Sombra

Thing is, how do we KNOW who those are? From a VERY tiny group that plays competitively, MERELY? </font>

Well, where do you thinkt the engineer got its building material for the rush job?

Lets say it with the words of "Life of Brian" I want to be a woman (complaing and bitching forms part of my nature) SC2 is fun and has some great additions regarding the options and lot of potential. Alas, we human players are always finding loopholes or bending rules to the breaking point. [ May 16, 2006, 07:37 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Oh Master of the waterless sands another hard question since we mere mortals CANNOT read in the beat forum. What of the the following things are real. 1. Santa Claus 2. Easter bunny 3. Patch for SC2 in our lifetime. Only 1 of these choices is real. TIP: Millions of children cannot be wrong P.S: A date for a first patch , a list of issues worked on wouldn´t be to hard . IMHO

And again simply limit the range of amphib transports. If the allied player still fails to patrol the seven seas and the axis player commited himself to a high risk adventure ... Let the best player win.

Could we get back perhaps the 2 rockets as an incentive for the rusian player to research rocket science? in 20 MP games so far I haven´t seen a single rocket

Problems could be: - Even more tech research with more turns per year -many turns were nothing happens as it is hard to conduct war in winter. - How do you handle rebuilding of resources and entrenchment in Winter ?

Hellraiser I think you have found a nice description what happens right now. The worth of techs should be decreased or the tech effect spread out over more tech levels. As you mentioned before a human player will max out the Axis tech before Barbarossa. This would help althouhg in the "minor nation units " problem.

I really like Sc2 a lot. Still I think that SC1 "played better" in the french campaign and in the start of Barbarossa. Right now it doesn´t make any sense to defend the borders of Rusia (Not in the strategic sense and there is no "political pressure" from Stalin ; ). ) It is outright suicide trying to defend the borders right now IMHO. Knowing that the rusian units hide deep within mother Rusia the axis side "always" in MP start a lukewarm Barbarossa taking the frontline border cities without resistance. In SC1 the start of Barbarossa was always a big event. I have 2 suggestions to improve the gameplay and add more strategic options to the game. 1. Starting with 70% war readiness rusian units should be permitted to entrench in the border regions + cities in the frontier regions(RMKO line). (NO entrenchment should allowed behind the frontier region) 70% is a typical value the rusian war readiness hits in summer 1941. It would be nice if the axis player would be forced now to start a "surprise" attack or risk to run against a line of entrenched rusian units later on. Slowing down considerably its advances in Rusia. The axis player would be forced to assemble a bigger attack force to take its objectives fast against a possible rusian resistance. The Rusian player would have more options avaible. 1. Not commit any forces to the defense of the border (The way SC2 is played now) 2. Seeing that the axis is tied down in other areas (for example Egypt) and taking up positions on the frontier. The gamble is if the axis doesnt attack in force, his units will be fully entrenched with the start of Barbarossa. On the other hand if the Axis attacks in strengh then he could lose his border troops. The 2nd change I would like to see is to strenghen the defense of units like corps and armies. IMHO the game right now give to many advantages to the attacker. I think the ratio attacker vs. defender loses were better balanced in SC1. This would help considerably in the french campaign. Right now the french campaign is simply an artless axis attack the only real enemy is the weather. [ May 15, 2006, 02:27 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

I could be simply that the E-License needs admin rights to run?

The RN Navy is far stronger than the german fleet... How about upgrading your destroyers for a sub hunt bevor leaving your ports? Uses for the RN: Hunting for subs, securing shipping lanes for transports form the Us, hit the italian fleet when fighting for Egypt. Ground bombardement when D-Daying.... (Someday after the patch? : RN is agood weapon against Sealion)

@LampCord: What happen sif you delete the save and restore it from mail? Sometimes there is simply an unusal streak of good luck. In TCP/IP no problem with PBEM there is right away the suspicion of cheating.

Any players in the old Europe received their box yet?

Purpose of the thread is a kind of online poll. If you like an idea just repeat it to show your support for the idea and add your new ideas or wishes for SC2. Please don´t discuss the different ideas in this thread. Unit balance: - armies strengthen the defense (upgrade against corps) - tanks more weakly in defense (Main strength is the attack and speed, however right now this unit is "over strength" and should be more vulnerable for counter attacks) - higher value of the carriers ship to ship - shortening the range of the amphibious transporters - All the other houserules( Terif ) should be addressed as discussed before. Play-technical changes: - change of the diplomacy system - higher costs of action points for attacks - Russian winter should stand for "random unit damage" if these units are in the Russian winter -possible entrenching of units from nations not in the war - changes of. effects of attacks on neutral countries in particular Turkey - Changes of the of the plunder system Play changing game: - faster transmission with TCP/IP - Scroll on the map during the opponents movements – -showing convoy routes on the main map - Report should be more meaningful = improvement of "intelligence tech?" - more hotkeys - Windowsmode for SC2 - sandstorms in the desert would be nice. [ May 09, 2006, 05:28 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Ok . Thanks Blashy

@vveed : You could cross the Atlantik in a "paddleboat". Still I won´t recommend it. Lower amphib range of transports would mean: German troops are half drowned when they reach Amerika and could be easily catched by the Royal Navy. (Ships would be much faster then the transports). I think this is enough to prevent an Axis invasion in the US. If on the other hand the allied player does absolutly nothing to defend and patrol its shores then the axis player should be able to hurt him badly therefore I am against script solutions to make the US an fortress. I think the game mechanics work fine if we have to consider the same logical choices as the commanders in WW2 => As Excel explained there were good reasons why the invasion took place in the Normandy (I think the German expected an invasion near Brest) and not in Kiel or Bremen. Why Scicly was chosen and not directly Rome. Still you should be able to do it with "realistic" drawbacks.

Anything new? Betatesters ? Already did you receive the first build of the patch? A list of improvements / changes?

@ Hellraiser: Again a shorter range for amphib. transports would help. If you patrol a little bit with ships, the Royal Navy could catch transports still in transit. You can build up more troops quite early in the US. If the allied player does´t send out ships into the Atlantic and gets caught unaware... Lets say "Hannibal ante portas" I think taking high risks should be rewarded sometimes and not stopped by scripts. The US invasion is only possible because the Allied player takes a predictable way to build up its troops.

Rambo please take sometimes a look at the history book. Do you think the US invaded the Normandy in summer 1944 because they were cowards or did it take simply some times to build up sufficient troops?

@Vveed I think an option like you suggested could be fun . But I I can live with the way Sc2 works in respect of partisans. I am against special garrison units which don´t lower your "unit /force pool" . You need some balance if the axis goes rampage trying to conquer the "world" . There are limits to the avaible soldiers to occupy all these countries.

@Exel 100% agreement. I hope a smple fix with limited range will be implemented. Anything between 3-5 squares for an amphib transport would be fine for me. [ May 08, 2006, 02:03 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

IMHO : Right now corps are overrated compared to armies. I would like to see a small raise in the defense value of the armies. There should be quite a differnece if 60.000 or 200.000 people defend a position.

If you want to fight only on roads .... I think the weather works fine. Get yourself some motorization and the weather won´t bother you to much.

Can´t see problems with the readiness. If you want to put the americans in the US in assault vehicles lets take thme a pitstop at England, Tunesia. Put the Americans in normal transport, ship them near the assault zones change them to assault vehicles. Would be even realistic

IMHO a sealion should be hard to do but if the Allied player strapy England then a sealion should be very possible. The problem form my point of view simply is that the RN and RAf have no "paper" in a defense against a sealion. Reducing the range of amphib transoports would change that.(My suggestion range 5) You still could do all teh orginal landings "normandy , Torch etc. but the royal Navy could spot the barges and defnd cruical spots. Keeping the surprise and the other benefits of the current system. I think Germany should have the chance to take out England if the allied player does mistakes (for example a 120% all out defense of Egypt)