vveedd

After long consideration, unfortunately, must say that this game is unplayable in multiplayer mode except, maybe, TCP/IP. As you already know, there are 3 modes: TCP/IP, Hot seat and PBEM. For TCP/IP I have no remarks because it is only playable mode. I have said –maybe- only because for this mode you have to have time which working and family man like me don’t have. Second mode is Hot Seat – which is playable only if you have brother, neighbor, friend nearby etc. AND time issue is still an issue for man like me. Third mode and most popular today (especially for turn based games) is PBEM but without some kind of control mechanism for reloading it is absolutely unusable. The cheat opportunities are enormous: You can reload game until you get desirable diplomatic or tech results, until you get good combat results in crucial battles or you can reload game for recon purposes which Fog of war option makes unnecessary. BUT – without Fog of war game is almost unplayable in any multiplayer mode. So Hubert, PLEASE, consider some kind of control mechanism for reload cheating and by this I mean overwriting SAV file in e-mail folder with copy in player mailbox. I know that SC2 game has implemented some kind of control for, let say, classical reloading.

What do you think about this suggestion: When USSR has surrendered it did not surrender completely, it only sighed peace agreement so Axis must left in USSR significant numbers of units for garrison purposes. If Axis failed to do that, USSR will reactivate as Allied major. I know that, practically, game is over for Allies after USSR surrender but this will give at least small chance for Allies and players will keep playing. From historical point of view this will be much more correct because it is absolutely sure thing that USSR people will never surrender especially because of reason that Hitler wanted to exterminate them. Also with this we will avoid stupid game situation after USSR fall that all this territory is without any Axis units. This is totally unrealistic and stupid. Sorry if someone has suggested this already.

Hmmmm... I am playing Allied side so I did not manage options at the start. Didn't see if this option is on or off but now I will take a look. Thanks again.

Thanks Terif for tactic suggestions, but I will not be enable to use it because my opponent also read this posts ( hello to my opponent). I confess I am not very good SC2 player (I was good SC player but now I have much less time then then for playing) but still - does this situation is a game flaw? My opponent has said that Siberian transfer is also related to Soviet-Japan pact. If this is true German player is every time in advantage if he attacks USSR before time when pact is sighed.

Well, I appreciate your help Terif but in my game Gorky has fallen and German tanks are in tile next to Stalingrad and still no Siberian transfer. Any explanations of this situation?

In my current game my opponent attacked USSR in 1940. Avoiding triggers for Siberian transfer he managed to advance with German units DEEP in USSR territory. Don't you think that this is too gamey? I mean - if player know triggers he can freely occupied 90% of USSR territory because USSR is too weak at this point. Also, this is not realistic – don’t you think that in real life Stalin will call Siberian reinforce much sooner if Germany attacked him sooner?

Have anyone tried to play SC2 without Fog of war? I am wondering is this game playable without it at all?

I agree. Third Reich is the best game I have ever played and still playing. Old computer version is also good if you ignore bugs or you have 3R GOLD program which can repair most of bugs. US don’t have enough money and manpower for another war.Especially not for Iran which has much more stronger army then Iraq. [ September 22, 2006, 07:03 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ]

Sorry, didn’t see another post with same theme.On the other hand we should have posts about this much more because diplomatic system is not good. I agree that something should be done with diplomacy but to my opinion every grand strategy must have diplomacy. Without it is unfinished and incomplete game. Good example of this is GGWAW game. Except my previous suggestion I have suggested to Hubert one thing more which will improve a little bit diplomacy in current system – every time when player got some diplomatic result ALL diplomatic chits should be gone. This will be much more realistic (diplomat came, done his work and gone) and much more flexible system.

To my humble opinion diplomacy should and could be better. My suggestion is that game should have 2 kinds of diplomatic points (chits). First, basic and free diplomatic points and second, diplomatic points which can be bought for MPP. This current system with only second kind of points is advantage for Axis. In early stages of game, only Axis has enough MPP to invest in DP and this is totally unrealistic. British and French diplomats was very skilled and competent just like Axis at this stage but because of lack MPP this can’t be used. Of course, players could play with non consumable chits but this is also not realistic. Same thing is for neutral majors. Soviet and US diplomats was VERY active in time when they was neutral so neutral majors must be enable to participate in diplomacy.

Guys, I’ll play with you in Panzer or whatever league but dynamic of play must be as I said because I have to work.

One turn per day, maybe more on weekend. Production delay and build limits ON rest settings as you wish. You can choose side. P.S. For Battlefront.com guys – you should have separate forum or some kind of board for finding opponents.

Thanks to you. By the way, maybe you should suggest to Hubert that this your mod make as default Fall Weiss scenario in SC2?

Looking good Blashy.Where I can download this mod?

From SC2 Manual: “ANTI-AIRCRAFT RADAR RESEARCH This research area provided both sides with more effective defense from air attacks, by improving detection capability and developing larger, more accurate anti-aircraft guns.” If this tech develops more accurate anti-aircraft guns why this guns can fire only on bombers?

First I must congratulate to you for patch v1.2. Finally I have found time to play it and AI is much better and game is much better in generally. Still, work on AI is far from over. Just a few crucial suggestions for AI: -make it that AI don’t attempt amphibious assaults without HQ. -make it that AI always (if it can) trying to destroy enemy units completely. -don’t know how AI works in diplomacy but it should invest more in it, especially in Spain. And now AA suggestion: AA should protect units in city against air fleets also. It is illogical that AA works only against strategic bombardments.

We disagree much less then you think Sombra. If I understood correctly in both case we agreed that this is advantage for one player. Or I am wrong? We don’t agree which is bigger. To my opinion in your case knowing what your opponent can do is much less advantage then mud-clear case. After all, in your case first player is also surprised by weather effect at start of his turn and his units will gain same effects (AF will not be usable, movement will be reduced etc) like units from second player. In my case player with mud turn don’t have same effects and situation at all like second player and he is in much unfair situation then second player in your case. And finally fact which is absolutely absurd – with this turn concept (i'll say again to be clear - TURN CONCEPT not weather)one player enters in next season sooner then opponent. [ June 29, 2006, 05:38 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ]

You have explained this well but, hey, this is turn based game. BASIC, CONSTANT AND ONLY CONCEPT for all turn based games so far was that opponent sides play his turn in same time period (everything different is illogical and out of common sense) and if game have some kind of weather concept it is made accordingly to this. So, to my opinion SC2 have basic concept wrong in this matter and current weather system will be great if SC2 was RTS game. Also your opinion about advantage for Axis is very doubtful. Panzer General 2 game have very similar weather concept and I haven’t seen any advantage for Axis? Also I can ask you similar question: If Axis in his turn has mud and Allies has clear or vice versa is this advantage for side which has clear weather? [ June 29, 2006, 03:30 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ]

I didn’t mean to offend you Blashy but you make me very angry with your constant answer “editor is solution for everything”. Also, as test player your job is to tell Hubert players suggestion and point out to some problem. It is not your job to agree with all Hubert decisions unconditionally. Some were wrong as we have seen. As for this turn-time issue your statement is ridiculous. Hubert will always have my vote for implementing something new but this is illogical and out of common sense and that’s why other games don’t have it.

I have seen this “editor is solution to everything” answer too many times. It is pointless to discuss about game issues with someone who is graceful to death to Hubert because he selected him to be a test player and because of that he lost objective view. Really, have anyone ever seen turn based game where first player play his turn in one time period and second in other? [ June 28, 2006, 04:29 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ]

Exactly. It is not the same turn but IT SHOULD BE the same turn. This is the main problem, not weather. Now in SC2 Axis turn is from some date to some date and then Allied turn is from end Axis turn date to some date. ????? :confused: :confused: :confused: So Allies are frozen in time and do nothing in Axis turn time period? :confused: :confused:

Exactly. You guys should read more carefully this post. Problem is not random weather, problem is this what Rolend said. It is illogical that both sides don’t have turn in same time period. Weather works fine.

You have my vote. In all turn based games I knew one game turn consist Axis turn and Allied turn in permanent or different order (depend from game to game). So if we have different weather effects for playing sides in one game turn this is not fair and balanced.

I have suggested something similar long time ago but with no effects. You have my vote for this.

I respect your opinion Rolend and partially agree with you about PG2 tech system and absolutely agree about luck in tech. To my humble opinion tech system similar like we have in Civilization I,I,II,IV or Hearts of Iron 2 (but less complicated, of course) will be the best for SC2. [ June 20, 2006, 05:19 AM: Message edited by: vveedd ]