xwormwood

"Tanks against farmers" Can't believe that i am the only person here who is anoyed by these statements!?! rambo, let me help you: your story happend in Vietnam, not in WW2-Europe.

There is a PC version (http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?gameid=1069). I am not sure if this game can be palayed without the manual (copy protection). (here some hints: first word under section 1.1 = storm last word under section 8.3 = it last word under section 9.4 = transfer first word under section 9.7 = naval last word under section 10.62 = bombers title of section 10.63 = fighters last word under section 10.632 = reach If anyone needs some help because underdogs has no manual: mail me edit: there is a patch file: simply start the "R-Storm"-file and the copy protection accepts every answer. Game runs fine under WinME [ May 14, 2003, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

I played Storm Across Europe on C64 (Joystick-Interface, coool!), Amiga & PC. The Amiga version was the best one of them. In my opinion it is still one of the best strategic games ever released. So many techs to research:garisson troops, infantry, mech. infantry, tanks, paratroopers, tac-air, strategic bomber, rockets, a-bomb, fighters, anti-aircraft-guns, battleships, escorts, cargoships, landing crafts, subs... You could build industries or fortifications instead of troops, fake armies, lend lease was possible ... Ok, the AI cheated (i say only Russia...), but playing against a human player is still fun. I think today is a good day to reinstall my little jewel... [ May 13, 2003, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

And it should be MANY random events (hundreds of them). This feature would give us back the nescessary spice when we play against the AI .

SeaWolf_48 Please forgive me when i stabb a little in your post Help did not come to them until Germany attacked Russia in June of '41, and later in December when Japan attacked the US and American became her best ally (giving England, food, arms, fuel, and men ,for free You forgot to mention that England already recieved massive help from the US months before Uncle Sam finaly entered the war in December 1941! And i see a big difference in "tying down" troops and fighting against fanatic troops. Submarine crews were the cream of the german crop We are talking about 40000 men, and in 1944 the cream served surely not in Kriegsmarine anymore This is not to mention the horrific bombing that Germany recieved from Allied Strategic Bombers crippling hugh resources,industry and civilians bombing the civilians prolonged the war (look what happend when these evil maniacs "bombed" the US in 2001). I guess you should subtract this war effort from your "why the allies won the war"-list after Normandy Germany's attention was with france and not Russia, proved by the quality of Divisions used in both Theaters The best german armies were already buried or starving as POWs in Russia when the Allies finaly started D-Day.

Which of Nazi Germany's opponents lead her to it's final demise (who contributed the most). The Soviet Union with it's huge army, or England/America with their large Navies, Air Forces, and Logistics. Which of the Allies took more of Germany's resources (soldiers, workforce, industry, and logistics Russia, without any doubt. Russia, RUSSIA and of course Hitler. Maybe you have to live in Germany or Russia for a while to understand this. The US needed the UK to fight Germany, and the UK needed the US to survive, but without Russia everything would have been lost. And for Germany everything was lost when Hitler decided to lead his armies without his generals ("this is easy work, i can do this stuff on my own, no need for generals, move aside!")

sounds like mixing SC with the late Panzer General (SSI). Nice idea, would be funny to see units with special leaders and / or abilities... [ May 02, 2003, 01:33 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

From my last TCP/IP-Game: -is it a game function or a bug, that the allied player becomes no informations about his lost lend-lease when axis subs attacked him? -is it a game function or a bug, when the swedish airforce does not intecept axis airstrikes against swedish units located next to this full-strength swedish air-fleet? -is it a game function or a bug when rocket detachments can't be turned into transport-ship? -is it a game function or a bug when an axis airfleet intercepts an allied bombing run when it is the very target of this bombing run? I have never seen such things happen in PBEM-Games or when i played against the AI / HotSeat.

Please stop talking about "Reichs ". In german we know "Reich", of course (ich bin reich = i am rich / Reich mir mal die Butter=please give me the butter / mein Reich ist besser als deine zwei Reiche zusammen=my Kingdom[my country] is better than both of your kingdoms [countries] together). But what the heck are "Reichs"?

Konstatin V. Kotelnikov : The mouse would have approx.. 188 tons weighed (Jagdtiger: 71 tons). Nearly no bridge could have carried such a monster, therefore one designed it in such a way that it could easily through-dip 8 meters deep water. (from: http://www.panzerlexikon.de/ Roughly translated by stupid me & BABELFISH.) The Clash of Steel-Hitler-Feature was buggy. When your Afrika-Korps invaded the USSR via Persia, your troops HAD to move from east to west to CONQUER. But Hitler ordered "NO RETREAT" (east to west movement) and your troops were forced to stop, even though they advanced...

Shaka of Carthage Clausewitz

ok, next try: MR. MOON: WHAT ABOUT THE AUSTRIAN PEOPLE, WHY DIDN'T YOU MENTION THIS POOR LITTLE GERMAN SPEAKING COUNTRY WHILE INTRODUCING THE LOCALIZED VERSIONS??? NO DISTRIBUTION, BECAUSE HITLER WAS BORN IN AUSTRIA, OR NO DISTRIBUTION, BECAUSE THEIER IS NO DISTRIBUTOR FOR AUSTRIA, OR NO DISTRIBUTION, BECAUSE EVERYONE AT BATTLEFRONT SLEPT ALL THE TIME AT SCHOOL IN HISTORY LESSONS? With a happy "he is risen from the grave" from Bremen / Germany Claus Stührmann

poor AUSTRIA ... lol

Urko: The problem is that nobody knows exactly the reasons why france, germany, russia refused to join the US in this conflict. Even though i surely don't know every reason the us had, i know that we have to fight for our freedom, and it is a good place to start this fight in a country like iraq. When i saw last week "the two towers" the 5th time i realized, that there are strong similarities (sorry, someone should help me out, me english is still VERY limited) to our world. "open war is upon you, if you dare the fight or not" (roughly re-translated speech of Aragon when he faced King Theoden). If we refuse to fight back these criminal states like iraq, lybia, syria, north corea we or our children will have to pay the price for our decision. [ April 06, 2003, 09:29 AM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

jon_j_rambo That is what i call a good idea!

Jersey John Getting to the other point you were making, concerning the current world. JerseyJohn, i can understand that you are angry/tired of the dump european masses. BUT don't let your heart be hardened while writing about the Iraq. There are MANY germans who do NOT support Schroeder / Fischer. Come on, you can post much better entries. Writing in anger isn't the best way to create a good, clear, sharp or cunning post. Even a lousy german government placed some special tanks in kuwait, placed 5000 soldiers to afghanistan (more than any other nation) etc. :mad: Schroeder :mad: won the last election by only 7000 votes (not much compared to 80 milion germans...), and the loser party would have supported the us today. :cool:

santabear: great post, all you wrote is absolut correct and true. Nice to have this forum, always many good thoughts and answers here. [ April 02, 2003, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

santabear: Thank you for your answer. I agree with you that Japan never had a chance against the US, never before and never after midway. I also agree that economic power is a vital instrument to win a war. But when we take a look at the Vietnam-wars (France, USA) we see also that even a weak army can find a way to win against an enemy with bilions of mpp's (to speak in SC terms...). In a free country every single persons life has it's high value, but in countries like Japan, Russia etc. the generals didn't bothered about human losses (in the 1930 -50's). This can balance out much industrial might, as history showed us. When I mentioned Japan than only to mention that the allies would have had an stronger oponent in the pacific theater after a possible russian capitulation. They still would have surely won the war against japan, but only at the price of higher losses in men and material. Material would have been no big problem for the USA, but what about the loss of life? I believe that at a certain point (maybe 1 million dead americans, just to write a specific amount) the american people would have been fed up with further losses only to achieve TOTAL victory over japan, demanding a peace (maybe pre-war borderlines). --- In late 1942 Germany had lost the war in the atlantic and was loosing the war in the air as well as in the west. But even while air superiority is absolut nescessary to win a war and german airforce was not to see on d-day the landing could have failed if a)the german tank reserves would have been placed nearer to the coast, what p.E. Rommel ALWAYS demanded Hitler wouldn't have been sleeping (nobody dared to wake him up for MANY hours) and after waking up permitted it to bring them to the battlefield (he refused for days to believe that this was THE invasion). When the reinforcements finaly arrived, it was to late. The allied have had enough time to bring in THEIR reinforcements, suplies etc. Maybe it would have been possible to stop the allies, but only in the first couple of days, and only with a general staff able to decide, command and act like they've learned it. With a wannabe-general like Hitler pulling the strings it was surely impossible. *big difference here between 42 & 43! agreed. But this change would have been slowed alot if the german airforce wouldn't have had to fight the red army in the east any longer the Germans could not invade Britain agreed! germany would have never been able to invade the UK after declaring war against the USA reason that I could see for Britain and the US to ever consider surrender agreed again. I've never mentioned a total german victory, just peace talks. Germany wasn't able to survive a "2-front-war", but with only one front left, hm, difficult yes, but impossible? --as long as the US Army Air Force wasn't around you ment: as long as the US Army Air Force wasn't able to achieve total air superiority, am i right? Germany needed some things they just couldn't quite get to be successful they needed MORE planes and pilots, not better planes. "Schnorchel" (snorkel) were installed to give the old subs a fairly better chance to survive, you ment the "Walter"-Subs, which were the first "true" submarines Russian defeat would have prolonged WWII the Allies were in command of the situation, not the Germans Agreed, agreed, agreed. My question was, if a prolonged war would have brought the allies to a point of war tiredness, from which they would have been already satisfied with a peace treaty instead of complete victory. At least the Brits, suffering from 1940 to 1945 from german bombs and rockets wouldn't have been too happy about another year of war. Churchill was very soon after the end of the war replaced by Attlee, even though it was Churchill who brought the UK through the war. Hitler attacked Russia and declaring war on the US I think he wanted the japanese to do the same: declaring war against russia (NO siberian army Moscow '41). And on the other hand the USA were already attacking german subs, lend-leasing the UK (all without their own declaration of war against germany, just like Syria seems to do right now["lend-lease]), but no german sub was allowed to attack any US ship before the declaration of war, even when it was attacked by this US destroyer who tried to sink it. Out of whack MPP values and plunders, that allow Germany to get a much bigger advantage in 39-41 than she actually got in reality. germany looted every countries gold reserves (germany was printing money without the nescessary gold, it needed this gold BADLY), it transfered food from the conquered countries to germany, so that at home no one would have to starve like in 1917/1918. Starving has been always and everywhere quite unpopular. This plunder did happen. The ability of the axis to get jet aircraft in 1942 The first german jets flew 1939 (August 27th), before the war even had started), It was Hitler who prevented further reseach. Jet aircrafts could have been ready en masse in 1942. Germany started war because of Hitler and Germany lost the war because of Hitler. SC does ignore this fact. There is no Hitler for the axis player in SC. That is the most unhistoric part in the game. Clash of Steel had at least a (stupid) rule which prevented sometimes german movement from east to west in russia (no retreat by Fuehrer's order). Unfortunatly this rule also prevented any ADVANCES if your troop came from east border of the map (Afrika Korps conquered Baku and had only enemies west of their position, but wasn't able to advance because of a "no retreat-rule"... PS: in my opinion Germany would have (and was...)never been able to a) rule over a conquered russia for a longer period of time win against the USA (Lee was a nice example, lol) c) win the war at all [ April 01, 2003, 06:24 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

xwormwood - Both -

Here in Germany everything is like always: everybody buys still Coke, watch still Hollywood-movies etc., no real "boycott" to see here at all. And while the dollar still lose against the euro every american made product gets even cheaper, so what do you think people will buy. Let the world shout and cry, they always do if someone does right while them would rather prefer to do wrong. And the islamic states would hate the christian western states even if they would regain rulership over isreal, africa, asia ... These folks have nearly no education, follow an fanatic religion and know (and never knew) no freedom.

I agree with everyone about the fact that germany did so endless many cruelties that every average russian man / woman had enough reason to hate their evil led occupiers. But on the other hand it were the soviets who killed even more russian people in the years before and after the war, so many russians had reason enough to hate the bolsheviks as well. Even in late 1944 / 45 there was this huge voluntary army (russian pows) under Gen. Wlassow who fought against the red army (and it wasn't anymore the time where a german victory would have been possible). If the germans would have installed puppet regimes like vichy, these regimes would have fought against any red army supporters. I am not really sure that the allies would have fought any further after the fall of the USSR. If the 3rd Reich would have offered reasonable concessions to the allies, hmm, i like the patriotism of everyone here, but why are you sure they would have fight further more? After the surrender of the USSR even Japan would have been a harder enemy. I hereby suggest that the allies (or better: the US) should have less mmps after the fall of russia (because of an stronger japanese enemy). Or at least it should retreat some corps or battleships etc to the pacific theatre. I may be wrong, but i got always this smile on my face thinking about the following: "It seems that it had to be a player from an former "axis" country to demand negative effects for the allied players while it have been often writers from an former "allied" country who demanded negative effects for the axis player in SC".

Would Britain / the US really fought any longer against a 3rd Reich that conquered Russia??? With all the experienced troops from the east in Fortress Europe, would the US / the UK really dared the invasion? They didn't invaded Japan, and what is the japanese Mainland against a 3rd Reich dominating europe incl. russia, with ALL it's forces to counter any invasion? And what if the invasion (D-Day) would have failed in a bloody, catastrophic way, would the Allies have dared another try? Wasn't there a possibility that even after a german victorious "Battle of the Bulge / Ardennenoffensive" Britain / the US would have entered peace talks? I wonder why everyone always have tons of extra rules against the axis player, but so very few concerning the handicaps of the allies in WW2 (public reaction on extensive troop losses and war-tiredness). :confused:

santabear: Air superiority is the key for germany, because it got no navy to protect the invasion fleet from the british homefleet. And even with air superiority it would have been VERY unlikely that SeaLion would have had even a smal chance for success. For the UK the " the British navy at Scapa " was surely the most effective key to close the door for an german invasion. The only lockpick the germans could have used would have been total air superiority. I think i remember that the demand for air superiority was some kind of trick the german admirals used. Goering was proud and ignorant, so he would promise everything to his "Fuehrer". I guess many of these leaders of the "Kriegsmarine" were quite facilitated that Goering promised to wipe away the RAF: he failed to achieve air superiority and no one blamed THEM for the cancelation of operation "Seeloewe".

disorder Thank you for your post. You are absolutly right, but this marine spoke from NEVER, sounded like his unit was just to lazy or racist to make japanese prisoners. And in my eyes it is amazing that somebody can make such statements without shame. I think it was the attidue of this old man what shocked me. The "Private Ryan" situation happens in every war. In my opinion the only "bad" guy in this movie was the scribe who shot the german who recognized him. I still wonder why he finaly shot someone (after he didn't rescued his comrades). Shaka & JerseyJohn Thank you for your posts. But i am against an atomic-bomb in SC2. Why? I am from germany, i am against anything. Just kidding, just kidding. Godspeed to all allied forces in Iraq! [ March 25, 2003, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: xwormwood ]

Italy got 3 BB, 1 CA and 1 SS in the MedSea. UK & France got 1 CV, 3 BB, 1 CA and an airfleet on Malta. If you fight the italians within range of Malta both fleets are more or less equal. If you bring down the 1 BB and 2 CA (all french) from the atlantic you should win the big battle, even though you might suffer heavy losses while one or two italian ships evantually evade heavily damaged into a friendly port. Than let us look what fleet stays back to counter a german SeaLion: 2 CV, 3 BB and 2 CA and 2 or 3 airfleets and 1 strategic bomber. The german player got 2 CA and 1 SS (the atlantic subs are easy prey and should be on their last dive on turn 2, 3 or 4). Even against 4 or 5 german airfleets it should be possible to win SeaLion. At least you should be able to fight the krauts long enough to wake up the (hungry and mad) russian bear.