Sombra

Iriemon its about the possibility to buy more tanks, planes etc. Sometimes as US player you are simply running out of useful things to buy.

I support your suggestion to give the US more "high" tech troops to buy aka. tanks + paratroopers

Well these troops you have easily in 1942. question is what do you do the rest of the war

Yep, if you know what you are doing I can see the problem with Axis simply steamrolloing the Allies. Still I think the long term balance regarding the MP income between Axis and Allies is right. Problem is when the US is really ready for war in 1943 (I think this date is right for the US!!) the war in the east is already over. Main issues here are for me: - Airfleets as fortification and citybuster - French armies are very weak in defense (Already the french have a tech disadvantage why are there armies weaker in defense?) -amphib tansport range at 6 I would like to see 3-4 (to easy to start a sealion still) - No incentives to conquer neutrals (US and Rusian KB stays low). -Spreading out the techs . IW3 vs. IW 0 should not be phasors aginst frontloaders. - In general the game is favored to attacking . Defense is very difficult - Consequences of "late " cookie cutter are very weak . Steamrolling neutrals after the US and UDSSR have nearly no consequences . Here I would liek to see more consequences for both sides. (allies and Axis attacking neutrals!) On the other hand as Axis player I am quite "mad" with the siberian transfer already in Jan .1941. I know it is to balance of the game but still it feels like the "2nd ghost army " arriving through space and time. It takes away the real possibility the germans had to postpone the attack on the UDSSR to 1942. I think the siberians would be represented in a better way if the reinforements would arrive in 1 or 2 units over the time. The trigger that the siberians appear "on masse" if you get to close to Moscow can stay the same but should have the possibilty for negative consequences ( event script that Japan takes part of Rusia in the east) [ June 26, 2006, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Agrred the attacks of airfleets should be adjusted regarding Morale and readiness lost in fortifications and cities.

You already have the means to win with Allieds in a historic way. DT is angry because people simply give up in 1941 with the Axis. Besides Terif there are few players who are playing the axis perfect enough to smash the Allies. Besides if these players would play Allies against "normal" players the axis would be smashed... My point is simply if you are able to stop the axis in 1942 in Stalingrad and Moscow you will see already what happened in reality. Axis is out produced and smashed latest in 1944. Though I think the game mechanics work quite well. I think it funny if people think the Allies are entitled to win the war regardless how badly they do the job. Now we can discuss if it is possible to stop the Axis in 1942. Up to now with version 1942 I didnt lose a game as Allies all were quite comfortable victories. As Axis in comparison I have to struggle to win against other human players. However, that’s my personal experience. If you want you can try your luck as Axis. P::S I believe Terif if he says that he believes the Axis is stronger. If that is true we will se e in the near future more and more Axis victories.

I think Lars you want to say many of the randmow events and scripts are to set? I agree with some of what you said many events should have consequences on the other half of the war. American assets transfer in the Atlantik "carrier group" etc? before Midway..,. Good chance that the Americans would have lost this ecounter. Siberian troops on mass transfer to the west? Japanese forces could have attacked Rusia and not the US.

@ DT see some games and already you are frustrating the newbies. Playing Axis is pointless much to weak Fun is when you play the Axis and you are going through the allied defenses. US is much to weak Axis has to much of a advantage. Right now I think played right the Axis can have a advantage (lets say a small one) unfortunately most times the Axis player does mistakes . I guess 70-80% of the games should be decided for the Allies right now.

Its quite frustrating and somehow its fun at the same time.

DT what si exactly your problem? That people give up to early or that the axis is to strong in your opinion?

Oh yeah please no more siberians arrive 1st January 1942.

Rambo you simply dont get it . Don´´t you? If the game follows the historic path, Germany is beaten already in 1942 in Rusia in Stalingrad . The US player has to be totally inept not to repeat the "historic" feats of the US. Right now IMHO the US is many times already stronger in 1942 then it had been in reality. Depends on your luck with IT and PT tech of course. You can discuss to add more units imply because in 1943 you run out of stuff to build.

Would be interessting to play aginst you sometimes. I Dont see how you can spare the troops after Barbarossa starts to conquer all these nations. At least the minors should react if a hungry monster Germany attacks one neighbor then another.. Perhaps building up more garrisons? Another question what do you invade these nations for? Arent these troopps better deployed in Rusia? What do you do if if Spain doest join you? Perhpas it would be possible to include some strategic incentives for Germany to conquer certain nations for example if you conquer sweden Axis cuts artic convoy to the UDSSR. [ June 23, 2006, 03:02 PM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

No. Thats the problem Hubert killed a little to effectivly the cookie cutter. There is no reason at least before the US and Rusian enter the war to attack any neutrals. MPwise it hurts you, transport cost, garrison units... Suggestions: - depending on the neutral and its size Germany could hire additional units => recruitment of natives for the german army - Reduce further the range of amphib transports. => Norway could be used by the allies as a start point of an invasion in Germany. - Random diplomatic events: Under certain circumstances a country could raise its alliance to one side . For example Vichy France could join the allies as soon as Brest and Bordeaux are conquered by american troops => its an incentive for Germany to secure these countires beforehand. [ June 23, 2006, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

Yepm, I dont think the Af fleets are to powerful per se but simply to useful to dig out cities and fortifications. (+ tanks should be downgraded in mountains , against fortificatiosn and cities too IMHO)

In Sc1 we had the cookie cutter problem . now In SC2 for the axis its better to simply ignore the neutrals. :confused: Besides the middle play in SC2 is kind of boring.

Right now there is no incentive to conquer Norway, Denmark etc... Somehow something is amiss here.

Battle aginst DT ended yesterday in May 1942. 9 tank divisions supported with infantry and fighter planes pushed the Germans first out of Rusia and then into Poland. Nothing the underteched Germans could do but surrender. In the hindsight the sealion of DT has been a dissater activating the Rusians and the US much to early. [ June 22, 2006, 03:48 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

@Blashy : Ok got your point now

No, because that is unrealistic, another country would not drop in value just because. That is a "gamey" deterrent and not a historical one. </font>

SC2 is a strange game

:confused: Diced I never said that I think that partisans are unnecessary. Still, as you noticed yourself a conquest of GB is strange . Impact on the British Empire "0" , its even an advantage for GB. You have better supply in the Med. US and UDSSR war readiness goes through the roof. I still believe that certain military dsisaters like losing your capital should have serious consequences. Rusias decision to move to another capital worked for parts because thaey had done it before aginst Napoleon in the rusian mindset Moscow wasnt as important (Still the impact on logistics would have been severe). Inviting somebody to conquer England as a trap and a strategy is quite strange.

Its simply to depressing to lose your home again and again. Who wouldnt go home

It appears you are talking about more corps than are actually there. Where is Dortmund? AS Blashy says it will take some luck to pull it off. Leave Denmark for another day, and save the MMP's. </font>

Blashy if you put your HQs under auto assist and use your generals well your chances are: Estimated total hits round about 12 for 10 strengh Krakow corps Estimated 9-10 hits for a strengh 8 Warsaw corps In the west it looks even better. You have an Army 1-1-1 , a tank, a corps 1-1 to do ground attack an upgraded fighter and a another fighter. + 1 corps in attck position on Kopenhagen + 2 cruiser + amphib transport. Yes, you can always have bad rolls. Still this beginning is nor perfect .Alas, in SC1 the strongest beginning for the Axis (HDO) was developed only last year giving the Axis an incredible boost in power. Still much to explore in SC2