Exel

Rockets aren't the same. It only increases the misery to have rockets in but not real arty, the queen of the battlefield.

Yes. Artillery was something I missed in SC1. Though I realize they are incorporated in the Armies, it would still be nice to have them in at some level.

Me me! But maybe the thread should be "Who doesn't want to volunteer for playtesting?"... :/

I would pay the full price (which is between 50 and 60 euros here), but 35€ would sound like a more reasonable price. The fans will pay anything, but you want to sell the game to a bigger audience too.

The new graphics look just fine to me. I mean, come on, in a game like this the gfx are highly secondary anyway. And they are certainly an improvement over SC1. The only thing that amazes me in a negative way about SC2 is that they gave up hexes.

I completely agree with Slapaho. SC's demo gave a great impression of the full game (that was one of the best demos I've ever played, seriously), and it was it that made me get SC in the first place; I had read a praising review, but was still sceptical about it, but decided to give the demo a try... and here I am now, still playing the damn thing, years later. [ March 30, 2004, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: Exel ]

I'd still appreciate the unit icons that are present in those few screenshots. No offense to anyone, but they're a lot better than the JBunnelle's ones.

So no news on the sprites? I'd really like to get those...

One lacking feature in the editor that should be added is the ability to change the core borders of a country. Or is it already in and I'm just missing it?

I have the US version too. At least there are no additional icons on the disk. Could someone upload them on an ftp or something? *pretty please*

No offense, but I liked the icons in the screenshots better than the updated ones. Viewing aircraft from the side aint the best option for an icon of that size and resolution... Any chance of getting the icons that are shown in the screenshots back? I'd really appreciate it.

I'd want to see the USA-Canada connection too. But making the Finnish border historical doesn't require any additional map changes, unlike some of the other proposed changes, so I figure it'd be easier (and more acceptable) to do at this point. It's only a question of hex ownership. However I do not see any reason to make an artificial land connection between Sweden and Finland. Unless the map would be expanded to the north, of course (I don't understand why it was cut off so south). But that'd be wishful thinking. Germany practically dominated the Baltic Sea, ie. the Allies (including Soviet Union) couldn't interfere with its shipments much. I bet that's why there's a ferry connection between Germany and Finland.

Now now, it's extremely important not to mix Winter War and Continuation War. In Winter War Finland had only a small air force, and large number of the operational fighters the FAF possessed were obsolete. Before Continuation War most of Finnish fighters were from Allied nations (Gladiator, Morane, Brewster) and some from Italy (G.50), but Finland never received fighters from Germany before the second war with Soviet Union had started. Even then Hitler was reluctant at giving Finland equipment - Germany never gave state-of-the-art equipment to its allies - and Bf109s were received only after hard bargaining. The same applies to StuG assault guns and the German anti-tank weapons. About the troop quantity and casualty figures: In Winter War Finland mobilized 337,000 men. Soviet Union started the war with 520,000 men and at its peak the Soviet Union had over 1 million soldiers in the Finnish front. The casualties were (quite accurately for Finland) 26,700 dead and 44,000 wounded, while Soviet Union lost nearly 300,000 men as either dead, wounded or missing. In Continuation War the Finnish Defence Forces had 475,000 men in total. In 1941 they were faced with some 300,000 Soviet soldiers. In 1944 the Soviet manpower in the Finnish front was a little over 600,000 men. Finland lost 65,000 as KIA and 142,000 as WIA. Soviet losses were at least four times as big (alone in Tali-Ihantala the Soviets lost over 60,000 men). I don't know how this discussion led to this (and discussion about some Central European cities, Yugoslavian army sizes, etc.) as the original issue was simply about Finland having an ahistorical border when it declares war on Soviet Union.

I doubt any map changes will be made at this point. Nor do I see them necessary. (But obviously a better and bigger map is needed for SC2) More complex political events would be nice for SC2 too, but not for SC anymore. Just a simple event simulating history and moving the Finnish border a bit... Btw, Finland did not surrender. It was the only European country west of Soviet Union whose ground was fought on but wasn't occupied.

I didn't mean that the Winter War event would trigger a war with Soviet Union and Finland, and thus make Finland prematurely join the Axis. All I want is Finland to start with it's historical borders once it goes to war with Soviet Union in 1941. What I mean is an event similar to the annexation of the Baltics: the Finnish-Soviet border is moved to the 1940 level (ie. Finland loses Karelian Isthmus) with a message saying "Winter War ends". Of course it would be nice to have the actual war simulated, but the current game mechanics wont allow that.

Finland's borders are ahistorical in SC. Now they start their Continuation War against Soviet Union with their pre-1939 borders, ie. they have not lost the Karelian Isthmus. It ought to be fixed. There should be a Winter War event (similar to the Soviet annexation of the Baltics) that makes Finland lose the territory it did historically. It may sound like bitching about an unimportant little detail, but it is a gameplay issue as well: Finland did not start the war with an army at the gates of Leningrad.