xwormwood

My Battlefront store experience from today: Just finished this email toward sales contact "Lori": Hello. I'm a little bit frustrated here. I forgot my password, and obviously even my Username. And there is no way to retrieve my forgotten passwort, because Battlefront store don't send no emails as long as someone doesn't enter his passwort and his email address or his username and his email address. Brilliant Idea (if you don't want to sell anything)!!! After all it is not possible to register new if you already registered with you current email address ... :mad: So please: if you really want to sell me a game, think about a change in this kind of policy. I hope you can understand why i'm quite angry after 5-7 fruitless tries to get my password. Kind regards Yes, i'm getting old and it was my mistake to forget my password. But honestly, i never met such an unbelievable unforgiving mechanism to prevent a sale. The true joke is that i can registerd via paypal, prepare the payment but battlefront refuse to accept this payment. :mad: :mad: :mad:

With this everything is said. I couldn't agree more.

from wikipedia: Turkish Air Force, beginning in mid-1942, received 72 examples of the Fw 190 A-3a (export model of A-3, a stood for ausländisch - foreign) from Germany to modernize their air force. These aircraft were basically Fw 190 A-3s, with BMW 801 D-2 engines and FuG VIIa radios and an armament fit of four MG 17s, with the option of installing two MG FF/M cannon in the outer wing positions. The export order was completed between October 1942 and March 1943. The Fw 190 remained in service until 1948-1949.

Yavuz = the former WW1 Battlecruiser "Goeben" (German Hochseeflotte) . From german-navy.de: Goebens life was quite unique - as part of the Mediterranean Division, the ship was sold to Turkey in 1916, but still operated with the German crew on board. During the operations against the Russian fleet in the Black Sea, the ship was called "Dyadya" - The Uncle" by the Russians. At the end of World War I, it was completely taken over by Turkey and in Turkish services until 1954. Since negotiations failed to return the ship to Germany, it was scrapped in 1974. From wikipedia: Goben, as Yavuz Selim (until 1936) and later as simply Yavuz, continued active service in the Turkish navy until well after World War II. Her war damage rendered her practically useless until 1926, when repairs were begun. She was finally fit for service again in 1930 and recommissioned. In 1938 she carried the coffin of the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, from Istanbul to the Anatolian port of Izmit. Practically unchanged from her World War I configuration and still coal powered, she was given NATO pennant number 370 in 1952, although she was used since 1948 only for representational purposes. In 1954 Yavuz was decommissioned and placed in reserve. The West German government offered to purchase Yavuz in 1963, but Turkey declined. The Turkish government later changed its mind, and placed the battlecruiser up for sale in 1966. However, the political climate of West Germany in the late 1960s and early 1970s was not conducive to the military, particularly for a practically unchanged remnant of the country's imperial past. Yavuz was finally purchased in 1971, and was towed from her berth on 7 June 1973. The last surviving battlecruiser was broken up between July 1973 and February 1976. [ February 19, 2008, 11:21 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Yeah, that would be probably helpful, hihi.

As far as i know the first SS units wiped themself out of the war because thes were fantical believers, ignoring military wisdom. Later than they got mostly better equipment than the wehrmacht. And even later they fought till death because they had their SS-Tattoos and knew if the russians would get them it would have been Siberia or most certainly worse. I don't know nothing about superior SS-Power. And no, i don't think adding special forces like the brandenburger were one of Huberts birghtest ideas. In fact, i hate them in a grand strategical game like SC2. Same goes for anti-tank and anti-air units. These units (and even SS) would be ok, if Hubert would have made a Panzer General Ultimate-Edition. But unfortunatly there is no decent game designer out there to continue SSI's legendary work. Sad but true. [ February 10, 2008, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

42!

Volksturm was quickly drafted, with nearly no training, lousy equipment and stupid leadership (Nazi party leaders, not Wehrmacht). Maybe these kind of units could be units "drafted" / scrambled out of the production line? You get a corps unit you have already paid for pretty fast ("i want them, i got them"), but therefor these units get no HQ-Support, limited strenghtpoints, no experience, limited tech possibilities and a certain chance that they disintegrate the moment they take heavy losses (fled home), maybe even lowering morale of regular troops nearby. Elite unts are already in the game, as soon as you build them up properly and get them experience. You can't buy experience or morale. But you can transfer it. Maybe it would be a nice addition to the game if players get the possibility to transfer experience from one unit to another one? The receiving unit could get some experience while the donor unit would loose more experience then the receiving unit would get from the transfer (new unit, new leaders, new equipment, new comrades, so the top notch transfers loose some of their old effecience). This way players would be able to get Elite Units the historical way. And we wouldn't need some new unit types. Btw: i really don't want any special SS Units in this game. Just use the bloody rename function, that is more than enough, Special colours? Yawn.

Netter Ansatz. Wenn auch ein sehr anspruchsvoller. Viel Erfolg!

Hexes all the way. Tiles and movement over the edges of a tile look ridiculous. And yes, i like SC2 and even more CIV 4. But still: if i want to play a strategic wargame, i want to play it with hexes, not with tiles. I need only to look at a screenshot of CEAW and feel instantly the urge to buy this game, because everything looks so neat and right. Can't say this for SC2, sorry.

I agree with arado234. Morale would be vey low, same for equipment, training and tactics. Total war needs time, and germanies volksturm was wasted into the gunfire of the enemy, so not such a big role model, hm?

I don't know enough facts about the british reserves and homeguard quantity / quality. But we didn't see such a phenomen in France when the german broke the neck of the french army. Why should be such an industrial and moral outburst occur in the UK? If the royal navy wasn't able to stop the Kriegsmarine and the Royal Airforce wasn't able to stop the Luftwaffe and all out of the sudden the nazi wehrmacht stands on the british isle while offering favourable peace terms, add to this that France is gone, no US entry and a german-russo pact, while japans eats the far eastern colonies for breakfast... I can't see or imagine a UK wonderarmy standing up from nowhere. Yes, there is the sleeping Arthur tale, of course, but come on. There is a difference between the USA and the UK, and while i totaly agree that the US would easily create an effecitve and forceful homeresistance, i highly doubt that the UK would have been able to do the same.

At least towards the end of the war the Waffen SS wasn't handpicked anymore. My Grandpa was drafted into the Waffen-SS (from an regular Wehrmacht 88-Unit).

Engine: Current Synopsis: Mobile Ports / Mulberry Design Summary: Introduce a unit which represents a mobile port, but only to generate supply (not to load / unload units). No attack / defense factors. Once attached to a coastline, it should only stay on a map for a limited timeline. Let naval and strategic or tac bombers be able to reduce the supply level created by this unit. This unit frees the allied player (and the AI) from conquering a specific city & harbor when it comes to starting a successful amphib landing. Let this unit only be available to nations who gained a specific level in amphibius landings / naval power (maybe Lvl 4 / Lvl 2) Problem 1: copyright belongs probably SSI Problem 2: Placing it, moving it or unloading it?

Engine: Current Synopsis: Game History Design Summary: Offer the players more statistics when the game has ended. Show detailed losses of every unit. Show in a vcr fastforward-replay how the strategic map has canged while the game went on. Tell the player, at which date the tide of war has switched from maybe winning to surely loosing by calculating army strength, income amd unit losses. ("Turningpoint: Stalingrad december 1942"). Keep track for the players, when wich city or ressource or unit was captured or lost or rebuild. Create for every country or ocean in which was fought a timetable. Show this list for every country / ocean seperatly if the player wants to see it seperatly. Highlight each end every name, so when a player clicks on a name he can see at which date a city was captured by which unit against what unit of the other side, or when a ship was sunk by which enemy. Enrich with these details the fun for every player after the game, making it something worth to play a game through (instead of the MEGA-ULTRA-GIGA unsatisfying lame end we have just right now...) Problem 1: has to be programed completly new into the game (?)

Engine: Current Synopsis: Change the sides Design Summary: Allow in a game against the ai to change the side you are playing. Mighty improvement when playing the ai, because, you can go on even if you are probably winnig. Simply take the weaker alliance and try to turn the tide against your evil ai clone. Problem 1: giving the ai some ideas what to do with the always new situation Problem 2: players would know where units are and which city / region is how strong or weak defended. Solution could be: let the ai play 1 or 2 turns both sides while the human player gets only the results presented (unit x destroyed, city y taken, resource z bombed) so that the ai got time to make some adjustments.

Engine: Current Synopsis: Implent a chit system instead of scripted events Design Summary: create a pool with special events. add every few specific turns special events. Player would have to pay some cash to "draw" a chit out of the pool. Limit the chits you can draw (1 per turn or one per month etc.). If you pay, you can draw a chit from your pool. A result out of the pool could be - an experience star for a unit on the map (adopted new tactics) - one double attack for a none double attack unit (Peiper assigned to unit x) - a moral boost (Churchills famous "we will fight them..." speech) - some cash (Exile-Norwegians donate to your cause yadda-yadda-yadda) - reduce buld time for a unit which is already in production (Speer looked into the production and found out that blablabla) - revive a unit with strength 1 (survivers made their way back to their own lines) - add diplo % (Canaris warned Franco about entering the war, Spain leans 5 % toward the allies) - addjust the map (russo-finish Winter War) - minor war entry (ireland) - fuehrers / presidental order (stay there, move this) - all as above but in the different direction, malus instead of bonus - many more (Graaf Spee made it back home, Rommel captured, Prince of Wales to Asia, Blue Legion ... Always add some historical info / background / explanation for the specific chit Insert many more chits than in one, two or three games could ever be drawn. Insert several blank chits. Fill the pool dynamic according the actions a player takes. Example: Axis invades Norway: fill Norway chits in the pool. UK buy a new carrier: insert "a new UK Carrier" chits etc. etc. Allow players to pay for every chit of their opponent which the opponent didn't pay for in his round / turn / month. Remove the chit which got drawn in this case permanently out of the game. Enable or disable this function before the start of a game Problem 1: Luck factor slightly increased, so our chess player section won't like this feature at all Problem 2: Balancing [ January 07, 2008, 04:31 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Yes, very smart, my friend, but please let me help you here, because it spells and if you don't, then go out and purchase a game from a different designer. We (or at least I) like Hubert for what he did with SC 1 and SC 2, and so we (or I) take the liberty to ask him to design an even better game whenever we (or I) want to. This constant "shut up or go away" attitude here is starting to be very annoying. You have seen the title of this thread (SC 3), haven't you? So for a new and probably improved game the fan base shouldn't ask any wishes and start design their own game instead? Great!

Yes, they are. And they are better abstractions as well. [ January 02, 2008, 10:49 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Carriers are sea units with a limited air strike ability. Therefor they should always do worse air strikes than regular air units. So, if i may dare to ask, why not introduce land units with limited air strike ability? a) Infantry with air strike ability (limited and worse than regular air fleets). Use them in Malta or Crete. Choose, if it should do strategic, tac or cap duty. Choose it with buying the correct upgrade. b)Tank units with air strike ability (limited and worse than regular air fleets). Use them for tank breakthroughs. Buy the correct upgrade. etc. etc. Call these units "stacked" units, or call them whatever you want. Create a new navy unit with an infantry upgrade. Allow these specific navy units to invade coastal hexes / tiles. Don't allow them to move further inland. Enable these new unit with a switch (on / off) before starting a game. Those who don't like it can make it away with a little click. Should solve pretty much nearly all problems we are talking about in this thread without changing to many things and without too much effort. And than give us back hexes. Because tiles are the worst solution. If you don't believe it, start a poll and ask your customers. Thank you for your attention. [ January 02, 2008, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

You got this one wrong. It is about playing a challenging scenario with a very personal history in its back, because YOU (or better: the player) fought this entire war until YOUR NEW SCENARIO begins. You know exactly why this or that ship went down to the bottom of an ocean, YOU know when Kiev was captured or why Turkey entered the war etc. I buy a game to play it alone. If i can play a human player as well: great, but in my personal life there is little time to organize a game against a human player. And than there are different time zones etc. etc. And i don't need a PERFECT CHESS-LIKE AI. I need an AI which in not too stupid, which gets here and there improvements (new ways to act, via patches / updates) and which doesn't have to cheat. I hate those scripted new units for the AI (like in WAW), because this really feels like cheating. I could wonderfully live with reinforcements for the AI a la "AI captured Minsk and gets therefor one additional corps, you russian sucker!" or "AI sunk more than 200 of your sorry convoy mmps and can therefor spare enough tanks to get one new unit in 3 month". This would be in a direct connection with my failures or the success of the AI. Pumping the AI up without telling me is too disgusting for my taste.

I played hotseat quite often (in those days that was nearly all multiplayer you could ask for). In a single player game, Clash offered you a bit more than SC, SC2 or SC2 WAW: you could play the game till you felt that you would surely win and than change sides, letting the AI play your winnig side while you tried to rescue the mess which the AI left you on it side. I still can't understand why it is not possible to change player side in SC2. This is a real gift for every single player who can't or who don't want to play games against human player (as good as they may be).

I'm with me. Because it sucks to have a massive moral and material advantage but a lousy 1 strength-point survivor with no moral at all can still deny you any advance. And to hell with malta. I'm talking about this gamey blocking of entire coastlines with corps, which didn't helped the Wehrmacht any good against any full allied invasion attemp. "Hammer them, land you troops, kick the survivors out of your beach head" instead of "hammer them first to death, than enter your enemyfree countryside", i say! Or should i cry "Patton instead of Montgomery!"?

But then there were many other things originaly not considered which found their way into the SC-Games, so why should we stop to discuss? And yes, i do remember the SC1 topics from waaaay back, thank you for reminding me of many fruitless begs and discussions. Sigh. My hint towards Clash of Steel was only nescessary because you wrote that any attemp to implent auto-withdrawals as a combat result would be the end of a WW2 game (=WW1) or would result in utter losses for the defender (in CoS it was more of the opposite, your enemy slipped out of your grasp). @ Go play Clash of Steel I like SC2 / SC2 WAW, but until now, i am still looking out for something better. BECAUSE SOME VERY TINY, BUT VERY NICE THINGS from SC-Grandfather Clash of Steel haven't found their way back into a game. - Withdrawals - a decent History of the game-function

Solution would be simple: no withdrawal while there are any entrenchement levels left. After there is no entrenchement and no moral % left, than you reach the "loose strenght points and withdraw"-region.