Jump to content

Brett

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Brett

  1. I play lot of games (wargames, economic games, RPG). One of the *fascinating* features of some RPG is they postulate a series of questions (sometimes yes/no, sometimes 3+ answers) which helps to formulate the character's starting condition/stats. I would love to have a feature like this for the big campaigns (i.e., WW1-1914, WW2-1939) as an option to the "standard" setup. Essentially a series of (6-8) Decision Events that occur before the war. Could influence technology, diplomacy/alliances, starting forces, etc. WW1 Example: 1) Conscription or Professional Army (more inexperienced troops vs. less w/ infantry tech and experience) 2) Subs vs. Surface ships (2 levels of adv. subs vs. 1 level of naval, 50% of force upgraded) 3) Expanded Fortifications (Yes - add ~5 border forts, No - add 200 economy) etc WW2 Example: 1) Maginot or No 2) Spanish Alliance -brett
  2. For reference, I consider the original SC:ETO one of the best wargames ever made... :> Like(s): HUGE - the many decision events... Wow, very interesting... Every one is interesting and contributes to the "grand" scale of the game... Manual and strategy guides - KUDOS! I like the fact that these are PDF and the manual proper can be accessed from within game. Research - Big improvement from the original... I like all the changes here... Success consumes a chit (good), good mix of steady progress (good) and randomness (good). Option for traditional symbol based counters and not 3D units (aside from the fact that I'm a traditionalist, my aging eyes find the traditional symbols much easier than trying to squint at 3D counters). Might have been nice to have the same option for cities/terrain features. As with the original game, I like the options (FoW, etc)... Dislikes: Major - square grid (bleah), go back to hexes! Looks to much like Civilization... Ambivalent/Uncertain: Some historical events (Graf Spee combat) add interest... Not sure if these are completely pre-programmed or involve some level of randomness... I would probably like them more if they included minor decision events...
  3. Sorry, don't like it and find unrealistic. If you have experienced troops available AT ALL, why can't I use them to reinforce a weakened unit (i.e., <10)? In SC:ETO you could actually have experienced units. I liked how it worked, even if it represented an "infinite" pool of experienced replacements. Part of the reason you pay extra for elites, presumably reflects their limited availability. In a real sense, a unit that has 10% experienced veterans and 90% "green" troops is a *lot* more effective than a unit with 100% green troops. The game appears to model it as a linear dilution of effectiveness (i.e., replace 5/10 troops - lose 50% of experience). Other mechanism could be easily created to model the fact that even a small cadre of experienced troops bring enormous benefit. Simple one is to carve out a portion of the experience base that is unaffected by the replacements: Example: New experience = 0.6 * old_exp + 0.4 * old_exp * (old_troops/total_troops_after_reinf) In game terms, the inability to replace losses (vs. only over-strength) with experienced troops means that there is little point in the game system that allows for experience. Virtually every unit will be "0" or "1" at best. Only units that experience virtually uninterrupted luck (high enemy causalities AND low self causalities) will ever grow in experience. If you wanted to have a more "realistic" system, you could have every country have a small generation pool/turn of elite reinforcements (e.g., Germany 8/turn) and then add in a fractional loss for each strength point lost in combat (e.g., 1 per 5). Then get rid of the increased cost, since you are handling the limited availability in a different way. Sorry, but I just don't buy that my veteran troops are un-employable and unwanted until my army decides to over-strength some corps. -brett
  4. Ok, after much fiddling, I came to understand that Elite Reinforcements ONLY allows a unit to be used to build a unit >10 at 1 step per turn. It *cannot* be used to actually replace losses... (Err - huh?) Which seems quite strange... I would submit that it should have 2 legitimate uses: 1) replace losses with (up to 10) with elites 2) over-strength, 1 step per turn (suggest no enemy contact only apply to this case) Which, assuming I recall correctly, is how the original version of SC worked. The unfortunate effect of the rule as it currently stands is that experienced units that take minimal losses, will drop to in-experienced, as soon as they replace their losses. -brett
  5. 1914: Call to Arms - Aug 1914 Elite Reinforcements does not appear to work. Infantry units are in supply (>5) and not adjacent to enemy units. I suspect this is an error. If it is intended for this campaign, this kind of thing should really be noted somewhere - perhaps a page or two of info on the campaign. Another example of this kind of things appears to be (at least implied in the manual) - that only CA/BB can be upgraded, while DD may *not* be upgraded... -brett
  6. Just played a game where USSR war status jumped from 60ish percent to 91% after the first turn of a SeaLion. This seems flaky to me - this may make SeaLion effectively impossible. :mad: -brett
  7. Just played a game where USSR war status jumped from 60ish percent to 91% after the first turn of a SeaLion. This seems flaky to me - this may make SeaLion effectively impossible. :mad: -brett
×
×
  • Create New...