Terry

Let's remember that Patton isn't remembered in Europe with the same enthusiasm as in the States. Given that, the majority of Europeans were unlikley to support his great 'plan' to wipe out the final remains of Europe with a self-destructive war with Russia in '45. It's just one of those ideas that sounds great when you're on the other side of a very wide pond.

Just to comfirm it is illegal to display the Swastika in Germany and Austria - be it on a commercial product or personal item (I think a few other countries such as those in the Baltic follow suit as well but can't remember). For this reason most software and book publishers intending to distribute their products in continental Europe either avoid the Swastika or prepare an alternative. In Germany and Austria in particular there are very strict laws about the Nazi's and the Holocaust. Recently, a British historian who is a Holocuast denier ( :mad: ) was jailed in Austria. This may all seem a bit strict for those in the USA and UK but we have to remeMber that the Nazi's, the Holocaust and Hitler are still very sensitive issues in Central and Eastern Europe. For this reason I can cope without the Swastika in the game.

I always take Norway - it's easy to take, opens up your routes to the Atlantic for subs and raiders, is easy to defend, is a good platform for attacking Sweden, threatens Scapa Flow and northern Britian, can go for Iceland. Plus if things go bad the Allies may waste time taking it instead of getting on with the real deal!

Really like Paratroopers - useful on specfici occasiions, not too powerful or plentiful. Like engineers but too slow and expensive for what they do (except for Russia around MoscoW). Also like the HQ for minors like Canada, Spain and Finland plus the ability to buy units for them. Would like to buy research for them. Don't like Rockets (too long to get going) & carriers a bit dissapointing.

One ongoing minor irritant in SC1 & SC2 is that when as the Allies you declare war and conquer Vichy France it does not revert back to France but becomes a conquered nation of the Major that took it. Realistically there is no way that the UK or US would not hand back this area to the Free French. Even if you conquer Vichy first (which can happen if you take theNorth Africa / Operation Torch route with the US) it should still be handed over once Paris is liberated. Can we chnage this easily?

I presume the point is that The Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg are seperate countries. Apart from the fact some people may not appreciate having their country subsumed into a non-existent conglomerate (anybody for North America rather than USA & Canada?, it is a perfectly acceptable scenario for the Axis to invade Belgium to outflank the Maginot Line but leave the Dutch neutral (as in WW1). Presumably you would adjust the impact on US reaction (less for just Belgium than Belgium and The Netherlands together). Also a useful buffer against advancing Allies in 44/45. Given the scale of the game I agree using Benelux is an excellent high level soluition - however, given the power of the editor if someone wants to do the above changes why not?

I think you'll find America already has its first flirtation with Facism - he's called George Bush. Opps, I forgot - under the new reigme rules you're not allowed to criticse the reigme!

Personally, I'd like Eisenhower and Clark to have the ability to command Commowealth and Free French units as well as American - both were successfully able to do this (in contrast to Patton, McArthur and Stillwell who had no ability whatsoever to command respect from their Allies troops). This flexibility would counter balance the limited pool available.

I used to play World In Flames from the Australian Design Group (it is a map tiles based board game). As in SC 'Lapland' didn't exsist. There was a lot of agitation for a connecting additional map and eventually one was brought out. And guess what - no one ever used it because it was simply swamp, unpassable hexes and mountains. No movement, no supply - nightmare. In addtion it just wasn't strategically important enough in the German attack to justify diverting from Smolensk or Sevastapol or Minsk or anywhere really. A similar thing happened when a further additional map was prodiced to connect the European and Eastern maps (to cater for the Rommel fantasy). Basically it never got used because if the Grmans or Japanese were driving into Delhi why bother - strategically the Allies had already lost or else why would the Germans or Japenese be there? Smae applies to Archangel and Murmansk - it would have to be one weird game to justify why the Germans had them but had not won. So basically extendeding the map for areas that are never likley to be fought over or if they are one side has already (in reality) lost why bother. Which leads me back to Lpaland quite nicely. QED. I'd also add that extending the hexes in North Africa is nice but again can also go too far. Armies did not have the infrastructure to operate too far from the coast and what exsisting infrastrucre there was. You can't get away from the fact that EL Alamein was, and remains to this day, a practical abd very real bottlekneck because of geography and the reality of infrastructure. So lets extend the map where it improves playability and realisitic winning options but simply because 'it's there'.

The naval HQ's seem a brilliant idea - after all the convoy systems bewteen the US and UK were all controlled by the North Atlantic HQ in Liverpool (which still survives today and can be visted). The air HQ systems simply reflect the British 'sector' idea and again should work. Edwins point on assigning invidual leaders names is excellent, although I can't help but add (tongue in cheek) that maybe Patton should also get +1 for fighting his own men!

"I'm sure that Paras played a bigger role than Rockets. If for nothing else they were". Not in Russia, mate. Ask any German who got a got a full truckload of rockets on his head.

Taking Iceland would undoubtedly have some effect on UK supplies. However, surely there would be a huge cranking of US war readiness and how efective would a German defence be unless they controlled the UK and Canada (if they did why bother with Iceland). Again its a nice extra but i still think we are not talking a major (or even meduim) truning point.

Intersting points and well made. For myself, I would like to see some chance where either France fights to the end (i.e. no Vichy) or accepts Churchills offer of Union (absorbed into CW and released on paris liberation). I hate the way in strategic level games you can do non-historical things like invade Turkey (which absoultely no one wanted to do) but you can't avoid Vichy (which was never a certainty).

Some interesting points but my take is that they are irrelevant from a strategic point of view: 1)Icelands independence in 1944 made no practical diffence to its status and its reliance on Denmark economically and to the US/GB for protection. So it doesn't make any real difference what its status is at the start of the game. From a stratgeic point of view its occupation by Germany may have boosted the U-Boat campiagn and hence damaged Lend/Lease etc. However, while certainly it is true the Germans might have taken it quickly the reality is they would never have had the reources to defend it against an American attack. So owning should make a difference but it is not one of those fundamnetal turning points. 2) Egypt as a seperate country seems pointless. If its occupied by the Axis,then its occupied and that should be enough. Whta difference does it make if its Axis occupied or a puppet reigme under Nazi control. The fact is they were occupied either way and it probably suited them more to be occupied by the British than the Germans/Itals (who didn't have a great record for grafting themselves onto local cultures (which was the British method used so successfully)). Indonesia etc showed that the 'liberated' people soon turned aginst their new occuppiers. It was for this reasin the INP eventually decided it was better to be 'British' for the war then Axis. Again its a nice gesture but I hope Hubert is concentrating on more fundamental issues to the game mechanic. After all, a Panzer Division in Alexnadria is all that is strategically required.

Tragically, I was unable to come up with a cunning plan and despite sinking the Italian Fleet and concentrating enough in the Middle east to hold Iraq I'm afraid it's a case of cat & mouse with me cast as the small brown rodent! When the Germans start naval bombardments of Newcastle you know its all over. Congratulations to Gavrok and good luck to both players in the final. Thanks to those made this all possible.