Les the Sarge 9-1

Battlefront THE site for official SC stuff. But I think I will spend most of my time over on the new site, I am a lounge type of wargamer. I don't make mods, I am not into statistical disertations, and I doubt I will be writing up long diatribes on the perfect gambits soon. I am just a player of SC, nothing more. And I discuss wargames.

I will continue to visit the SC forum here. I will do so because Hubert has personally made me feel welcome along with a few of our key members. But I can say this much, that is the only thing getting me in here. Battlefront has killed off so much of my fire to post, that it is very likely you won't see all that much more from me. Obnoxious posts are no friend to anyone anywhere. But SC fans posting off topic posts amongst SC friends on an SC forum is called a "community" An SC forum that has no room for anything but straight jacketed SC posts is really just a sterile experience. And it won't be vibrant dynamic or able to achieve any form of fan loyalty or longevity. The names will change, new people will find the site, they will find out there are other places more "community oriented" and they will move on. If that is a "good" thing, then I must be interested in a bad thing.

Ok what is the pro advice for taking and booting out the British (assumes the game is going in a current text book fashion for the Germans). I am just curious, what is the prevailing "technique" for cracking this one. I have done the 39 and 41 games, where in one I don't start at war with Italy, and the one where I start competing with Tobruk. And in both cases I suck

This thread has wandered and after a couple of posts was worth being ignored, but Rambo's opening posts comments were good. "How come the majority of the 'please fix the game threads' are always about some Russian tank, Finland needs this, the map is inaccurate, or the Nazis deserve this? Well, I'm here to say, it's time the United States of America is represented correctly. 1) Add about 10 more naval ships or more, we had cruisers, destroyers, & escorts out the ass. I'm sick of floating G.I.s across the Atlantic in rubber boats without cover. My Uncle fought for the good guys on a Destroyer, SC is teaching bad history to the young people, by shrinking the U.S. Navy. 2) Get some real supply for North Africa. It's terrible that the USA can't even consider a ground war in North Africa. Give me Patton rolling the Gerries in the sand,"I read your book!" We brought so many supplies across the Atlantic, it was ridiculous. 3) Where are the paratroops? 82nd, 101st, Easy Company. They captured bridges, cutoff Germans, & held at Bastogne. Please add them for SC2. Give the Germans their Airborne too, for Crete. 4) US/UK are ripped off in anti-air tech, interception, radar, etc. The Germans got their assed kicked over the Channel. The Luftwaffe & Goering weren't so tough fighting somebody who was ready. Stuka, Me-109s, or whatever are tough against unarmed sleeping farmers. Axis didn't have a plane in the sky in 1944 in the West. 6) US needs some tanks, Patton drove all Africa, Sicily, France, & Germany. We didn't have the thickest armor, but we didn't move 15 mph either. I get tired hearing about one Tiger tank in a village was sooo tough. How about added 3 or 4 US tanks. 7) Finally, for now. Where's the cash? That's one thing we have here. Uncle Sam is loaded, Capitalism is King." (please note, I edited out one comment that I didn't think had any merit) I think SC would possibly want to try to simulate his notions in some manner, his points are valid.

Rambo the only people calling it SC and SC2 are the fans hehe, the market calls it Strategic Command If Hubert gave it another name, we would only convert that to letters only a fan would be able to identify

Rambo has a real point (where marketing is concerned). One of the things I had drummed into my head during courses on marketing, is the consumer WILL be suspicious of your product if it doesn't meet expectations. Price is one of them. SC is a new game, and the price is not far off from several years old software. That is of course an odd looking detail to a consumer. People EXPECT to have to pay for quality, the moment they don't have to, they get suspicious. They ponder and muse over why you don't want to be like everyone else. I learned during a business start up course, that the item I planned to sell through my business could NOT be priced as low as I wished it to be priced. It was immaterial that I could do it and make a hefty profit. The consumer would see my massively lower priced article as suspect. Customers are odd creatures So yep, if SC2 hits the market Hubert, don't hesitate to raise the price to where your fellow wargame manufacturers sell at. We fans won't be screaming about being screwed over by a suddenly full of himself designer (well I won't be at any rate). Your game is a proven product Hubert. You don't have to prove to us what we already feel is the case.

Cool, going to look you guys up (dang wish I had email notification from activity on Battlefront threads ). Look for my emails guys.

Just putting out an open invitation for anyone that wants to play me via PBEM. This invite is mainly for those on the forum that would like a game, figure they are green as grass, and don't want to risk playing a hardcore player that will only trash the snot out of them in the first 5 turns . I say mainly for the novice crowd, because unless you also enjoy kicking puppies, you likely won't find my game play sufficiently challenging to even be interesting heheh. I currently have 2 count em two games underway. (I plan on submitting AARs after completion, but not before). Sure my name might appear in the strategy guide hehe, but don't let that fool you hehe, I still suck (especially in Russia it seems). I just haven't got the time or inclination yet to play SC day to day all day long. I can still count my total number of games played using fingers and toes. If you wish a lightweight learner's game I am your bet hehe. Leave contact info here or PM me. And of course for those that know me elsewhere, you can always PM me through whatever option suits your fancy.

I just want to comment. I was overjoyed when the cWiF news was released. I was assuming the thread would not last too longish before being closed due to not being Scish. That, I would not object to overly much. I kinda expected it. But to delete a link in a thread, just because it is in here and not General Dscussion, that sounds a bit, well unfriendly really. It's not in the Forum rules stcky either. I checked. There is no comment "thou shalt not post links to other commercial wargaming sites other than Battlefront". There is indeed no "rule" specifically prohibiting advertising that I know of. And is acknowledging a discussion on a non Battlefront forum really that problematic to Battlefront? I just want to go on record as protesting. Deleting the link was in my opinion entirely uncalled for. I has soured my feelings about Battlefront yet again. What is wrong here? I know of no other forum in existence that can't tolerate the acknowledgement there might actually be other producers of wargames. Was my link actually harming Battlefront that much? No I am not going to sulk off. But it does indeed pour cold water on my desire to post now. And if I end up going silent. It just means Battlefront loses out. If all our best posters suddenly went silent, well it would definitely become public knowledge elsewhere, that the site was not a good place to meet. New members? sure there will always be new members. No one person here is unreplaceable. But it takes very little time for each new member to hear how straightjacketed the discussion is. And that only means no one stays long. If that is acceptable policy, I can't change that. I wish I could though. Lately Battlefront has been near the top of my list of places to go first. I would rather it stayed there. But people usually only go where they are welcome. And I only feel welcome where I can discuss wargames with wargamers. And there is indeed more to wargaming than SC. It is inevitable that the SC community here is not going to aaaaaalways just have SC on their mind. And no, I don't feel like posting n General Discssions. And yes you already know why. It isn't an option in Les the Sarge's rules (sorry).

My take on it, is the guys that play "Cup" games have spoiled its potential to fulfill minimum enjoyment levels. We all know the game has certain "must do" requirements for optimum success. But that gets old at lightning speed in my opinion. If I played the 39 Campaign day and night disecting it for the perfect opening moves, I think it would grow stale for me too. Which is why I have not had any involvement in those sorts of competitions. I expect to still be playing SC next year and having the same level of fun with the same campaigns that exist now. I might get in more PBEM games, and I might get in a few more games against the AI. But I am not planning on beating the game to death in cuthroat competition where it's only about winning, not just playing a wargame.

For the record, I would buy cWiF because I am the sort that wants detail, but I want wargamer detail, not that wretched garbage disguised as a wargame known as HoI. Having cWiF though won't impact my playing SC though. I like SC because it does what it does well. I think a revamped SC (call it SC 2 or Advanced SC or whatever suits your fancy) would interest me as well too. I like A3R but have no incentive to go beyond A3R in its design currently. I'm not totally convinced I would like the gobal design enough to merit the effort. Besides, WiF did a fine job, so why fuss. The beauty of SC though is in the ease of enjoyment. I am sure that even if Matrix Games ensures cWiF is done right, it will still be sooooo far ahead in complexity. And while some gamers go for complexity, I don't think they are the majority. The world is not going to dump SC or SC2 for cWiF in my opinion.

Drat can't figure link out to actual thread location....correction learned how to do the link correctly now. World in Flames will be a reality soon. Ok lock this up as non SC if required. I just wanted to tell everyone (and frankly I could care less if the General forum knows, I only care about my SC buddies). [MOON: Link removed. No advertising allowed] [ October 21, 2003, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: Moon ]

Conceding is based on the skills of the players. Has zero to do with the current game's progress. I have witnessed games where I knew I had won, the writing was on the wall. I have also played games where it was obvious I had lost. I got in a game of A3R once, against a totally new gamer, someone I had only recently met. He had been playing regularly, while I had not played in about 2 years. It showed. He handed me my butt on a platter with sterling moves unlike anything my usual wargaming local friend was accustomed to using. 3 turns into the game I was obviously going to lose. SC is about the same. Two realively novice players are going to enjoy a certain amount of success, but it would be silly to assume they could perform the same level of gamesmanship as some of the hard core out there. I played a game the other day of the 39 against the AI. I took out Poland turn one. I was impressed, as I had never done it before. Wasn't from any super duper perfect moves though, I just got lucky in my choices.

Hmm the main reason I like SC is I can't use my several years worth of A3R skills to plot the perfect game out in advance. I have been playing a few games in PBEM finally, and as I have not actually extensively played the game to the point I have memorised all the starting potentials, it has actually been a very fun experience for me. A lot of my strategies have not been overly brilliant, but that has been part of the fun too. I have to say it gets boring playing games where I can sit back and beat the crapola out of the AI sit back and laud how frickin smart I am. Losing makes you humble and it makes you less prone to arrogance. I played a long campaign in my Steel Panthers World at War game not long back. I achieved 43 Decisive Victories a few draws, not one loss. I waltzed through places like Stalingrad as if the opponent was a complete moron. I found that the AI was just not able to compete with me. But instead of it being thrilling to win that big, it ruined the game for me. I dumped the idea of playing anything but the Mega Campaigns, because in them I actually lose occasionally. SC is best played without prior knowledge of the conditions. I would only need to fret over cheating if there was money involved. I would only play a wargame for cash if I was in the same room with the opponent on a separate computer with a 3rd party monitoring the game. Otherwise the only way to deal with cheating, is to abstain from further contact. If the party in question asks why, you do the best thing possible, you invent a reason to cover your inability to play, and you leave it at that. Accusing a person of cheating, never accomplishes anything at all. [ October 18, 2003, 11:20 PM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

I am not sure I could indulge you. I have Civ II Test of Time. Is this the same Civ II which you refer to? I also have Civ II Call To Power, slightly different beast. A 6 of 1 half dozen of the other argument though. I liked how with Civ II Test of Time I got the original game, plus a scifi version and a fantasy version all in the same program. I played that all the time till Civ III came on the scene. Civ III has gone multi player though. I like how Civ III will trash your butt even on the easier settings if you don't use your head. Civ II Test of Time was a bit easier to beat, the AI was not as nasty to deal with somehow. Until SC came out, I was inclined to think Civ was the only grand strategy game worth comment out there.

Everytime I see the word cheating in a wargame it makes me sad. Sad though only for the other guy. Cheating in Vegas is potentially dangerous, but hmm it's about cash. Cheating in an intellectual pursuit though, totally different matter. I personally enjoy the fact I NEVER cheat in a matter of intellect. I could not bear the realisation that would come with it, that I was just to dumb to win the honest way. In a wargame it is inevitable I am going to lose some of the time. It doesn't bother me when I do. I have played numerous games where I could smell the fact I was not going to win long before I lost. But it's the flip side to that sweet smell of victory you sometimes get as well. I don't think I have ever accused another person of cheating in a wargame before. I hope I never do. I have had some spirited dicussions over the semantics of a rule in a rule book during a wargame with my old wargaming friend of course. If SC has elements of it's design open to rampant cheating, it doesn't worry me. It is easier to stop playing a person you think has succumbed to the weakness of cheating, and just move on. Than it is to design a cheat proof wargame. I think you will encounter mostly good players. It is likely you will encounter some cheaters too. They are like the guys on forums that are annoying. You have to learn to deal with them or in the end you are the only one that suffers. [ October 18, 2003, 10:58 PM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

"Dice" "Die" come on man you are to experienced to think people actually spend a lot of effort even caring about the literal diferentiation in the terms hehe But play a veteran A3R player sometime, and he can show you, that the game is won almost anywhere (just like in SC actually). I have lost games due to the most cheesy of strategies just as much as the tried and true ones. Once got a concession of a win just by having the Russians using a lucky bit of Dilomacy and some bang on die rolling. I was able to hit Rumania right at the beginning stages of the game. Took Ploesti before the German player even knew what was happening. It was clear, that by the time he cleaned up that mess, his game would be in the toilet in the long term sense of the word. I once lost a game because I just failed to take Irag seriously as a threat as the allied player. The Germans ended up collapsing the Middle east, and the writing was on the wall. This was all based on strategic thinking though, and had nothing to do with the game being just a roll of the die and an I win you lose approach. Sure the board has some spots that scream out win here and you wn big. But then, that is the same deal with SC and some of it's notorious Gambits too eh hehe. Only difference is in A3R we don't allow house rules to say you can't capture say Lenningrad on any specific turn etc. But then again, A3R is a board game, and doesn't enjoy fog of war as an option. That is indeed a pity. [ October 16, 2003, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

One man's planning ain't another's though Rambo. I could eat you alive in A3R with my eyes closed. But I highly doubt I would even rate a speed bump currently in SC hehe. I can out plan you in A3R, and odds are you know a lot more about squeesing out the best of SC. Me and my buddy we looooooooved playing A3R regardless. I would play my turn and he would examine my every move and taunt me the whole time telling me the folly of my choices. Then the dice would fly and one of us would enjoy the others distress. Then the other person would get a turn and the roles would reverse. I have really enjoyed playing SC against people in spite of the fact I still suck as a player. But I have not really played it much solo against the machine, so I have not yet seen a lot of the "obvious" details yet. SC is like expensive chocolate, it's best enjoyed melting slowly on your tongue hehe, not gulped done like cheap easter budget chocolate crud [ October 16, 2003, 12:09 AM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

SC is a great game, it does a great job at doing what it does. Sure we want a few tweaks. Third Reich was a great game, but we were not happy, it became Advanced Third Reich. I generally won't say anything negative about TR, but I will play A3R over it hands down every time. It's simply better. SC might get the same treatment some day. I am sure it will get as much out of the improvement as TR got out of A3R. But one thing I have to say quite clearly. A3R has not been equaled on the board game scene or in the computer realm yet. Not even close even. The only reason I play SC, is because I am a demanding wargamer. And it met my demands. [ October 14, 2003, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

I have to disagree. The Axis can get mangled just fine, I know hehe. If you want to play the Axis and get a but stomping, merely select a player with a bit more experience with the game. I played the Russians in 41, I got stomped. I am playing the Germans in 41, and guess what, I am not butt trashing the Russians just because I am the Germans. The game comes with a lot of random variables, and who you choose to play makes a big difference too. Getting bored, ask one of the hardcore to serve you a slice of humble pie and show you how good you actually might not be heheh. I can just see it now, "come on Rambo hit me I dare you........whack!!". "Well he told me ".

A better question will be more likely will you be disappointed when SC is NOT 3R or COS or any other previous grand strategy wargame. But the fact I am a fanatical A3R player, and I consider SC a solid good purchase, need anything more be said SC is its own game, it will have a lot of things in common with other grand strategy wargames of this time period. That is to be expected. SC has it's quirks, so to do all the other games out there we like. But in the final analysis, SC is a grand strategy wargamers idea of a grand strategy wargame done well.

Come on guys, this is mostly for the new crowd that I thought might be interested, sing them praises eh, what about those mods makes the new player want to check them out. Brag even

If your computer is even close to current don't waste your time dreaming about them Comrade Trapp. I have those two games via old collection cds. Both won't run on anything remotely current to the best of my knowledge. That and they hail from the days of need to input word such and such from manual copy protection days.

Ok I am basically only interested in hearing reponses to mods made for the game ie you made a campaign that is not part of the mix you get when you install the game. I am specifically asking here, because, well, why not eh Sure some of us know there are lots of mods here and there, but some will NOT know eh. So this space should be a good chance to get good exposure for your modding efforts. Feel free to sing the praises of any mods mentioned to eh. [ October 07, 2003, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: Les the Sarge 9-1 ]

I have only one thing to say to people that use cheat codes, or cheat in any manner in a game the supposedly has something to do with using one's brain. And my response sounds amazingly similar to when I laugh actually. Hehehehehehehehehahahahahahahahahahahheheheheheeh I don't have to worry about losing respect for a cheater, they never even had respect for themselves in the first place after all.