Jump to content

Skrivebordsgeneralen

Members
  • Posts

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Skrivebordsgeneralen

  1. In one game I tried out a strategy that I think is pretty much unbeatable.

    Japanese invest heavily in diplo chits against the Soviets - which still gives them enough for a solid punch against China.

    Germans build nothing but armor, tank tech and one infantry advance, possibly supplemented by tac bombers. No action in Africa and early 41 attack on USSR.

    Such a strategy leaves the Russians crippled and defenseless.

    Any viewpoints?

  2. At present, the Free French have no possibility to invest in tech. With a total of 3 corps and 1 army it makes them pretty much useless - except possibly as a base to reconquer Africa. The best use of the Free French Army is to defend the Pacific islands. Doesn't make much sense.

    One possibility is to give Free France increased possibilities after an allied conquest of Vichy Algeria - which should become the new Free French capital. That's what happened historically.

  3. Yes, the Chinese are toast. The real question is what it means in terms of gameplay.

    In my ongoing game, my losses have been so high that I didn't manage to buy my first inf tech chit before mid-1940. And I'm playing very carefully.

    Their last city should fall by mid-42, maybe even earlier. At any rate sufficient for the Japanese to shift the bulk of their forces to India or Russia for a 42 offensive.

    I have never seen the Japanese go for anything else than an all out offensive - with good reason and very predictable results.

    The question is whether this land-based Japanese strategy is necessary for an axis victory. As it stands, the alternative is to let the Chinese grow strong - and the Japanese will eventually have to spend more fending them of than they would have spent subduing them.

    In terms of gameplay the result is that Japan will invariably go for Russia or India after China. This in turn forces the US to focus on building a relief army to be sent to India or Africa - since that is where they can apply counter-pressure as quickly as possible. If the US goes for the Pacific, the Japanese can afford to pretty much ignore them for a long time at minimal cost - while the axis will be winning the war on other theaters.

    Fortifications in the north are badly needed. Taking away Japanese motorization is another option now that we have forced march.

    In order to provide Japan with some incentive to try out alternative strategies more needs to be done however - decreasing the attack value of the Chinese and providing the Japanese with fortifications is one option.

    WIF has a system of "limited war" in China where the Chinese get few mpps, but the Japanese are restricted in the number of attacks they can carry out each turn - unless they want to face the consequences of a substantial US-entry penalty. But I suppose implementing such a system would require a lot in terms of programming.

    Ah - I guess we will never get rid of these kind of dilemmas

  4. I am starting to suspect a national morale bug in the new version. In my current game (against a human opponent), I (CP) hold all of northern France up to and including Caen, Rouen, Abbeville, Le Havre, Amiens, Arras, Calais, Lille, Maubeuge, Sedan and the northern mine. Except for a small Russian incursion (occupying the Ger and AH mines in Silesia) as well as two AH border cities (Tarnopol and Czernowitz), nothing major has happened. Losses have been slight on both sides. It's turn 11 (24 oct 1914), the ottomans have not yet joined. French moral stands at 95%, with other countries above 95. According to my experience from 1.1, the French should be around 80 or less at this point. What is going on?

  5. My favorite quote after the war is when Albert Speer was asked about the French Resistance he said "Frenchh Resistance??? WHAT French Resistance???" The Free French forces as the Axis waned became somewhat viable. How ever the French Colaborationist by a factor of ten to twenty to one out did any French Resistancemyth that was largely created after the war.

    With the said exceptions of the Maquee, and the French Communist.

    The resistance myth (ie. that all of France were somehow resistants) was, as you said, largely a creation of the gaullists and communists in 45. It's most important function was to lay the ground for the post-war consensus in France. Remember that 1940 was the biggest traumatism in modern French history.

    The French communists were an integral part of the Forces Francaises de l'interieur after Jean Moulin (de Gaulle's envoy) unified the interior resistance movement in 43. L'armee de l'ombre (army of shadows) is a very good french movie based on these events.

    It's true that the role of the Free French, both on the interior front and outside France, was limited until 43. The US recognition of the Free French as the legitimate government of France was an important step.

    Still, the Free French played a major part on at least one occasion before the tide was definitely turned. If interested, you can read more about the battle of Bir-Hakeim:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bir_Hakeim

  6. It would. I don't quite remember, but I believe there was a chance for this happening in earlier editions of the SC series. In general, I think Free France should be upgraded a bit and receive a few more units in course of the game. As it stands, the option is very pricey for the UK (400mpp) at a critical time in the game and IMO not worth it. I'm not sure if choosing Free France is also connected with the Fort de France events and the US getting the Bearn CV (or was this only in earlier editions?), but the Free France event seems too expensive to pick.

    Historically, Free France certainly played a more important role. In 1940, many experienced French (and polish, belgian) pilots participated in the battle of Britain. Later, the Free French had considerable troops fighting in Africa, Italy and ultimately France itself. French armies liberated Corsica, landed in major numbers in the South of France in August 44, later fought for Alsace and marched on to Germany. At the end of the war, France must have had more than a million regular soldiers in the field, mostly US equipped. From 43 onwards, Alger was btw. the capital of Free France (there were about one million Europeans living there at the time). The Vichy government on their side allowed Germany to use Tunis as a base from 41 onwards, which is not reflected in the game. There should possibly be a US option (not for free) to recognise Free France as the legitimate French Government once the allies take Alger. Britain would get the de Gaulle HQ, units (after some time) and the possibility to build more in Alger.

  7. OK, I don't like playing the AI. Bores me very quickly, even though it looks reasonably good. Who's ready for a real game? Have only played until mid-1940 as axis so I hardly even know how this game works and what to look out for. Doesn't matter - it'll be twice as much fun. Have played all the other games in the series, though. If someone feels up for a mirror game, just send me your first axis turn.

  8. I was wondering if there will now be a possibility to access event folders "ingame" and get an instant overview of all relevant effects of any given action (DoWs, Events etc...). For competitive gameplay, accesing these folders is a must anyway. A more readable and readily accesible format than what we have now would definitely be a very nice feature.

    Any thoughts?

    Otherwise eagerly looking forward to this release

  9. First ever game of PT. instead of facing just another noob, I am thrown right into the lions cavern: The biggest and baddest SC2-player out there, the all-american, guns-slinging and bible-preaching J.J.Rambo.

    Our norwegian peace-brokers hurriedly left Sri-Lanka and the Middle-East burning and went off to attempt last-minute negotiations. But, alas, to no avail. In despair, we decided to confer with the grand-ayatollahs at the Oslo Peace Research Institute. They came up with a shrewd idea: let’s give Rambo the Nobel Peace Prize!

    As Norwegians, we would indeed much prefer to give Americans the Nobel Peace Prize than to fight them. Rambo, however, flatly rejected our generous offer and frowned at our brilliant idea of setting up a socialist world government under the leadership of the United Nations. Not even a generous offer of oil-financed development aid could sway him.

    Summary of the action so far:

    Western Pacific:

    Instead of giving our peace-offers any consideration, Rambo simply started bombing our ships. Foolishly, the cruiser and destroyer sought refuge in the harbor, only to be bombed to pieces in the following turn. At least I’ve managed to rescue a sub and a cruiser from South-East Asia. Later on, only luck saved Pearl Harbor from a Japanese invasion. In order to reinforce it, I moved a bomber rescued from the Philippines closer to a supply source and accidentally spotted a lone jap amphibious vessel headed straight for our main base! Fortunately, the repositioning of a TAC bomber was enough to dissuade him. The American researchers are useless – no advances in industrial tech nor in production tech as of yet. No doubt, it’s the ethical committee of the Norwegian oil-fund who refuses to invest in arms!

    China:

    After a few quiet turns, Rambo decides to hit the Chinese with everything he’s got. My defensive setup was no good: Too weak in the North and too strong in the South. As a result, the Legend makes major gains both in the North and in the South and my army is rapidly disintegrating. Only south of Kunming was I able to score some very limited success against a lone jap army who keeps running into the defenders barring the route of Kunming. No doubt, Rambo is just forcing me to overstretch my defenses. My general staff gravely underestimated the supply problems caused by mountains – an army foolishly left it’s entrenchments in a city only to be cut off and ruthlessly killed. The japs use their bombers to great effect, relentlessly pounding my industry and supply centers. In a desperate gamble, we were pray for rain and hope to defend Chungking a few more turns. Afterwards, we really have no plan. Some of my generals want to establish new defensive lines to the north, others prefer to hold Kunming and block the Japanese access to Burma. It’s a predictable disaster.

    Burma:

    In this theater, I have fared slightly better for the time being. After the Burma corps was wiped out, a Malayan unit shipped in from Kuala Lumpur was unfortunately not able to resist the jap advance, so Rangoon fell. I have established good defenses, but still have two major worries:

    1- A Japanese landing behind British lines in India. Many enemy ships have been spotted in the area.

    2- An incursion from the north if the japs manage to take Kunming

  10. @Skrivebordsgeneralen --- Can't think of a funny nickname for you just yet. What jumps to mind is "Skivvy"......I didn't type your name this time, so I could call you "CPgeneral" (CP = copy & paste).

    Problem: If we play Fall Weiss, that's not on SC-Pacific Theater game is it? My gaming laptop only has SC-Pacific on it. I'm on the road, forgot my laptop, so I can't check right now.

    I'll play you any scenario you want that's playable on SC-Pacific.

    -Legend

    OK, Rambo, let's play Plan Z. Send me your japanese opening move to jensenvictor@mail.ru

    It's my first ever game of PT, so I expect severe punishment.

    Hard build limits, no undo. You choose whatever other settings and house you see fit.

  11. @Skrivebordsgeneralen --- I got tired just typing your name. Hey, what scenario you talking about?

    The legend himself! I already feel intimidated. Even more so since it's been a long time since my last game.

    Sorry about the lame nick. It's norwegian for armchair general and it was - sadly - the best I came up with when I created my profile.

    I was simply thinking about vanilla Fall Weiss with any house rules you see fit. No naval blockades by or against neutral Italy is the only one I can come up with.

    If you're still interested, send me your opening axis move to jensenvictor@mail.ru

  12. I think the oil and manpower features of CEAW are somewhat overrated. Do they have so much to offer in comparison to hard build limits? As Germany, you can basically either build more infantry (save oil and burn manpower) or more armour (save manpower and burn oil). In the end, you have to settle for a compromise, just like with hard build limits. When the germans take the Caucasus and ME the oil constraints are lifted, but then again, it's game over for the allies anyway, just like in SC.

    CEAW and ToW lack headquarters (very big minus, since it's one of the best features of SC), roads and railways. And it's impossible to bomb supply sources. And there are no convoy lanes (I've seen no other system which manages to reproduce the "hide and seek game" of sub warfare).

    In SC, the maps are made with gameplay in mind. For example, Copenhagen is exactly 12 tiles away from the nearest UK port (transport movement limit). Oslo is 11 tiles away (so you can land and invade from the UK in two turns) and so on. This makes the game more compelling and interesting. In ToW (and to a lesser extent in CEAW) I often get the feeling of simply pushing vast number of units in the general direction of the enemy. I guess I'm just overwhelmed, I'm certainly bored. What does the huge map add to strategy and gaming experience? IMO nothing SC doesn't already have.

    I never had the courage to finish a game of ToW. Actually, the longest I made was late 1940. It's boring. And the system whereby you have to play different countries one after another is no good. Just makes everything last much longer.

    SC2 is by far the best game for pbem gaming. Matrixgames GoA is another excellent little game.

    I own all the games in the SC series, CEAW, ToW and HOI3. HOI3 is IMO a totally unplayable game. Invariably, you just end up adjusting sliders. It's just anoying. And I would imagine quite unplayable online. As someone already wrote, the "encyclopedia" feel adds nothing to realism.

    I think stategy games have to be somehow credible, but they can't ever be historical. At least unecessary detail shouldn't be confused with historicity.

  13. Sombra,

    yea, I also thought no. 1 would be the best option for the russians. My oponent chose to transfer the bulk of his army to the turkish border instead, imo a mistake. But apart from my stukas, I had built 1 fighter, 3 tanks (the minimum), and put the rest of my mpps into corps, artillery and anti-tank, expecting such a move. In addition, if you have sufficient LR (3 will do better than 2), the stukas can strike northern Syria (attack with fighters first in order to commit their aircover) and their land forces won't survive long in open ground, the southern Caucasus and the hexes around Rostov from the same bases. The combination LR + AT is a killer, particularly with decent fighter cover (lvl 2 will do).

  14. I don't think it's that much of an investment. After all, you can use the tac bombers elsewhere. As for pulling them out of Russia, it's really just a way to save MPPs before soviet winter strikes. And with regards to the extra paras, I didn't really need them (granted, my tac were lvl 2). And even if the allies know what's going on, there's nothing they can do to stop it, is there?

    The only slight hunch is the research priorities you have to make, but two chits invested in long range from the outset of the game should be sufficient to get you to lvl 2 by the summer of 42 - which btw is very usefull in lots of other circumstances.

  15. Have I found the perfect strategy?

    OK, here's what I did in my last PBEM game as axis.

    39: Poland and Denmark

    40: Low countries, France, Norway, Malta, french North Africa. Defensive force in Libya.

    41: Yugoslavia and Greece, early Barbarossa. Carefull, conservative advance. Pull out my airforce before russian winter strikes.

    Now here's the trick :

    Late may 42: I declare war on turkey. My four german stukas, the italian tac bomber + all my fighters (I have LR lvl 3, needed a minimum of lvl 2 in order too carry it out)attack Ankara. I have three paras (the two germans plus one italian ready to jump. In addition, a spec unit operating from Athens was ready to land south of Ankara. IOW overkill. The fighters and three stukas suffice for the turkish army to bite the dust. German paras drop on Ankara and Turkey surrenders at the end of my turn. Next turn, the german army is ready to invade the Caucasus and the Middle-East.

    What can the allies do at this point? IMO the new road supply rules makes things too easy in the Caucasus.

    PS: We're both decent players, but not too experienced

  16. I might have missed out on something essential, but for the moment I find CEAW to be one of my worst purchases ever. Started a game three or four times, won't start another. SC2 is simply immensely superior.

    Hexes? I couldn't care less. Although I could call myself a "seasoned" wargamer, I actually tend to prefer tiles after having played SC2.

    Oil? Typical example of a good idea who turn out wrong. Seemingly, it adds a new dimension. However, in the end, it simply makes gameplay unidimensional. You didn't go for those oil wells in the Caucasus/Middle East? Too bad, game over.

    Manpower? A useless detail. Germany has lost 6 million men? Well...with or without manpower, chances are they're losing the war anyway. Will probably make sence in a WW1 game like GoA, where BOTH sides (ie France and Britain vs. Germany, Austria-Hungary) could suffer from it's effects.

    Hats off to Hubert Cater's game philosophy, which is genious in its simplicity: details who add nothing to gameplay should be redundant.

    The new convoy system? Once again, SC2 is better. More of a guessing game. Strike, hide in the Atlantic for a couple of turns and the brits have no clue which lanes you'll be hitting next. Much more fun.

    On the other hand, CEAW simplifies where SC2 is more complex - and rightly so. HQs ans paratroopers are prime examples.

    SC2s HQ system, with it's combined supply wagon/combat bonus effect (one of the most innovative and interesting aspects of the game), the superior research, diplo and upgrade system, the "hit and run" combat system (which btw adds depth, because you always need to consider which units to move first) and a host of other elements add up to make SC2 the best WW2 strategy game on the market - by far.

    To all those "historical" gamers out there: I simply don't understand you! The reasoning makes sence if you're playing a tactical level game, for a strategic game however, it simply doesn't collocate. Realism should not be confused with mimetism. Why would you for example want to eliminate paras just because the "scale" isn't right? They add something to the game, and that's what justifies their presence. Oil has the exact opposite effect.

    Tolkien is great because the world he depicts is credible (within it's context), not because it's realist. That's what makes the strenght of his litterary work. On the other hand, Balzac (in his poorer novels) is ever the realist, but not always credible (or readable). My point is: a "realist" computer game is not necessarily the most playable.

×
×
  • Create New...