xwormwood

sorry for my mistakes, unfortunalty i started my topic to soon...

Just started my first game. There are so many nice ideas in this game, wow. For this i kneel down and say "Thanks a alot, Mr. HC". But on the other hand i stumbled about some really annoying "features" which survived the trip from sc1 to sc2. First and most disgusting "feature": sea bombardements WHERE in WW2 ETO have you ever seen such strong BB / CA killing and hunting ARMIES and airfleets? i remember only some more or less sucsessfull shelling on d-day and in late '45 on the eastern front (german CAs against the red army). In this game (a kneefall for those SC1 hardcore nerds?) i find the whole damned uk navy in 1940 / 41 shelling everything it can find. Bombardments on AIRFLEETS in WW2? No problem, lets do it. Oh yeah, very accurate. And than entire ARMIES unable to fire back on some lousy ships near the coastline. Like we all remember from history lessons in school, or what? :mad: Sorry, but i don't see no reason why an army or corps is not allowed to fire back. But firing back is not my point. My point is the ridicoulus bombardement by BBs and CAs. I could agree with a loss in morale and readyness, maybe a very rare loss of strength here and there. But this "let's go hunting"-syndrome of the navies in SC2 is in my foolish eyes nothing but a bad joke. The poor choice regarding white & black (upgrading, buying...) has been mentioned before, so i just shut up in this case (even though i don't see how this choice could survive the playtests unchanged). Please don't get me wrong: in my eyes SC2 is a jewel, and i am very glad about many many many things. Beginning with the digital download and ending with all those cool features. But this navy-thing, the black/white desorientation, the iso-view (didn't liked it in CIV2, don't like it in SC2) and the click here, click there, and than wait quite long for an AI wich has nearly nothing to do) spoiled my first impressions quite a bit. Please forgive these scribblings from your unworthy, foolish customer xwormwood [ April 13, 2006, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Just started my first game. There are so many nice ideas in this game, wow. But on the other hand some really anoying "features" survived the trip from sc1 to sc2. First and most disgusting "feature": bombardemnt fro ships. WHERE in WW2 ETO have you ever seen such strong BB / CA killing and hunting

Iiiiek :eek: , the bug of the beast! :eek: :eek:

Hurraa!

Dietrich Bonhoeffer Martin Luther Geschwister Scholl Albert Schweitzer Johann Sebastian Bach

Thank you for all your work, Mr. HC.

After all the jews did fight back in WW2: Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was a fine statement to the free world, and in the concentration camps Treblinka and Sobibor were uprisings as well. But even when the jews started to fight, the rest of the world did pretty nothing to help them. Or to stop the holocaust (which was known to all the allied / soviet leaders by the time). Warsaw Uprising Ghetto Uprising [ November 18, 2005, 03:34 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

You are right, as always. And it wasn't your statement that made me writing. YOU know history, we all can see and read this here and in every else major history thread of the last years. The german mass murderers are unique when you look about how and why they killed (even though Stalin or Mao killed probably even more). My point was not guilt, or who started or did the worst things in a war. It is about the mad horror of killing innocent, helpless civilians to win or shorten a war. I am not sure what kind of reason was / is exactly behind bombing or strafing civilians. But what i know is that creating a firestorm in a city filled with civilians to break the fighting spirit of an army / country (didn't work) is at least "the little brother" of "surrounding a village and kill everyone within" to break the fighting spirit of partisans/ an army / a country (didn't work as well, just the opposite is true).

Thank you, Blashy!

"So let me see. YOur new bright ironic conclusion is that the game will not be better with a realistic leader-file. Hm maybe we could reshape the map too when we are at it. To suit your logic. Well the fact nthat Rokossovsky was one of the best commanders in the war didnt help his case. Now lets try your logic. Hm Spain was a top 10 european military power back then. Lets change the shape of spain to look like a banana and call it Uganda. Hey does'nt matter does it? I mean 30% more Uganda or 20% less Spain doesnt matter does it? And I mean you like to rename things so just use The editor if you're not satisfied with having Uganda in the game." That was funny, thank you for the laugh.

SPD, Zentrum and a dozen others. But have you ever heard of something like Ermaechtigungsgesetz? [ August 10, 2005, 03:05 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Yeah, yeah, if all this rubbish would be true, than this rubbish would be true as well: Uncle Pattons wins were only achieved & possible because the real german wehrmacht was already buried in russia, and he was now facing the kindermacht: :cool:

Yeah, sure. Or maybe the russians would have used the german scientists, workers and soldiers against the US, against democracy, against christianity ("opium fuers volk").

I disagree because there is a difference between wild retreat and an organized retreat (just the way a reatreat could be the first step for a furios counterattack).

Lol. But you are right: it is time to watch Aleksandr Nevsky once again. Even though grandgrandgrandgrandgrand...grandfather will die & drown in the frozen seas ...

Thank you, Mylord. Great picture, as always! Always my joy to join the ranks of the high king of the SC-Forum, JerseyJohn the 1st, true defender of history.

Mmh, what i haven't read here after all: germany would have fought with the allies against the russians. I have read many interviews, letters or diaries from former german wehrmacht-soldiers who stated that they were once and for all through with war in may 1945. With one exception: if the allies would have fought against the USSR: in this case they would have joined the allies. And i am sure that there would have been pro-allied german partisans as well if the allies would have fought back the red army in 1945.

After those statements i wonder why the USA didn't attacked those commies on their own. Maybe you can tell me why. I am pretty sure Uncle Sam might have had a friend in Uncle Kraut.

If it woulnd't come from Mr. Kuniworth himself...

Oh, and when effective tank tactics means that 16-20 poor guys have to die to kill 4-5 on the other side, well, than this tactic really sucks when you are serving in the "16-20 dead"-army. Just my 2 cents. It was such a unnescessaey waste of lifes.

Year Germany USSR USA 1939 249 -- -- 1940 1460 2794 331 1941 3256 6590 4052 1942 4278 24,668 24,997 1943 5966 20,000 29,497 1944 9167 29,000 17,565 Total 24,370 56,952 76,442 (Figure 2: Chart Showing Tank Production6) Total ist totaly wrong: this is what i got as result when adding everything: 24,376 83,052 76,442 So it would be the USSR outproducing everyone, not the US.

In Clash of Steel some attacked nations changed alliances depending of the time (in 1940 turkey became british ally but if attacked in 1944 it bacame russian minor, same for the yugos).

But wasn't it me who vowed never to grow up? Sorry, but i fear we germans are bad losers...