aesopo
-
Posts
372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by aesopo
-
-
-
This is way too unbalanced for the allies. Heck France and UK can afford to start disbanding naval units and hit low countries and Germany is toast. They have enough of a left over so that the german navy can be easily contained. Played several hotseat games. German experience should be raised another level including aircraft to reflect their superior tactics and organization. Norway should be neutral period - too much MPP for UK. USSR warlevel should be set at 50% or 60%. Another Airfleet should be given to Germany as they were able to establish air superiority. No wonder Terif loves playing as allies in this scenario.
-
It should still be part of the game as disbanded units still return some materiel and manpower.
-
CT,
You are dodging me. Do u still want to play or abort? I sent u my first rd.
-
Comrade, sure what is the bid and losses reported on ISCL league. No special rules or anything prohibited. Everything goes.
-
I would also like to try the scenario. If you could email it at razuldazul@yahoo.com thanks!
-
Awesome quotes Kuni!
Too bad Rambutt is the butt of most of them!
-
Heck JJ,
I have given the the German and Italian AI 9999 mpps each plus level two experience at expert level and still would hand its head everytime. Anyone else?
-
Conrats Rambo,
Someone needed to hand his head again in sooooo humiliating fashion!
-
We got tied up in trying to balance this game up depending on experience. Bid here, bid there, no so-so, no naughty play, etc...etc...It would be really nice if Hubert would release a real campaign editor patch so we can really balance this out without the artificial controls. Nuff said.
-
Comrade,
What reality are u living in? SC defines your whole life and self-worth? How sad. I have served in the army and sacrificed lofty career goals to help deprived and abused children (You and Rambutt are likely child molesters being so gender confused). Bring on the flogging!
-
Rambutt,
Why the elitist smug rambling? This is a free society and in this forum, discourse is encouraged inspite of detractors and pinheads like you. Who made you King George?
-
Kuni
You are so gay
-
two games alternate axis and allies game?
-
Just to solve the problem of balancing- each match should be played as allies and axis. The more experienced players may give bids if they want. This way, you'll have to learn how to be a pretty darn good player to whip the Axis and your talents would really show as a general! This is like beating a dead horse anyway - SC2 is a few months away.
-
Terif,
Then what is your ideal strategy for the allies? Just pile up the corps on the line? In your game with me, you used the French navy as fodder going into the Baltic Sea to destroy my fleet and used Ireland as target practice for your carriers.
Zapp,
Axis just have to invest into two other AFs from three and concentrate to disable your fighters first. With Manstien HQ backing them some from cities, I do not think your air strategy would work.
-
I have never noticed this built in SC1 where the number of units you have on the field affects your MPP. I have disbanded units and my MPP did not increase.
-
Nope, not really - units do cost money to maintain (salaries, equipment, fuel, ammunition, rations, etc) It is not a one time deal that you spend the MPPs to purchase a unit without supporting it.
Hubert any comments? Is it too late to address this issue?
Has this been brought up before?
-
Probably one MPP for a corps, two for armies, three for tank groups etcetera. It is probably too late to incorporate a supply pool (certain amount of country's MPP diverted to the supply pool to keep units supplied - HQs provide efficiency to org).
Probably the abstraction of MPP is better right now as Hubert would not have to tear his hair out too much in coding in implementing a supply pool. If you do not have sufficent MPPs to support your units, their orgs will suffer.
It does not make any sense for 200-300 represented combined divisions (infantry, airplanes, ships) operating without any adverse effect on your economy. Now, that is so unrealistic!
I don't know how hard it will be to recode for decreased supplies in inclimate weather.
Air superiority and strategic bombing should also have an effect on your supplies as it historically did in WW2.
Combat should cost MPPs to represent extra supplies spent and coordination.
The real problem to all of this, is how hard to incorporate this with the current coding.
-
Hubert,
We are willing to put down money on a beta version that can be patched later. I think people with SC1 and who order from your website should be allowed to do this. It would be a win-win situation as your pool of feedback increases that should increase the quality of the game with later patches.
-
Before SC2 is finished, everyone has overlooked that each unit draws supplies and maintenance cost in real terms, each unit has to cost MPP and draw from a supply pool. A unit in the front lines in combat draws more supplies-maintenance. No frekin army was just buiilt from the ground up without maintenance and support. Just my humble opinion. Any comments?
"Return of the Allies"
in Strategic Command 1
Posted
I played on intermediate +1 experience, followed house rules. Occupied all of Germany by August 1944 and had Italy surrender in December of 1944. Heck, Germany did not surrender until April 3, 1945. I diverted resources to the mideast or else this would have been done and over with earlier. Such a waste of having those army leaders bunched up in the mideast doing nothing. Next I will try the expert level/+2. I have played the fall weiss campaign as allies on that level and giving Italy and Germany each 9999 MPPS and got them rolled up usually all the time by late 1944 or early 1945. Hey, make this really difficult by having Sweden and Finland already joining the axis and maybe some extra mpps, plus industrial tech 5 for Germany and Italy. As long as you know what you are doing, the AI is really predictable and it is easy hit areas with massive firepower than doing attrition (then you lose!). Good tough scenario. Although I think the US should be more mobilized as the invasion of the UK would have prompted a massive full mobilization of the US Army. Another suggestion, the UK and US navies should have been actively deployed in the Atlantic and UK area.