willebra

I think the main problem with the interface is basic visual design. The perspective and graphics can be discussed, but I think for this game the graphcis are good enough (or even above the required level), but the layout, colors, separating lines, i.e. the visual feeling lacks a professional touch. I can't explain this better, as I am no professional in visual design. Its the same difference as with advertisements made by no-pros and advertisements made by visual design professionals. A home-made feeling. The game is great anyhow: I can get past this and enjoy this great game. However, I'm afraid that many people trying the demo are repelled due to the lack of professional visual design.

Male 31 Finland

On diplomatic effects: In my first game against the SC2-Allied AI (full version, not demo), Iraq made a radical shift from 20% pro Allied to 80% pro Axis. This seems to have been caused by something else than the diplo-chits, even though I had four chits invested. Is a likely British fall in Egypt a factor to this? I got a little later a +14% increase and so the Iraq joined the Axis (after 90% the increase seems automatic).

Order placed. I'm happy to pay this even as an extra for SC1. Of course, if the game is really released within 6 weeks, that's very good.

Yep, Liam is correct, airfleets are not the über-unit of the game: they are required, but in proportionate amounts. If the Axis has played well, when Barbarossa begins, Allies have some edge on MPP-income (Allies perhaps 480+136+180=796, and Axis could have 550+140=690), but Axis have more accrued units and experience. The Axis amount of units is that great, that without a significant bid to help Allies/Russia, the Axis will win. Of course, if your play proceeds along these lines, you will need a bid to balance the game. But over-concentrating on AFs will detorioarate your game. Once the fronts go from North to South in Russia, and similarly in France at the same time, both parties need to have ground units for that. Otherwise one can push through and make cheap attacks on the too many AFs, which in turn is very costly for the owner of the AFs.

The example at mathforum is good, but I think they make an error (that does not affect the result) in the solution that includes the hypothetical changing of the speed of the system. (If they impose a speed of -u on the system, the officer will be walking to the back of the column at v+u and returning at v-u, and not the opposite. But this doesn't affect the end result.)

All new players should read Terif's notes. How to act after an Allied LC Gambit is also covered there. http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=002198

Why did you stop?

yes, I'll buy it.

Looks great, by the way (forgot to mention this, it was so obvious).

It seems that in some screenshots the scale is very different to other ss'. E.g. North Africa or North Frence seems to have in the first pages ~two-three times (in one dimension) more hexes than in later pages. Anybody else noticed the same?

Nice and simple. I like it. </font>

With the production delays, when is the payment due? (When ordered, when finished, in the middle or a combination.) In other words, can you start a project you might not be able to finish? Does the future planning requirement also require you to compute your future incomes?

Let us know how it goes!

What if you enlarged the scale in a mod so that you use sea-tiles to create a river? Well, it wouldn't be the same, but could create some interesting situations.

Tanks don't seem to go to defense, when they are surprised. Their soft defence is quite high and they don't benefit of it in surprise contacts: they seem to suffer some other penalty too.

Your troops take less damage if they have more readiness. And strength of the unit is a factor in readiness. Thus a strength 10 unit takes less damage from same attack than a strength 5 unit, if other factors, including luck, are similar. (Of course if the attack/defense is very weak, then both could end up having the same anticipated result due to rounding) Also, buying a new unit costs ~double the reinforcement costs. I do not know, but I have always thought that the experience is not stepped (scales down/up without steps) even if the screen shows the bars in three steps each. Anybody know this? [ February 19, 2005, 04:30 AM: Message edited by: willebra ]

I would like to try this too: martin.vonwillebrand@helsinki.fi Thanks in advance!

Thanks Terif and others, I think one should be able to place all the units for the attack-position from 3-5 hexes away from the border, within one turn. Still, it would be less labourous if some of the units are already placed within the three hexes. So, how many units kan you keep within the first 3 hexes so that it doesn't affect the readiness (provided that the first three units are correctly placed)?

Ok, if you have too much units at the border, the Russians will be expecting barbarossa and their readiness will rise. But what is too much? And what is "at the border"? (I.e. when preparing for Barbarossa, how far should you optimally keep your troops, so that you can place them all in one turn on their final positions and attack on the next?)

Nice game to watch! It's good that all games do not end in 1940.

Or perhaps all the rest of the participants will invite first intermediates and thereafter newbies so that their chance to win is as high as possible ) Another qualifying system would be better, if you want it to be purely competitive. What you propose is actually a system based on honor and as such a very good choice.

FF, The naval attack value of armies/corps is 6/3 whereas for tanks it's 2.

Friendly Fire, thanks for the clarification. (ZOC isn't a good word to reflect the SC-rule.)

Benefits of tanks: 1. Tanks move faster (i.e. have more APs) 2. Tanks defend better against air (3 instead of 2/1 of armies/corps) 3. Tanks defend better against armies/corps (4 instead of 2/1 of armies/corps) 4. Tanks have it a little easier when attacking units on oil or mine (no defense bonus against tanks, 1 bonus against armies/corps) The benefits 1 and 3 make for a powerful blizkrieg-tool. The benefit 3 makes a strong defensive unit: put a tank in a city and let it entrench and its a hard nut to crack. Note: defense values do not affect the defenders losses but a higher defense value increases the attackers losses. Some drawbacks: 1. tanks can be attacked by other tanks with high attack values (from 5 upwards): fighting becomes costly. 2. tanks are ineffective in attacking ships at ports 3. tanks have it harder when attacking units in cities (defense bonus of 2 against tanks compared to 1 against armies/corps) [ October 26, 2004, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: willebra ]