For my understanding this effect represents the danger around enemy controlled ports. Subs have a chance to slip through, that is why they don't suffer like surface fleets. 4) I guess what we need is a "silent" option for all naval units. If you DON'T want to get a surprise attack (damaged or weak naval unit), than it should be possible to avoid this. Btw: when i stumbled into your surprise attacks, than i never wanted these attacks, it wasn't my evil masterplan. 5) In the Franco-Prussian war campaign Bill added some auto-fortress attacks. I would love to see those in a 1914 campaign, just to get the feeling if this would help the gameplay or not. 6) Probably too hard to calculate and program, abstract as SC is. Nevertheless a good idea. 7) That is what recon planes are for, or airships. I think that two tiles woudl be too far, as this would affect land units two in a way, where you shouldn't able to watch what lies behind the enemy trench lines. On the other hand i would like to see some of the rather "dead" techs enhanced. So i would be in favor if you would get some bonus sight for your harbors if you would start to research infrastructure, or even better: certain combination of techs (if you have instratructure level 3 AND intelligence level 1 AND long range level 1 AND ..., than your ports will gain the abiltity to look two tiles into the sea (but never into land).

A better solution would have been to open up a second income and a second kind of convoy for the US player. There is already one convoy system to help allied countries with MONEY. Now create a second convoy system to TRANSFER your own money to the UK, AUSTRALIA, INDIA (etc. etc.). If the convoy reaches the harbor unharmed (convoy = amount of sent money), allow the US player to spent the money in the UK (playing new units in the UK, maybe a bit faster as if purchased for the USA). If the Axis players sinks the transports from the convoy (placing subs or raiders on the convoy line), money (= troops and equippment) have been lost at sea. Ta-daah.

Catacol Highlander, yes, i do have thoughts, I've offered them often and in detail during the beta phase (where you obviously missed them in my badly written but nevertheless endless feedback lists :eek:), and I will gladly repeat them here once more: "I would remove most, if not all, of the red arrow shortcuts for naval movements. You're robbing the player the chance to destroy troop transports or to use the large sea for naval battles. This won't be possible if you invent warp movement 1000 years before it becomes a reliable transportation system. Leave only the arrows to move from one end of the map to the other side, and vice versa. This is nescessary because we don't have a globe, but a square (the earth is a disc...). But all other arrows, as much comfort they may bring, destroy the big map feature. If players don't like to move their units on a large map, than they should play the smaler map of Global Conflict Gold. Honestly: if there is a safe way to avoid axis warships, than the whole naval war of this map becomes a rather bizare something." & "The red arrows (allies only) don't belong in a game where a large map should offer ways to ambush your opponent at the high seas. Red arrows are nescessary for changing from one side of the map to the other side of the map. If you think you need to offer a comfort feature, than i beg you to think of something better." & "Please make the red arrows (loops) optional, best would be a "turn on"- / "turn off"-button in the game menu within the advanced options. I'm sitting right in front of the largest SC map / largest ocean ever, and get everytime angry when i see the loop buttons which allow the allied player to cheat out of the effects of such a large ocean." I'm pretty sure that i wrote even more about this topic, as these loops kind of killed my desire to play AoD. I can't help it, but that is the truth.

Thanks Bill!