Sombra

You don´t work in R&D right? I like the research system at least basically. I would like to see a better catch up, some kind of general defense tech and more use of rockets perhaps some rebalancing along the way.

My suggestions You count toward the plunder only the units left in France toward the plunder . Raise the possibilty to save free french troops (or other minor nations) and ships(?) I think the game should work more like SC1 in this respect. In SC1 many times some french units were left you couldn´t evacuate though these could count towrad plunder (and the axis wouldn´t benefit of killing them) Raise the base ammount of plunder and decrease the ammount of plunder gained of the troops [ April 20, 2006, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Nice a succesful subwar!!! Yeah finally ASW will be necessary for the Brits!!

The attacker tries to spare the defender and the defender commits kamikaze attacks... German Soldier: Please I don´t want to shoot you. French soldier : Arggh, shoot me your german bastard, KIL ME, kill me before I kill you. [ April 20, 2006, 06:03 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Yep, bring back some old SC rules to give the allied player some benefits of preserving his troops.

Yep, DH this is why it seems so gamey to me. You sacrifice your armies though the Axis don´t get any money. Free french forget it, its much better to kill your soldiers yourself hopefully to the last man. After a few game I think the old system with free french / even free polish planes worked better. Just my opinion. In SC1 You tried to evacuate you troops and you had to strike a careful balance when to give up the defense of France, get at the right time to the ports etc. In SC2 right now the art consists to kill your units in a way to provoke max damage. As I said french and Polish troops are disciples of good old "Japanese traditions" Perhaps the rules could be changed that only units count for plunder which are left in the occupied country and raise a bit the chance for free units not only for France but for any country (Poland etc.) - No more suicide actions of the french fleet - And a certain benefit if you try to save your soldiers instead of sacrificing them ritually

I noticed in the last games I played human vs human that the Allies (France , Poland etc. ) have taken lessons from their Japanese friends. They fight to the last man, commit "Harakiri", suicide bombing, french ships pursue the german fleet deep into the baltic sea, the french planes start "Kamikaze" Since the ammount of "plunder" is tied to the number and strengh of the enemy army left. It seems a little bit funny that the enemy starts to commit ritual suicide as soon as the defenders are before the gate of PAris for example. Just an obsebvation. [ April 20, 2006, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Regarding siberians I hated it in SC1 that the axis could chose when to trigger the Siberian. Possible to add officially a time trigger which triggers the Siberians ramdomly after for example 1944 or something if they haven´t been triggered before? I don´t know right now if it is really an issue for Sc2 but just in case because in SC1 you could perform very well defend your homeland and as a reward you got nothing (Please not the almighty editor and do it yourself because I want this event mainly for Human vs Human)

Even if this is more or less the system how SC1 worked please consider that we are now dealing with much less effective shorebombardement, less effective fighters (+fewer and carriers are not anymore the ultimate killer. Though we would face the problem that landing spots could be blocked again by corps.

Hellraiser RTFM please take a look at Page 139 of the Manual: USA => Allies : Activation 3 event (Egypt surrenders to Axis ) general activation event 5-10% increase per turn in activation of US toward Allies. [ April 19, 2006, 02:09 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

A question regarding diplomacy: For example Germany / Italy and GB each invest 5 diplomacy chits on Spain. What haappens: a. GB chits cancel out all the efforts of Germany and Italy b. GB chits cancel out randomly 5 diplomacy chits from Germany or Italy (Still a chance between 15-25% to influence Spain then) c. Something els. I guess a is the correct answer ?

Yep its quite a strong trigger 5-10% increase per round if you take Cairo??? I would like to know why is Cairo important historically for the US? If there is a good reason for this trigger then I think the trigger should be changed to the way the english sealion trigger works. If you stand beside Cairo it could be activated. I would like to prevent houserules if possible. [ April 19, 2006, 02:20 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Any update regarding the shipment date of the finished boxed version? I hate to read manuals at the screen and its a little bit to big to print out. I think I miss much of the small print of the game right now.. [ April 19, 2006, 12:38 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Regarding diplomacy errors: When the FRENCH fleet invaded the baltic sea and attacked Königsberg I got the message that Finnland is worried about RUSIAN navy moves in the Baltic sea :confused:

I have to say I disagree mostly. Investing in tech is a gamble. ( I work in R&D ) The only thing I would like to change is perhaps the catch up effect (making it a bit stronger) and / or strenghen the intelligence tech. A fast follower strategy in tech should be possible (hey its the way most companies work today ) Or perhaps an event script. If you kill a technically superior unit for the first time you get a random chance for a one time a research boost of 1%? From the game perspective: Tech is very strong. If you get an sure payback for your tech investment you would take away strategic options from the player. Everybody would have to invest in tech (like GGWAW where the game in the end is only a tech race up to 50% money on tech argghhh). Right now you can decide: Will I gamble on invest for high tech weapons (like the "wunderwaffen" which never appeared) or I am better of buying troops I know which will be avaible. You took a gamble and perhaps in history books they will say yeah he shouldn´t have invested so much money in weapons which never worked. As I said I think the catch up effect should be stronger. Perhaps the tech cost need a little bit fine tuning if the players start to invest always in the same 5-6 techs (like production , production etc.) Perhaps teh cost for Indus./production tech should be increased and other costs for subs /rockests etc should be lowered (I have the feeling that again rockets never show up on the battlefield). I think there we need to see more AARs to see how and if the tech system needs to be changed. [ April 19, 2006, 12:51 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

I would like to know. What are the advantages from implementation long range amphib. transports right now? I can hardly see any advantage from the game perspective . On the other hand shorter range would give: - the RN /RAF back some of its purpose. - "Historical" landing sites would be attractive Norrmandy/Brest - The amphib transports would mantain some of their flexibility to look for undefended spots - LR invasions could still be carried out but with higher risk and less readiness of the troops - Easy to implement - The AI is totally "helpless" against these transports (I think it will be very hard to patch) P.S: Yes you can defend even now against a Sealion but England need to dedicate a huge ammount of money to build up ground forces as a precaution because the RN (The traditional weapon of England) is IMHO quite useless to defend against Sealion. This takes away many of the new opportunities for England aka invest in Diplomacy/Tech/med defense [ April 19, 2006, 12:27 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

You will have to wait a few days longer to be able to buy only the download option. Look at the stickys

@ Blashy: Yes we play with hindsight... But we still imagine ourselves as great commanders and Stalin could be still there to order us to move some troops into attack position. From the game point of view I think i could be fun if you are able to build forward defenses with entrechment and fortifications. Could be sometimes a little surprise for the Germans and add variety to the game. some player swould opt for retreating as much as possible and other for a forward defense although to be more able to counteratttack aka sealion. Though I think it would be nice if you are starting to entrech at for example 50% activation. On the ohter hand if you although permit neutral to entrech when activated enough it would be slthough a small measure against cookie cutter.

And here we go again. Why not limit simply the range of amphib transports? The trnasports have to be at sea and could be attacked. Airforce could spot them. Still they would be able to maneuver around a bit to get to a good landing spot.

@ War of the rings is really a nice board game. You should try the expansion "Battles of the third age". Did you know there is an active community right now to play the game via "PBEM". => Download the Battlemap from the download section from Ringkriegforum Now back to SC2

Oh, its christmas again. I just want a small present. => Acutally an estimate how much money each side earns in total in the report screen. I can see number of cities mines etc. I would like to see only a total number libe axis=265 MP) estimatr without production bonus) allies=745 MP ... Depending on the side you play the real value with all bonuses included. I think its on of the most important statistic to know to evaluate your position.

Hmmm, again perhaps a small change. Entrenchment vould be possible when activation reaches 50%-70% activation. Including the minor nations (would although serve as anti cookie cutter and would make a forward defense more feasible) I can´t see anyone trying to defend Rusia with a forweard defense right now. => Attackers have the advantage, no entrenchment for defenders etc. [ April 18, 2006, 02:28 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Is it just me or is it much more worthwhile to attack in SC2 then to defend? It seems to me right now that the defender has a huge disadvantage right now compared to SC1: - Readiness bonus - More tiles to be attacked from - Units can move after attack What I don´t like right now about it is that defenders take much more casulties then the attackers. (I think SC1 was better in this respect) You were abel to defend witha few units against a superior force. I think the same approach in sC2 will lead to your doom. Its really hard to form defense lines or hold a position because if you stand still you will lose your units. Even fully entrenched units in a town will be easily removed in 1 turn if the attacker moves in with enough forces. "No need" to cut of supply first of the defender or soften up the defense. What I noticed so far is: There is no point to try to defend/delay with only a few units. You need enough units to counterattack or no you should not defend at all. At least these are first impressions. My actual defense doctrine is though: Active defense or counter attack when possible. Try to concentrate troops in strategic key areas. [ April 18, 2006, 02:02 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Any reason at all for the rusian to NOT leave the border? Delayed activation etc.?

@ Blashy . Well lets agree to disagreee right now. Perhaps later Ichange my mind but right now I would like to see that the initial range of amphib transports would be greatly reduced. We are talking here of landing whole armies in peek condition. Even with half of action points you could reach far away shores but the readiness at least would be lower and airfleets have a chance to spot approaching transports. Besides the historic invasion spots: the invasion of Scily , Normandy , Bretagne etc. would be more attractive then other far away locations. In two games wiht players who have already played multiplayer they are asking right now again for house rules like : No DOW on mayors first round / No neutral spotting right now it seems that this is becoming a trend it seems at the moment.