Fire

What countries are good to get the moral boost/demoralization effect before an attack on russia? Iraq?, Egypt (cheese when not taking Cairo), Iran? Fireball

Hi, when i have a chit in a country and lets say my chance of getting a positive result is 10%. Are the computer dices thrown after my turn AND after the opponents turn, meaning, do i get a 10%chance every time a side (allied, axis) finishes their turn? Fireball

I am not a programer but i cant think of a reason why the program can work with 256*128 but not 512*512 or 1000*1000. I guess there is a reason, else i dont see any logic why we have this small boundaries but as i said, if it is just an AI problem, than who cares. Than it will be a great bonus for all HvH veterans who always wanted to create THE WW2 game. Fireball

Why cant Hubert just increase the maximum number of squares? I mean if the AI has problems with that, than we just make such big maps for HvH. Give us 1000*1000 Hubert and everybody can make what he wants!

Why cant Hubert just increase the maximum number of squares? What is so hard about that, i mean if the AI has problems with that, than we just make such big maps for HvH. Give us 1000*1000 Hubert and everybody can make what he wants!

I am talking about those "random" reinforcements that the UK gets in Egypt. Do they get troops when for example Cairo is under 5 and they dont have any other city? Fireball

Japan was ready to surrender and the only thing that kept Japan from surrender was the fact that the US didnt allow the emperor to be in place after the war. For the japanese the emperor was a god and so the US knew quite well that Japan would never surrender....so the US "had" to, tragically and very reluctant drop the bomb....

I know that there are documents that prove that there was an attack planed on Germany. I dont have the motivation to search for it but Google may help. Fireball

SC2 Panzergeneral!! Yes that is a good way to put it. If i would only have the time and skill to do that...... I think what "we" need eventually is a bigger map like 512*256 as it was planed originally and than Divisions would be good. At Retributer and "same thinking people" : Do we want to create a project team and search for other skilled people to start this project? Fireball

Looks very good. And maybe you can upgrade it later to an "All Europe" Corps Sized Mega Campaign. HOI2 with SC2 design! Fireball

Thanks a lot. Does that mean i was sleeping and didnt read the forum carefully enough or should i just lean back and wait for the things to come? And is there a case where Italy and GB cancel each other out? Fireball

Why is it a rule that 5 diplo chits from germany are chancelling out 5 diplo chits from GB? This really leads to boring calculation games. He puts 5 in, so i put 5 in and everythink is quiet. (I know that you never know exactly how many chits the other player has invested but still in the end there can be this 5-5 constellation, just to make sure). Than diplomacy works like a machine and not like negotiations between humans and states. Why not make it that way that germany has a 25% chance of influencing the country and a 25% for GB to influence a county? Easy to implement and makes much more sense to em, since you cant always predict the way people will behave in negotions and how they will react under diplomatic pressure. Fireball by the way what happen when Italy and Germany both have 5 chits in the same country and GB does too?

And by the way. The use of the JU52 in this example is also an excellent abstraction for the use of air transport. (which would else be totally missing in SC2)

Well, the paratroopers are coming with a second unit, called JU 52. So using the airplanes to fly them into a city (airport) are proper means enough for me. And there is no need than to loose 40% of "heavy equipment".

"What if you consider an air move into an already- friendly hex as not a drop, but the paras being transported in their transport planes and landing at the destination like most normal people do? " Well that is bascially what i meant by my post. No paratrooper unit would jump out of their planes if they fly to a freidnly hex. And Lars, where is the abstraction, i dont see it? Fireball

Lars, i mentioned an airfield. I guess Tripoli has an airfield, dont you think?

You mean clearer than the desert or an airfield? Ok, will do that. Frieball

Than we are on the same side here. I know that jumping out of a plane is a bit more risky but we are talking about men who were trained to do that and as far as i know history there were never cacualties more than 10% for paratroopers (besides combat losses). I mean we are talking about more than a division of paratroopers and than 10% would already mean that 1500 to 2000 men died by excident. Fireball [Meister 2006 !!!]

Ok so you really think it is right that a whole army of paratroopers loses 40% !!! of its men when they jump over friendly ground?? Why is there no rule that we could have 40% casualties when unloading an army into a friendly harbour? I mean its basically the same thing. When we say that paratroopers are too clumsy to make a simple jump on firendly territory, than every other soldier must at least be so clumsy that there is a high risk that they fall into the water ! I mean i could maybeee understand 10% because some planes crashed or some equipment wasn`t working right but 40% ? Real casualties only occured when they jump on enemy ground and there is a reason for it.....because there are enemies who shoot at them! And just because this is now the rule does not mean that it is a good rule. Fireball

Hi, i had my Paratroopers flying from Italy to North Africa, "landing" in Italian Tripolis and they took 40% causalties??? I would suggest a fix here, because there were no Allied Fighters on Malta and i dont think that Paratroopers are jumping out of their planes when they could easily land on the tripolis airport. And even if they would jump out, why do they get 40% loses, are the Germans that bad in jumping out of planes and landing in the desert? Fireball

Thanks a lot ! Fireball

Ok, so even if there is mud you can bypass the Belgium frontline corps and attack the town directly from 3 sites and you can "drive" in there with a tank? Wouldn`t it be better to attack denmark with 2 units? 1 form land that kills the defenders and a second that lands with amphibs. So next turn you can already move west to France. Fireball

I know we discussed the topic somewhere her and there but i wanted to summarize it for myself. Is it possible to conquer Belgium and Denmark in a mud turn? I mean Denmark for example with ship fire support, one corps attacking from the Hamburg region and a second one landing directly in the city? And Belgium? AF`s cant help, so are the germans able to take it without AF`s or doesnt that matter so much and should the Belgium frontline corps be destroyed first and worry about the city in the second turn? And how about that scenario in a winter turn? Thanks for your comments! Fireball

Well. Travel back in time to the year 1939 and place yourself in charge of the Germany Army instead of Hitler. What would have been the result? Most likely no escape for the british Expedition Force, most likely a victory in Africa, most likely Spain would have joined the Axis.....and so on The best weapon on the allied side was Hitler. Fireball

Poor Italy. Well at least they still keep up the "fight" in Iraq. Fireball